RadioRob

Published by Reuters By Dan Whitcomb (Reuters) – A federal judge on Thursday barred the state of New York, at least for now, from enforcing the part of a closely watched gun law that bans firearms from churches or other places of worship. The ruling marks the latest victory for gun owners in a tug-of-war with the state of New York over its strict new statute, which as of Sept. 1 makes obtaining a license more difficult and prohibits firearms in a long list of “sensitive” public and private places. Places of worship are among those places where guns were forbidden. Two church leaders sued last week, saying that such a constraint ran counter to the gun rights spelled out in the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. U.S. District Judge John Sinatra agreed in a 40-page written ruling, issuing a temporary restraining order against the state of New York from carrying out the law while the court fight proceeds. Sinatra cited a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in June that struck down New York’s previous law, which barred individuals from carrying a handgun in public without proof of special circumstances. The top court found that the statute, enacted in 1913, violated the Second Amendment. New York legislators quickly passed new rules on gun ownership which Sinatra, in his ruling, called “even more restrictive” than the law struck down by the Supreme Court. “The nation’s history does not countenance such an incursion into the right to keep and bear arms across all places of worship across the state,” Sinatra wrote. “The right to self-defense is no less important and no less recognized at these places.” The judge added that, based on the Supreme Court’s ruling earlier this year, the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their lawsuit. A spokeswoman for the New York Attorney General said the office was reviewing the decision and “considering our options in our ongoing efforts to protect New Yorkers and defend our common sense gun laws.” (Reporting by Dan Whitcomb; Editing by Shri Navaratnam and Christopher Cushing) View the full article

Published by Reuters (Reuters) -Biden Administration officials are discussing whether the United States should subject some of Elon Musk’s ventures to national review including the deal for Twitter Inc and SpaceX’s Starlink satellite network, Bloomberg News reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter. The SpaceX chief in recent times has taken to Twitter to announce proposals to end Russia’s war in Ukraine, and also said SpaceX cannot indefinitely fund its Starlink internet service in Ukraine. He later backed down and said he would continue to bear the costs of the service. The discussions to review Musk’s ventures are at an early stage, sources told Bloomberg, adding that officials in the U.S. government are weighing what tools, if any, are available that would allow the federal government to review Musk’s ventures. One possibility is through the law governing the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which is under the U.S. Department of Treasury, to review Musk’s ventures, the report added. An element of Musk’s $44 billion Twitter deal which could trigger a CFIUS review is the presence of foreign investors in Musk’s consortium, Bloomberg said. The group includes Saudi Arabian investor Prince Alwaleed bin Talal and Binance, which was founded in Shanghai. A spokesperson for the U.S. Treasury Department said CFIUS does not publicly comment on transactions that it may or may not be reviewing. Twitter and SpaceX did not immediately respond to Reuters’ request for comment. Musk had said he would walk away from the deal to buy Twitter in May alleging the company understated the number of bot and spam accounts on the social media platform, which started a series of lawsuits between the two parties. Earlier this month, Musk reversed course and said he will proceed with the deal on original terms. (Reporting by Rhea Binoy and Anirudh Saligrama in Bengaluru; Editing by Sandra Maler) View the full article

Published by Reuters By Michael Erman NEW YORK (Reuters) -Pfizer Inc expects to roughly quadruple the price of its COVID-19 vaccine to about $110 to $130 per dose after the United States government’s current purchase program expires, Pfizer executive Angela Lukin said on Thursday. Lukin said she expects the vaccine – currently provided for free to all by the government – will be made available at no cost to people who have private insurance or government paid insurance. Reuters earlier on Thursday reported that Wall Street was expecting such price hikes due to weak demand for COVID vaccines, which meant vaccine makers would need to hike prices to meet revenue forecasts for 2023 and beyond. The U.S. government currently pays around $30 per dose to Pfizer and German partner BioNTech SE. In 2023, the market is expected to move to private insurance after the U.S. public health emergency expires. “We are confident that the U.S. price point of the COVID-19 vaccine reflects its overall cost effectiveness and ensures the price will not be a barrier for access for patients,” Lukin said. It is not yet clear what kind of access people without health insurance will have to the vaccine. Pfizer said it expects the COVID-19 market to be about the size of the flu shot market on an annual basis for adults, but that the pediatric market would take longer to build based on shots given so far. So far the U.S. rollout of updated COVID-19 booster shots which target both the original coronavirus strain and the Omicron strain has lagged last year’s rate despite more people being eligible for the shots. Around 14.8 million people in the U.S. received a booster shot over the first six weeks of the rollout of the new shots. In the first six weeks of the 2021 revaccination campaign, over 22 million people received their third shot even though only older and immunocompromised people were eligible at that point. Lukin said she does not expect purchasing of the vaccines to transfer to the private sector until the first quarter of 2023 “at the earliest.” The move is dependent on the government contracted supply being depleted. (Reporting by Michael Erman; Writing by Caroline Humer; Editing by Bill Berkrot and Richard Pullin) View the full article

Published by Reuters By Patricia Zengerle WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Republicans will have the power to block aid to Ukraine if they win back control of Congress, but they are more likely to slow or pare back the flow of defense and economic assistance than stop it, analysts said. They might also use support for the Ukrainian war effort as leverage to force Democrats to back Republican priorities such as clamping down on immigration across the southern border with Mexico. Democrats have been raising the possibility Republicans would curb assistance to Kyiv for months, given polls showing the party likely to end the Democrats’ narrow control of the House of Representatives, if not the Senate, in the Nov. 8 midterm elections. Europeans bearing the brunt of the war’s impact have also voiced concern. President Joe Biden said on Thursday during a visit to Pennsylvania – a state with close congressional races – that he was worried about the Republican stance on aid to Ukraine. There has been more Republican opposition in the House, where the caucus is more closely allied than in the Senate with former President Donald Trump and his “America First” policies. All 57 House votes against a bill providing more than $40 billion for Ukraine in May came from Republicans. “You’ve got big pockets of the Republican party that have very kind of isolationist views,” said Scott Anderson, a governance expert at the Brookings Institution. However, Anderson and other analysts said there remains widespread bipartisan support for Ukraine eight months after Russia’s invasion and that is unlikely to change soon, especially if Ukrainian forces continue a recent series of battlefield advances. Anderson said some Republicans have viewed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s administration as corrupt since Trump’s first impeachment trial. House Democrats voted to impeach Trump in 2019 on charges he held up military aid for Kyiv to put pressure on Zelenskiy to investigate one of Biden’s sons. The issue could loom large again for Trump’s closest House allies, especially if he becomes the Republican presidential nominee in 2024. “They’re a minority element (but) that doesn’t mean they won’t wield potentially outsized influence in the Republican caucus,” Anderson said. Trump’s vice president, Mike Pence, chided Republicans who have questioned supporting Ukraine, condemning what he termed “apologists” for Russian President Vladimir Putin and warning against “unprincipled populism” during a speech on Wednesday at the conservative Heritage Foundation. Conservative U.S. television personalities who wield a major influence over the Republican base have also inveighed against assistance approved for Kyiv, which totals about $66 billion so far including military, economic and humanitarian support. “It is certainly a question that looms large over Capitol Hill at the moment,” said Brett Bruen, who was director of global engagement in President Barack Obama’s White House. NO ‘BLANK CHECK’ Concern about a Republican-led shift in policy on Kyiv was amplified this week when Representative Kevin McCarthy, the top House Republican and likely next Speaker, said there would be no “blank check” for Ukraine if Republicans take over. “I think people are going to be sitting in a recession and they’re not going to write a blank check to Ukraine,” McCarthy told Punchbowl News. “And then there’s the things [the Biden administration] is not doing domestically. Not doing the border and people begin to weigh that.” In an appearance on Bloomberg Television, Representative Michael McCaul, the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said some in his party are concerned about the cost of the Ukraine effort but not the goal, and he pledged “more oversight and accountability” if Republicans win the majority. Biden administration officials have said they will support Ukraine’s fight against Russia for as long as necessary. Mark Cancian, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the total U.S. price tag for the Ukraine war is relatively small, given the Pentagon’s $800 billion annual budget and the importance of supporting democracy and stability in Europe. “Many strategists – and I would put myself among them – would say this is a reasonable amount of money and it’s cost-effective,” he said, noting the price would be much higher if U.S. troops were doing the fighting. Several defense industry executives said they viewed the Republican comments on Ukraine aid as political rhetoric ahead of the midterms, not a threat. Shares of companies including Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics Corp., L3Harris Technologies, Raytheon Technologies and Northrop Grumman have outperformed major stock market indexes so far this year. Polls have Americans backing the aid. A Reuters/Ipsos opinion survey this month showed 73% of Americans felt the United States should continue to support Kyiv. There was more support among Biden’s fellow Democrats – 81% – than Republicans – 66%. The possibility of less U.S. military assistance has prompted jitters in Ukraine itself and elsewhere in Europe. “It’s the war of the free world, and rules-based world against the aggressor and this is exactly how we have to take it,” Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur told reporters this week after meeting with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. “When anyone, doesn’t matter whether it’s Republican or Democrat, says that we don’t care about the rules-based world, then we can say that we stop helping Ukraine,” Pevkur said. (Reporting by Patricia Zengerle; Additional reporting by Humeyra Pamuk and Mike Stone; Editing by Mary Milliken and Daniel Wallis) View the full article

Published by DPA American singer Taylor Swift attends the 2022 MTV Video Music Awards held at the Prudential Center in New Jersey. Her new album "Midnights" is out now. Doug Peters/PA Wire/dpa Taylor Swift’s new album “Midnights” offers rare insight into her personal life and relationship with her boyfriend, British actor Joe Alwyn, while also embracing a dramatic new sound. The pop megastar, 32, has described the record as the story of “13 sleepless nights scattered throughout my life” and “a journey through terrors and sweet dreams.” It sees her turn away from the intimate indie songwriting of her two last albums, “Folklore” and “Evermore,” in favour of electronica, synth-pop and sometimes even hip hop-influenced beats. Swift has once again written the majority of the album with Jack Antonoff, lead singer of rock band Bleachers, although this time they have opted for much darker sounds and lyrics. Album opener “Lavender Haze” appears to contain direct references to Swift’s own life, although many other tracks refer to fictional characters and narratives. Swift rails against “the 1950s shit” she says many women face and appears to reference media speculation over whether she is engaged or married to Alwyn. “All they keep asking me is if I’m gonna be your bride,” she sings. “The only kinda girl they see is a one night or a wife.” The track also features background vocals from Zoe Kravitz, the Hollywood star daughter of Lenny Kravitz and Lisa Bonet. The penultimate track, “Sweet Nothing,” is co-written by Swift and William Bowery, the pseudonym of Alwyn, and describes a holiday to Wicklow in Ireland in July 2021. The romantic piece recalls a pebble she picked up from the beach and how she finds herself “running home to your sweet nothings.” During the semi-acoustic ballad, Swift adds: “Outside they’re push and shoving / You’re in the kitchen humming.” Swift and Alwyn have been together since 2016 and he helped write several songs on “Folklore” and its sister record “Evermore” under the pseudonym. The track “Anti-Hero,” meanwhile, describes a character haunted by self-loathing in the middle of the night. Swift sings: “When my depression works the graveyard shift / All of the people I’ve ghosted stand there in the room. “I should not be left to my own devices, they come with prices and vices, I end up in crisis / Tale as old as time.” The song also sees her admitting, “Sometimes I feel like everybody is a sexy baby / And I’m a monster on the hill.” Swift also cryptically references politics, although it is not clear whether she is describing her own feelings or those of a character. “Did you hear my covert narcissism I disguise as altruism like some kind of congressman,” she sings. Swift has been increasingly vocal about her politics in recent years and backed Joe Biden and his vice-presidential pick Kamala Harris during the last US election. There is a collaboration with Lana Del Rey, who also worked with Antonoff on a recent album, on the song “Snow On The Beach.” “Midnight Rain,” meanwhile, sees Swift’s voice electronically manipulated to sound deeper and more robotic. It describes a protagonist whose former partner “never thinks of me except when I am on TV.” “Vigilante Shit” offers a darker perspective with lyrics about “dressing for revenge.” Swift took fans by surprise when she announced the new album in the closing moments of the 2022 MTV VMAs in New Jersey in August. In a post on her Instagram to mark the album’s release, she shared a photo of herself with her collaborators, and singled out Antonoff as her “co-pilot.” “He’s my friend for life (presumptuous I know but I stand by it) and we’ve been making music together for nearly a decade HOWEVER … this is our first album we’ve done with just the two of us as main collaborators,” she wrote. “We’d been toying with ideas and had written a few things we loved, but Midnights actually really coalesced and flowed out of us when our partners (both actors) did a film together in Panama. “Jack and I found ourselves back in New York, alone, recording every night, staying up late and exploring old memories and midnights past.” She continued: “Midnights is a collage of intensity, highs and lows and ebbs and flows. “Life can be dark, starry, cloudy, terrifying, electrifying, hot, cold, romantic or lonely. Just like Midnights.” Swift has been busy in recent months, releasing a stand-alone single titled “Carolina” for the film “Where the Crawdads Sing,” and continuing to re-record her first six albums after the master recordings were acquired by talent manager Scooter Braun. By creating new versions of the songs, the star can regain ownership of the music. “Midnights” by Taylor Swift is out now. View the full article

Published by Reuters By Luc Cohen NEW YORK (Reuters) – When jury selection begins next week in the criminal trial of former U.S. President Donald Trump’s company, prosecutors and the defense will likely be on alert for “stealth” jurors seeking to hide political biases in the hopes of being named to the panel, legal experts told Reuters. The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office has charged the Trump Organization with nine counts of tax fraud and other crimes for allegedly making “off the books” payments to executives since 2005, allowing employees to understate their taxable income and enabling the company to evade payroll taxes. The company has pleaded not guilty. Trump has not been charged in the case, but has called the allegations politically motivated. The trial comes as the former president, a Republican, is weighing another possible bid for the White House in 2024. “It’s very, very hard, especially with a name this big … for people to be able to separate your organization from the person who it’s named after,” said Melissa Gomez, president of MMG Jury Consulting in Philadelphia. During jury selection – which begins on Monday – lawyers for both sides will question prospective jurors to select a panel of 12 members and six alternates. While jurors cannot be excluded for simply holding certain political views or expressing disapproval of Trump, experts said the lawyers will aim to remove jurors who cannot be fair and impartial. Experts said they expect the defense to look out for so-called “stealth jurors” who do not answer questions about their views honestly in the hopes of being chosen. Partisan Democrats who hope that a guilty verdict could hurt Trump’s political prospects may be particularly motivated to hide the intensity of their views to get on the panel, Gomez said. “Because of the social and societal implications – and particularly because this could be one of the first steps in ensuring that Donald Trump cannot run in the future – there’s a high risk of a stealth juror,” Gomez said. Similarly, Gomez said the government will look to weed out strongly pro-Trump jurors who are unable to put those views aside. Such prospective jurors are likely to be vastly outnumbered: Democratic President Joe Biden won 86% of the vote in Manhattan in the 2020 election, according to New York State data. However, a guilty verdict must be unanimous, which means one juror unwilling to convict the Trump Organization would upend the government’s case. During a discussion about jury selection at a Sept. 12 court hearing before Judge Juan Merchan, Trump Organization lawyer Susan Necheles said she wanted to ensure that any jurors were excused if they said, “I hate former President Trump. I would always vote to convict.” Joshua Steinglass, an assistant district attorney, said his office shared the same concerns “in terms of who we are trying to prevent from being on the jury. Neither the district attorney’s office nor the Trump Organization’s lawyers responded to requests for comment. ‘DEEP SCOURS’ OF JURORS’ INTERNET HISTORIES The trial comes as the former U.S. president’s legal woes are mounting. He faces a civil lawsuit brought by New York State’s attorney general for allegedly overstating his net worth and the value of his real estate assets, a federal probe into the removal of government documents from the White House when he left office and a defamation lawsuit brought by a writer who has accused him of raping her. Lawyers for the Trump Organization have claimed the Manhattan district attorney’s case is a “selective prosecution” based on animosity toward Trump’s political views, though the judge overseeing it has rejected that argument. Both Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and his predecessor Cyrus Vance, who began the investigation, are Democrats. Lawyers for the defense will likely conduct “deep scours of internet research” and review jurors’ social media profiles to make sure jurors who said they could be fair have not expressed a disqualifying level of antipathy to Trump online, said Christina Marinakis, director for jury research at Litigation Insights in Baltimore “There is some degree of due diligence that needs to be done to look at whether people are posting things online against your client, or that may be not consistent with what they’re saying in court,” Marinakis said. (Reporting by Luc Cohen in New York; Additional reporting by Karen Freifeld; Editing by Noeleen Walder and Josie Kao) View the full article

Published by BANG Showbiz English Tori Spelling is “really happy” to have finally ended her lengthy feud with her Candy Spelling. The 49-year-old former ‘Beverly Hill, 90210’ first fell out with her mother around 20 years ago and their relationship went through some extremely rocky patches with Tori admitting they went several years without seeing each other before finally putting the bad blood behind them in recent months. During an appearance on SiriusXM’s ‘Jeff Lewis Live’, Tori said: “We have had a good relationship … it’s like next level right now. I’m really really happy.” Tori went on to credit her friend ‘Million Dollar Listing’ star Josh Flagg with bringing about the reconciliation by suggesting mother and daughter get together for dinner. She explained: “I hadn’t seen her since before COVID. And then Josh was like, ‘Okay, we’re gonna do a family dinner at her place.’ So we went and had a great night.” Tori added the pair have been out together many times since and are in regular contact, adding: “We text every single day”. The pair first went public with the reconciliation back in September when Tori shared a picture on Instagram showing her out to dinner with mum Candy and her brother Randy. She captioned the snap: “This was a special moment in time. I don’t think the 3 of us { just the 3 of us} have gone out to dinner together in 20 years. “All to celebrate our mom! Happy Birthday @candyspelling !!!! @randyspelling and I love you so much! Such an iconic woman! Loved Mom and Grandma! Can’t wait to keep celebrating your birthday with you!” Another picture she posted later, showed mother and daughter hugging and Tori wrote: “Loved celebrating this goddess tonight. One thing I’ve learned recently … life is short. So, hold those near and dear to you as close as you can. I love you with all my heart Mommy. Happy Birthday.” Tori later opened up about mending the rift in an interview on ‘Entertainment Tonight’, saying: “I feel like life is too short and we forget that. I think because life keeps going and so you say to yourself, ‘I gotta make plans with this person, I gotta make an effort,’ and then you don’t because your life keeps going. It’s important now to really take that time, and I think I’m finally starting to get that.” View the full article

Published by Reuters By Joseph Ax NEW YORK (Reuters) – One of the 20 people arrested for voting illegally as part of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ effort to crack down on voter fraud had his charges dismissed on Friday. A Miami state judge threw out the case against Robert Lee Wood, ruling that the statewide prosecutor, who is overseeing all 20 cases, had no jurisdiction because the alleged crime did not occur in at least two judicial circuits. The decision could pave the way for similar findings in some or all of the other cases, though local prosecutors could still choose to refile the charges. Statewide prosecutor Nick Cox said his office would appeal the ruling. DeSantis, a Republican who is running for re-election as governor on Nov. 8 and is widely thought to be weighing a 2024 presidential campaign, touted the arrests in August as the “first salvo” from his newly created Office of Election Crimes and Security. The agency, which includes state law enforcement officers, was established amid a nationwide push by Republicans to tighten voting laws in the wake of former President Donald Trump’s false claims that the 2020 election was stolen. Civil rights groups have said the office could intimidate voters while undermining public faith in elections. Voter fraud in the United States is exceedingly rare, studies have shown. Florida’s 2020 election saw 11 million ballots cast. The ruling on Friday came two days after the Tampa Bay Times published police body camera footage taken during the arrests that showed several defendants appearing baffled by the charges. All 20 are former inmates convicted of murder or felony sex crimes. A 2018 constitutional amendment restored voting rights for many ex-convicts but specifically excluded people who committed those offenses. In the videos, several defendants said they had been allowed to vote by election officials and did not understand why they were being arrested. Under state law, voter fraud requires intent. In Wood’s case, prosecutors argued that his ballot, cast in Miami, was eventually sent to Tallahassee to be tallied, thus fulfilling the requirement for the crime to occur in two separate locations. But Judge Milton Hirsch agreed with Wood’s defense attorney that Wood had nothing to do with the transfer of ballots from one place to another. “Here, all the criminal misconduct, if there was any, was performed by one man in one county,” the judge wrote in his order. Wood’s attorney, Larry Davis, said prosecutors should abandon the case. Wood registered to vote after being told he was allowed, received a voter card and cast a ballot, all without any objection, Davis said. “There’s no way he would have done so without being told it was OK,” Davis said in a phone interview. “My client had absolutely no intent to break the law.” DeSantis’s office did not immediately comment on Friday. (Reporting by Joseph Ax; Editing by Colleen Jenkins and Daniel Wallis) View the full article

Published by Reuters (Reuters) – Regulations prohibiting the sale, purchase or transfer of handguns within Canada take effect on Friday, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said, adding that the measure builds on earlier efforts banning handgun imports. The handgun freeze was announced in May alongside proposed legislation that would implement the nation’s strongest gun control measures in 40 years as part of Trudeau’s plan to tackle gun violence, his office said. “We have frozen the market for handguns in this country,” Trudeau said at a news conference in Surrey, British Columbia, attended by family members of gun violence victims and other advocates. “As we see gun violence continue to rise… we have an obligation to take action,” Trudeau added. “Today our national handgun freeze is coming into force.” Friday’s action stops people from buying, selling or transferring handguns within Canada, and prevents them from bringing newly acquired handguns into the country, according to the prime minister’s office. Canadian Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino called it the most significant action on gun violence in Canada in a generation. Canada has stricter gun laws than the United States, but Canadians can own firearms with a license. Some firearms must also be registered. Canada’s gun homicide rate is a fraction of the United States’ rate, 2020 data showed, but is still higher than other wealthy countries and has been rising, with handguns the main weapon used in the majority of firearm-related violent crimes between 2009 and 2020. Trudeau’s ruling Liberal government introduced bill C-21 to fight gun violence, and his office said Friday’s action will help “keep Canadians safe” while the legislation is debated. In August, it banned imports until the law passes. “We’ve got to get that law passed as quickly as possible,” Mendicino said, speaking alongside Trudeau. Under the executive action, any handgun applications submitted before Friday will still be processed, Trudeau’s office said. (Reporting by Susan Heavey; Editing by Josie Kao) View the full article

Published by Reuters By Sarah N. Lynch WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Steve Bannon, a one-time adviser to former President Donald Trump, was sentenced by a judge on Friday to four months in prison for refusing to cooperate with lawmakers investigating last year’s U.S. Capitol attack. Bannon was found guilty in July on two counts of contempt of Congress for failing to provide documents or testimony to the House of Representatives committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021 attack. Prosecutors had sought a six-month sentence, while Bannon’s attorneys had asked for probation. U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols also ordered Bannon, a key adviser to the Republican Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, to pay a fine of $6,500. The judge allowed Bannon to defer serving his sentence while he appeals his conviction. Prosecutor J.P. Cooney said at Friday’s hearing that Bannon chose to “thumb his nose at Congress.” He “is not above the law, and that’s what makes this case important,” Cooney said. Bannon, 68, served as Trump’s chief White House strategist during 2017 before a falling out between them that was later patched up. A firebrand, Brannon helped articulate the “America First” right-wing populism and stout opposition to immigration that helped define Trump’s presidency. Bannon has played an instrumental role in right-wing media and has promoted right-wing causes and candidates in the United States and abroad. A pro-Trump mob stormed the Capitol and attacked police with batons, sledgehammers, flag poles, Taser devices, chemical irritants, metal pipes, rocks, metal guard rails and other weapons in a failed effort to block congressional certification of his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden. Bannon declined to address the judge prior to sentencing on Friday. Outside the courthouse, he delivered fiery remarks as protesters at times tried to drown his voice out with shouts of “Traitor!” “Today was my judgment day by the judge,” Bannon told reporters. But…on November 8, they are going to have judgment on the illegitimate Biden regime, and quite frankly, (House Speaker) Nancy Pelosi and the entire committee.” Bannon has two weeks to file his appeal, which his lawyers said they intend to do. If he fails to file it on time, he is required to turn himself in by Nov. 15. According to the Jan. 6 committee, Bannon spoke with Trump at least twice on the day before the attack, attended a planning meeting at a Washington hotel and said on his right-wing podcast that “all hell is going to break loose tomorrow.” In his trial, prosecutors called only two witnesses while Bannon’s defense team called none. Bannon opted not to testify. Bannon’s lawyers have said they will appeal his conviction. Bannon’s defense was hamstrung by rulings by Nichols that barred him from asserting that he relied on executive privilege claims and arguing that he relied on advice from his attorney. The committee’s leaders have called Bannon’s conviction a victory for the rule of law. Bannon had sought to portray the criminal charges as politically motivated, lashing out at Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland, while saying, “They took on the wrong guy his time.” The Democratic-led committee has sought testimony from dozens of people in Trump’s orbit. In addition to Bannon, prosecutors have charged former Trump White House adviser Peter Navarro with contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena from the same committee, with a Nov. 17 trial date set. Navarro has pleaded not guilty. During Friday’s hearing, Bannon’s attorney David Schoen said Bannon relied on the advice of his lawyers not to comply with a congressional subpoena after Trump invoked executive privilege, a legal doctrine that shields some White House communications from disclosure. “A more egregious contempt of Congress would have been to say ‘Screw you Congress, take your subpoena and shove it!'” Schoen said. Nichols, in rendering his decision, said he agreed that Bannon should get some credit for relying on legal advice, even if it was “misguided.” At the same time, Nichols said that Bannon “had not produced a single document” or any testimony to Congress. “The January 6 Committee has every reason to investigate what happened that day,” Nichols said, adding that “flaunting congressional subpoenas betrays a lack of respect” for Congress. Friday’s sentencing does not end Bannon’s legal troubles. He was indicted in New York state in September on charges of money laundering and conspiracy, with prosecutors accusing him of deceiving donors giving money to help build Trump’s promised wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Bannon, who pleaded not guilty, could face up to 15 years in prison if convicted on those charges. (Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch; Additional reporting by Andy Sullivan; Editing by Will Dunham and Alistair Bell) View the full article

Published by BANG Showbiz English Harry Lawtey has been cast in ‘Joker: Folie a Deux’. The ‘Industry’ actor has boarded the ensemble for Todd Phillips’ sequel to the acclaimed 2019 film ‘Joker’. The star joins an ensemble that includes Joaquin Phoenix, Lady Gaga, Zazie Beetz, Brendan Gleeson and Catherine Keener. Plot details for the new movie have been kept under wraps but Phoenix is reprising his role as Arthur Fleck/Joker and Gaga is playing the role of Harley Quinn – the Arkham Asylum psychiatrist who falls in love with her patient. The movie is said to be set in Arkham – where Fleck ends up at the end of the original film – and will feature musical elements. Warner Bros. are yet to comment on Lawtey’s casting in the film but insiders suggest he will have a major part in the flick. As with the original ‘Joker’ film, Phillips is directing from a script he has penned with Scott Silver. The movie is expected to begin production in November with a plan for a theatrical release in 2024. Gleeson recently revealed that he signed up for the film in order to work with Phoenix again after the pair starred in the 2004 movie ‘The Village’ together. Asked how the ‘Joker’ sequel appealed to him, he told Collider: “It wasn’t the material, which is a great way to get me out of having to answer any questions about the criteria. “It was the achievement of the first film. I worked with Joaquin before on ‘The Village’… And so I knew him from then.” The 67-year-old star added: “And that performance, I’m still in awe of it. That performance as Joker, in that first movie. It was one of the most extraordinary achievements I’ve ever had. “And for Todd to have – Worked the movie around to allow for that, I didn’t have to be asked twice. I really didn’t.” View the full article

Published by Reuters By Luc Cohen and Karen Freifeld NEW YORK (Reuters) – Donald Trump’s family company is set to face a criminal trial on tax fraud charges in New York starting next week that could trigger fines and further complicate the real estate firm’s ability to do business as the former U.S. president’s legal woes mount. The Manhattan district attorney’s office in July 2021 charged the Trump Organization and its then-chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg with defrauding tax authorities by awarding “off the books” benefits to company executives since 2005, allowing certain employees to understate their taxable compensation and enabling the company to evade payroll taxes. Weisselberg, who has worked for Trump for half a century, pleaded guilty in August to charges that he concealed $1.76 million in income. His plea agreement requires him to testify at the trial against the Trump Organization, which operates hotels, golf courses and other real estate around the world. Jury selection is scheduled to begin on Monday in Manhattan state court. Trump has not been charged in the case. But the trial of his namesake company now run by two of his adult children – Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump – comes as the Republican former president considers running again in 2024. Trump faces other investigations by federal and state prosecutors including ones into attempts to overturn his 2020 election loss and the removal of government documents from the White House when he left office. The Trump Organization could face up to $1.6 million in fines for the three tax fraud counts and six other counts that were brought. Two of its subsidiaries – the Trump Corporation and Trump Payroll Corp – are the entities charged in the case. Lawyers for the Trump Organization have claimed the case is a “selective prosecution” based on animosity by the prosecution toward Trump for his political views, though the judge overseeing it has rejected that argument. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and his predecessor who began the investigation, Cyrus Vance, are Democrats. The company’s lawyers also said prosecutors presented no evidence to the grand jury that returned the indictment that the Trump Organization evaded payroll taxes. They also said that prosecutors were seeking to punish the company because “a handful of its officers allegedly failed to report fringe benefits on their personal tax returns.” OFF-THE-BOOKS PAYMENTS The fact that the Trump Organization kept making off-the-books payments for so many years could help prosecutors show it intended to violate tax laws, a key element of proving its guilt to the jury, said Bridget Crawford, a law professor at Pace University in New York focusing on income tax and corporations. “Failure to report once might be a mistake. Failure to report over a period of time is fraud,” Crawford added. “If you know of your tax obligations – which all experienced and savvy people do – and consciously disregard them, that is intent to defraud the government.” The criminal case is separate from the civil fraud lawsuit filed by New York state Attorney General Letitia James on Sept. 21 against the Trump Organization, Trump and three of his adult children, accusing them of overstating asset values and Trump’s net worth to get favorable bank loans and insurance coverage. Trump has called the civil suit brought by James as well as the charges being pursued by Bragg politically motivated. James, a Democrat, is seeking to recoup $250 million, remove the Trumps from power at the Trump Organization, prevent it from buying commercial real estate in New York for five years and install an independent monitor to oversee its operations. The Manhattan District Attorney’s office is limited to seeking financial penalties, noted Marc Scholl, a former prosecutor in the office. A corporation can be fined up to $250,000 for each tax-related count it faces and up to $10,000 for non-tax counts, Scholl added. The trial could make other companies wary of dealing with the Trump Organization regardless of any punishment the judge may ultimately hand down, said Miriam Baer, a professor at Brooklyn Law School specializing in corporate compliance and white collar crime. The Manhattan district attorney’s office has brought criminal cases against high-profile companies but trials are rare. “It casts a pall of uncertainty over the company,” Baer said, adding that many companies seek to resolve allegations of criminal wrongdoing before charges are even brought through agreements with prosecutors. WEISSELBERG’S PERKS Prosecutors said Weisselberg received perks from the company in lieu of some salary, including rent for a Manhattan apartment, lease payments for two Mercedes-Benz vehicles and tuition for relatives, with Trump signing the tuition checks. They added that Weisselberg also used company money to buy personal items like televisions and carpets, and falsely told tax authorities he was not a New York City resident. Weisselberg avoided $900,000 in taxes by failing to declare those perks as income, and collected $133,000 in refunds he did not deserve, prosecutors said. Two other Trump Organization employees received compensation in the form of lodging and car leases, prosecutors said. There is nothing illegal about receiving non-monetary compensation from an employer, but those benefits must be reported as income, with the exception of small perks like free coffee at the office, said Jay Soled, a lawyer and accounting professor at Rutgers Business School in Newark, New Jersey. (Reporting by Luc Cohen and Karen Freifeld in New York; Editing by Will Dunham and Noeleen Walder) View the full article

Published by BANG Showbiz English Andy Dick has been arrested for allegedly stealing power tools. The 56-year-old comedian was stopped by police on 13 October after Santa Barbara cops responded to a report of a burglary in progress at a home, where they found the ‘Less than Perfect’ star trying to flee after he had allegedly removed several items from a home under construction. The homeowner confirmed to police they didn’t know him and he didn’t have permission to be there. According to TMZ, the Santa Barbara County District Attorney’s office have charged Andy with first-degree residential burglary and he has pled not guilty to the charge. A week on from the incident, the ‘Freaky Deaky’ actor remains in Santa Barbara County Jail waiting for someone to bail him out, with his bond having been set at $50,000. Andy’s lawyer, Brian Mathis, said the comic has a public defender representing him and they are “confident additional facts will come to light supporting Mr. Dick as this case moves forward.” Andy’s arrest comes three months after he was arrested on suspicion of sexual battery after an adult male alleged the ‘NewsRadio’ star had assaulted him at California’s O’Neill Regional Park. Last November, the star was arrested for felony domestic battery after he allegedly hit his partner with a bottle. But he was released around three hours later after posting a bond of $50,000. And in June last year, he was arrested for allegedly assaulting a man with a deadly weapon and was released from jail after posting a bond. Andy was previously sentenced to 14 days in jail for sexual battery in 2019 after squeezing a random woman’s butt in the street and failing to complete his community service. And in 2018, he was charged with misdemeanour sexual battery after an Uber driver accused him of grabbing his crotch. View the full article

Published by AFP More frequent wildfires caused by climate change have placed the survival of Los Angeles' last remaining mountain lions in doubt Washington (AFP) – They are beautiful, powerful and stalk the hills above Los Angeles. But more frequent wildfires caused by climate change have placed the survival of the city’s last remaining mountain lions in doubt, by increasing their exposures to car collisions and hostile encounters with their own kind. Rachel Blakey of the University of California, Los Angeles led a study published Thursday in Current Biology examining the impact of the 2018 Woolsey fire, which scorched half the big cats’ habitat in the Santa Monica mountains. The biggest takeaway: “It’s not just about how many animals perished in that fire — in this case two mountain lions,” she told AFP. “We need to think about how that change in the landscape is then going to influence how these animals experience all the other stresses that they’re currently dealing with.” Blakey, a native of Australia who has been researching California’s wildlife for about seven years, says she was “blown away” to learn that a city of 10 million people supported a population of mountain lions, also known as cougars. The apex predators are one of two large cat species in the Western Hemisphere, along with jaguars found further south in Mexico and Central America. Generally speaking, the species is healthy enough, explained Blakey, though their range was once much bigger, roaming from coast to coast before the arrival of Europeans to the Americas. But there are pockets within California where the lions are hemmed in by urban areas and freeways, decreasing their genetic diversity and placing great pressures on their survival. Los Angeles is one such region. More crossings, more fights – Over the past 20 years, the National Park Service (NPS) has been tracking this isolated population, which generally numbers around 10-12 individuals. They had already noticed worrying signs of inbreeding, such as kinked tails and low-quality sperm, but the lions were nonetheless clinging on. Blakey and NPS colleagues decided to leverage GPS and accelerometer data from tags on the animals to understand the impacts of the Woolsey fire, which burned 97,000 acres (40,000 hectares) in November 2018. What they found was far from encouraging. After the fire, the lions avoided the burned areas, which they previously used as cover to ambush their prey — deer and small mammals — as well as to avoid conflicts between males. They also placed themselves at great risk by crossing more roads, including freeways. Their rate of crossing Highway 101, a busy 10-lane freeway, increased from once every two years to once every four months. Blakey said this change was “very, very striking considering these roads are the major source of mortality for this population.” The lions also had to put in a lot more work to eke out survival. They traveled nearly 400 kilometers a month on average compared to 250 kilometers, increasing their food needs and placing them at further risk of lethal skirmishes with other mountain lions. Animal crossing One piece of good news from the study: contrary to residents’ fears, the lions remained deeply shy of humans, spending only four or five percent of their time in urban areas both before and after the fire. Co-author Seth Riley of the NPS told AFP that while the population had since returned to their former range after the forest recovered, and the lions were back to their pre-fire numbers, climate change continued to pose risks. “With climate change, there’s concern about more and bigger fires, and drought doesn’t help, which is something we’ve been experiencing for quite a while here,” he said. Researchers and conservationists are placing great hope on the Wallis Annenberg wildlife crossing, a vegetated overpass currently under construction that was designed with the lions and other species in mind. Some animals will of course continue to get hit, said Riley. But they believe the crossing will help restore connectivity between the Santa Monica lions and other populations to the north, providing a much-needed boost to genetic exchange. View the full article

Published by Reuters By Jack Queen (Reuters) -A Manhattan jury began deliberating on Thursday in the sex abuse trial of actor Kevin Spacey, who was accused in a civil lawsuit of making an unwanted sexual advance on a 14-year-old in 1986. Anthony Rapp, now 50, claimed the abuse took place in Spacey’s New York apartment when the actor was 26. Spacey denied the allegation on the stand and said he had never been alone with Rapp. Rapp’s lawyer, Richard Steigman, urged jurors to discredit Spacey’s recollection of the events. “It’s inconsistent. It’s not worthy of your belief,” Steigman said during closing arguments. Spacey’s lawyer, Jennifer Keller, said during her closing arguments that Rapp fabricated his story because he wanted attention, among other possible motivations for lying. “Mr. Rapp is getting more attention in this trial than he has in his entire acting life,” Keller said. The trial in Manhattan federal court began on Oct. 6, just under five years after Spacey’s career was upended by sexual misconduct allegations in the early days of the #MeToo movement. He has denied any misconduct. Keller urged jurors to ignore the sexual politics of the case. “This isn’t a team sport where you’re either on the MeToo side or the other side,” Keller said. Rapp sued Spacey for battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress in November 2020. During the trial, Judge Lewis A. Kaplan dismissed the emotional distress claim but allowed the rest of the lawsuit to proceed. Spacey won Oscars for performances in “American Beauty” and “The Usual Suspects,” but his career largely ended after more than 20 men accused him of sexual misconduct. Spacey faces a criminal trial in London next year after pleading not guilty to five sex offense charges over alleged assaults between 2005 and 2013. (Reporting by Luc Cohen, Jody Godoy and Jack Queen in New York;Editing by Noeleen Walder, David Bario, Alistair Bell and Mark Porter) View the full article

Published by BANG Showbiz English Rihanna’s new Savage X Fenty sportswear line is “inspired by everyday life”. The ‘Umbrella’ hitmaker – who welcomed her first child, a son, with her boyfriend rapper ASAP Rocky in May – called her athleisure collaboration with Adam Selman “sexy” and “functional”. The 34-year-old singer – whose real name is Robyn Rihanna Fenty – told Vogue: “I was inspired by everyday life. Everything is a sport. Being pregnant is a sport. For me, it was about fit and fabric, and I let Adam play with everything else. The pieces are sexy and snatch you, but it’s functional and that’s what describes the whole Sport collection. Sexy. Functional. Fashion.” Adam – who is a long-time creative partner of Rihanna and has made some of her most iconic looks such as the naked dress she wore to CDFA Awards in 2014 – believes the line of “lingerie-inspired activewear” is unlike “anything else”. The designer told the same outlet: “It’s the perfect marriage of lingerie-inspired activewear that isn’t like anything else on the market. We wanted to create something unique and bold that can speak to the existing customers, but also open up a whole new realm of possibilities for us.” Adam – who has worked with Michael Jackson, Lady Gaga, Britney Spears, RuPaul and Mick Jagger – thought it important to make the line to be technical while still “sexy”. He said: “Sometimes, when innovation and technology are used in activewear, it gets very techy – I wanted to keep it invisible and sexy, so you feel it, but without noticing it visually. It has all the things we know and love from Savage X Fenty – it’s disruptive, inclusive, bold and sexy, while still being powerful and playful at the same time.” View the full article

Published by Tribune News Service At the Global Fund Seventh Replenishment Conference last month, President Joe Biden pledged $6 billion in U.S. funding to fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria, and strengthen health systems worldwide. The announcement is a welcome sign of the administration’s continued interest in global health as attention to the COVID-19 pandemic wanes. But despite this and other recent commitments, the United States is still doing too little to address the danger of new and resurgent diseases. The recent spread of monkeypox and even polio, though unlikely to reach pandemic levels, underscores this fact. Loo… Read More View the full article

Published by Raw Story By Sarah K. Burris Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) has dispatched his “election police” to arrest Florida voters who were told they were allowed to vote by election staff but they weren’t supposed to. A few years ago, Florida citizens overwhelmingly voted in support a ballot measure that restored voting rights to felons who had served their time. So, those felons went to the polls and relied on government employees to tell them what to do. Now they’re being arrested. Republican commentator Alyssa Farah Griffin implied that it was all a political ploy by DeSantis to force Democrats to support pedophil… Read More View the full article

Published by Kaiser Health News Can’t see the audio player? Click here to listen on Acast. You can also listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, Pocket Casts, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Related Links Kids’ Mental Health Care Leaves Parents in Debt and in the Shadows As Links to MS Deepen, Researchers Accelerate Efforts to Develop an Epstein-Barr Vaccine Centene Gave Thousands to Georgia Leaders’ Campaigns While Facing Medicaid Overbilling Questions Don’t Drill Your Own Teeth! And Quashing Other Rotten Dental Advice on TikTok What do pandemic preparedness, mental health care services, and over-the-counter hearing… Read More View the full article

Published by Orlando Sentinel ORLANDO, Fla. — Florida adopted a trio of education rules Wednesday that carry out its new culture-war laws, including one that threatens public school teachers with the loss of state certification if they violate requirements of the state’s so-called “don’t say gay” and “anti-woke” legislation. More than 50 people spoke at the State Board of Education meeting held at an Orlando hotel, both to denounce and applaud the new rules, all of which were adopted. The laws were approved earlier this year by the Republican-dominated Florida Legislature and then signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis, who pushed fo… Read More View the full article

Published by Sports Illustrated By Nick Selbe Perkins: “I’ve decided that I’m going to make a change, and stop running away from myself.” Hampton defensive back Byron Perkins made history Wednesday by becoming the first football player at an HBCU to come out as gay. Perkins, a redshirt junior from Chicago, made the announcement on his Instagram account story, saying that it was time to “stop running away.” “I’ve decided that I’m going to make change, and stop running away from myself. I’m gay,” Perkins wrote. “Let it be known that this is not a ‘decision’ or a ‘choice.’ Yes, this is who I am, this is who I’ve been, and this … Read More View the full article

Published by PopCrush The mother of one of Jeffery Dahmer’s victims is slamming those who dress as the serial killer on Halloween. Shirley Hughes, the mother of Tony Hughes, recently shared that when people dress as the serial killer, it becomes exploitative and can traumatize their families. Speaking to news outlet TMZ, Shirley told them that the costumes were “evil.” “If Netflix hadn’t streamed the show … None of the families would be revictimized … and then there’d be no Dahmer costumes this year,” she added. Last month, Netflix released a series focused on the serial killer. Produced by Ryan Murphy, Dahmer — Mo… Read More View the full article

Published by City AM By Adam Bloodworth My Policeman review: Harry Styles is not yet a good actor, but Styles gives the fans exactly what they want in this gripping LGBTQ drama Amid all the rumours of a feud between Harry Styles, his director-girlfriend Olivia Wilde and their co-star Florence Pugh on the set of Don’t Worry Darling – a rumour that grew stronger when Pugh didn’t turn up to press conferences – you’d have been forgiven for forgetting Styles has another flick out. Not just any flick: one where he gets his naked butt out and, clearly having engaged with an oh-so modern intimacy coordinator, has some of … Read More View the full article

Published by uInterview.com Actor Kevin Spacey began his testimony in his sexual assault lawsuit in New York on Monday and gave on-record responses to the accusations outlined against him by fellow actor Anthony Rapp. Rapp accuses Spacey of touching him inappropriately in a Manhattan party when Rapp was 14 and Spacey was 26, and is seeking $40 million in damages. Spacey is accused of inviting the young actor to a private room, when he then lifted up Rapp “like a groom carrying a bride over the threshold,” and then laid him on a bed and climbed on top of him. Rapp also said in his testimony that he quickly squirmed out an… Read More View the full article