US&nbsp;House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday said she has instructed the House Judiciary panel to draft articles of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trumps-lawyer-giuliani-back-in-ukraine-as-impeachment-probe-escalates-266286">impeachment against President Donald Trump</a>.

"The president's actions have seriously violated the constitution," Pelosi told reporters.

US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made a statement early Thursday on the status of the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, one day after the House Judiciary Committee began weighing potential charges against the Republican president.

The Democratic-led panel on Wednesday heard from four legal experts as US lawmakers considered whether Trump's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate a political rival rose to the level of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-willing-to-compromise-us-security-impeachment-hearing-chair-266274">impeachable offenses</a>.

The hearing came after the House Intelligence panel this week submitted findings from its inquiry into Trump's push for Kiev to launch an investigation related to former US Vice President Joe Biden, a top contender for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination. He also wanted Ukraine to look into the discredited theory that Ukraine, not Russia, meddled in the 2016 election.

Democrats have accused Trump of abusing his power by withholding $391 million in security aid to Ukraine - a US ally facing Russian aggression - to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to announce the investigation.

Trump has denied any wrongdoing.

The House may vote by year's end on formal impeachment charges known as articles of impeachment, but Democrats, who control the chamber, say no decision has been made at this point on the specific charges.

Those charges could include abuse of power, bribery, obstruction of Congress and obstruction of justice.

Judiciary panel Democrats on Wednesday also said they may look beyond Trump's relations with Ukraine to include Trump's earlier alleged efforts to impede former US Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into his 2016 campaign's relations with Russia, but they stopped short of saying that could trigger a separate charge.

If the House votes to impeach Trump, the Republican-led Senate would hold a trial to decide whether to remove the president from office.

Trump's fellow Republicans in both the House and the Senate have stood by the president.

"If it does come to us, I think it will be along party lines," Republican Senator Rand Paul told Fox News in an interview on Thursday, adding that the "frivolous and partisan" effort could harm vulnerable Democrats in the November election.

&nbsp;

US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday said she has instructed the House Judiciary panel to draft articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump. "The president's actions have seriously violated the constitution," Pelosi told reporters.

US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday said she has instructed the House Judiciary panel to draft articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump. "The president's actions have seriously violated the constitution," Pelosi told reporters. US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made a statement early Thursday on the status of the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, one day after the House Judiciary Committee began weighing potential charges against the Republican president. The Democratic-led panel on Wednesday heard from four legal experts as US lawmakers considered whether Trump's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate a political rival rose to the level of impeachable offenses. The hearing came after the House Intelligence panel this week submitted findings from its inquiry into Trump's push for Kiev to launch an investigation related to former US Vice President Joe Biden, a top contender for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination. He also wanted Ukraine to look into the discredited theory that Ukraine, not Russia, meddled in the 2016 election. Democrats have accused Trump of abusing his power by withholding $391 million in security aid to Ukraine - a US ally facing Russian aggression - to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to announce the investigation. Trump has denied any wrongdoing. The House may vote by year's end on formal impeachment charges known as articles of impeachment, but Democrats, who control the chamber, say no decision has been made at this point on the specific charges. Those charges could include abuse of power, bribery, obstruction of Congress and obstruction of justice. Judiciary panel Democrats on Wednesday also said they may look beyond Trump's relations with Ukraine to include Trump's earlier alleged efforts to impede former US Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into his 2016 campaign's relations with Russia, but they stopped short of saying that could trigger a separate charge. If the House votes to impeach Trump, the Republican-led Senate would hold a trial to decide whether to remove the president from office. Trump's fellow Republicans in both the House and the Senate have stood by the president. "If it does come to us, I think it will be along party lines," Republican Senator Rand Paul told Fox News in an interview on Thursday, adding that the "frivolous and partisan" effort could harm vulnerable Democrats in the November election.

Trump abused power, US House to draft impeachment charges against him: Nancy Pelosi

Three constitutional&nbsp;scholars&nbsp;on Wednesday bolstered Democrats' case for <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-willing-to-compromise-us-security-impeachment-hearing-chair-266274">impeaching Donald&nbsp;Trump</a>&nbsp;by saying the president's actions seeking foreign interference in US elections were clear grounds for removal, as the inquiry kicked into high gear in&nbsp;Congress.

But reflecting the Washington political divide, a fourth expert strongly dissented, saying there was "woefully inadequate" evidence that&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;committed&nbsp;high&nbsp;crimes&nbsp;and misdemeanours necessary for removal.

Democrats have made a forceful case that&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;should be impeached for trying to leverage a White House meeting and military aid to pressure Ukraine for dirt on an election rival.

In a&nbsp;theatrical hearing of the House Judiciary Committee,&nbsp;now tasked with weighing impeachment charges against the president -- lawmakers listened to damning testimony from constitutional law professors.

"On the basis of the testimony and evidence before the House, President&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;has&nbsp;committed&nbsp;impeachable&nbsp;high&nbsp;crimes&nbsp;and misdemeanours by corruptly abusing the office of the presidency," Harvard Law School professor Noah Feldman told the hearing.

"We three are unanimous" in that view, jurisprudence professor Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina stated, referring to himself and fellow witnesses Feldman and Stanford Law School professor Pamela Karlan.

The trio was invited by Democrats to testify.

Americans tuning in to the eight-hour live broadcast witnessed clashes between Democrats and Republican&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;loyalists on the panel, who repeatedly forced procedural votes to stall the process.

The new phase of impeachment began a day after a congressional report on the high-stakes inquiry detailed "overwhelming" evidence of abuse of power and obstruction by the president.

The report mapped out a months-long scheme by&nbsp;Trump, his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, senior diplomats and White House staffers to pressure Ukraine's president into investigating Joe Biden, the current favourite to win the Democratic nomination for the 2020 election.

Trump&nbsp;"was willing to compromise our security and his office for personal, political gain," said Judiciary Committee chairman Jerry Nadler.

Watch: Democrats release impeachment report on Donald Trump

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-democrats-release-impeachment-report-on-donald-trump-266213/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

'Proof, not presumptions'&nbsp;

Trump's <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/how-us-public-opinion-has-evolved-on-impeachment-of-trump-266209">alleged political&nbsp;crimes</a>, including bribery and obstruction of justice and&nbsp;Congress, "are worse than the misconduct of any prior president," Gerhardt said.

"If what we're talking about is not&nbsp;impeachable, then nothing is&nbsp;impeachable."

Feldman added that if&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;is not held to account for his offences "we live under a dictatorship."

White House spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham hit back in a statement, saying that "the only thing the three liberal professors established at chairman Nadler's hearing was their political bias against the president."

"It did nothing to change the fact that, despite weeks of hearings in this sham process, the president did nothing wrong," Grisham said.

The fourth academic who testified, George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley -- the only expert invited by Republicans -- argued there was "no evidence" that&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;acted with corrupt intent.

He warned that partisan "rage" was compromising the inquiry.

"Impeachments have to be based on proof, not presumptions," he said, adding that Democrats were rushing the process so quickly that they were not hearing from key players in the Ukraine scandal.

Turley and Republicans did not, however, mention the White House's stonewalling. Despite Democratic requests, 12 current or former administration officials have refused to testify.

'Impeachable&nbsp;offence'

The president himself, in London for a NATO summit, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-house-panel-impeachment-report-to-be-released-tuesday-adam-schiff-266202">lambasted his opponents</a> for proceeding with impeachment hearings.

"What they are doing is a very bad thing for our country,"&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;said. "It's a joke."

Karlan asserted that&nbsp;Trump's alleged effort to withhold military aid until Ukraine&nbsp;committed&nbsp;to investigating Biden was grounds for removal -- even though Kiev never conducted the probe.

"Soliciting itself is the&nbsp;impeachable&nbsp;offence," she said.

But Karlan found herself in hot water when she invoked&nbsp;Trump's 13-year-old son Barron when differentiating between monarchical and presidential power.

"While the president can name his son 'Barron,' he can't make him a baron," Karlan said.&nbsp;

The remark drew stiff blowback from First Lady Melania&nbsp;Trump, and Karlan apologized.

The House Intelligence Committee report is expected to form the basis&nbsp;for the&nbsp;Judiciary Committee to draw up formal charges -- articles of impeachment -- that could include bribery, abuse of power, obstruction and contempt of&nbsp;Congress.

Democrats reportedly aim to have the articles presented for a vote to the entire House of Representatives by late December.

If the House impeaches&nbsp;Trump, he would then stand trial for removal in the Republican-controlled Senate, where he is likely to be exonerated.

The Senate meanwhile released its 2020 schedule, and the entire month of January is blocked off, signalling preparations for a trial.

Three constitutional scholars on Wednesday bolstered Democrats' case for impeaching Donald Trump by saying the president's actions seeking foreign interference in US elections were clear grounds for removal, as the inquiry kicked into high gear in Congress.

Three constitutional scholars on Wednesday bolstered Democrats' case for impeaching Donald Trump by saying the president's actions seeking foreign interference in US elections were clear grounds for removal, as the inquiry kicked into high gear in Congress. But reflecting the Washington political divide, a fourth expert strongly dissented, saying there was "woefully inadequate" evidence that Trump committed high crimes and misdemeanours necessary for removal. Democrats have made a forceful case that Trump should be impeached for trying to leverage a White House meeting and military aid to pressure Ukraine for dirt on an election rival. In a theatrical hearing of the House Judiciary Committee, now tasked with weighing impeachment charges against the president -- lawmakers listened to damning testimony from constitutional law professors. "On the basis of the testimony and evidence before the House, President Trump has committed impeachable high crimes and misdemeanours by corruptly abusing the office of the presidency," Harvard Law School professor Noah Feldman told the hearing. "We three are unanimous" in that view, jurisprudence professor Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina stated, referring to himself and fellow witnesses Feldman and Stanford Law School professor Pamela Karlan. The trio was invited by Democrats to testify. Americans tuning in to the eight-hour live broadcast witnessed clashes between Democrats and Republican Trump loyalists on the panel, who repeatedly forced procedural votes to stall the process. The new phase of impeachment began a day after a congressional report on the high-stakes inquiry detailed "overwhelming" evidence of abuse of power and obstruction by the president. The report mapped out a months-long scheme by Trump, his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, senior diplomats and White House staffers to pressure Ukraine's president into investigating Joe Biden, the current favourite to win the Democratic nomination for the 2020 election. Trump "was willing to compromise our security and his office for personal, political gain," said Judiciary Committee chairman Jerry Nadler. Watch: Democrats release impeachment report on Donald Trump 'Proof, not presumptions' Trump's alleged political crimes, including bribery and obstruction of justice and Congress, "are worse than the misconduct of any prior president," Gerhardt said. "If what we're talking about is not impeachable, then nothing is impeachable." Feldman added that if Trump is not held to account for his offences "we live under a dictatorship." White House spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham hit back in a statement, saying that "the only thing the three liberal professors established at chairman Nadler's hearing was their political bias against the president." "It did nothing to change the fact that, despite weeks of hearings in this sham process, the president did nothing wrong," Grisham said. The fourth academic who testified, George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley -- the only expert invited by Republicans -- argued there was "no evidence" that Trump acted with corrupt intent. He warned that partisan "rage" was compromising the inquiry. "Impeachments have to be based on proof, not presumptions," he said, adding that Democrats were rushing the process so quickly that they were not hearing from key players in the Ukraine scandal. Turley and Republicans did not, however, mention the White House's stonewalling. Despite Democratic requests, 12 current or former administration officials have refused to testify. 'Impeachable offence' The president himself, in London for a NATO summit, lambasted his opponents for proceeding with impeachment hearings. "What they are doing is a very bad thing for our country," Trump said. "It's a joke." Karlan asserted that Trump's alleged effort to withhold military aid until Ukraine committed to investigating Biden was grounds for removal -- even though Kiev never conducted the probe. "Soliciting itself is the impeachable offence," she said. But Karlan found herself in hot water when she invoked Trump's 13-year-old son Barron when differentiating between monarchical and presidential power. "While the president can name his son 'Barron,' he can't make him a baron," Karlan said. The remark drew stiff blowback from First Lady Melania Trump, and Karlan apologized. The House Intelligence Committee report is expected to form the basis for the Judiciary Committee to draw up formal charges -- articles of impeachment -- that could include bribery, abuse of power, obstruction and contempt of Congress. Democrats reportedly aim to have the articles presented for a vote to the entire House of Representatives by late December. If the House impeaches Trump, he would then stand trial for removal in the Republican-controlled Senate, where he is likely to be exonerated. The Senate meanwhile released its 2020 schedule, and the entire month of January is blocked off, signalling preparations for a trial.

Trump committed impeachable crimes: Constitutional scholars to US Congress

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-envoy-to-rejoin-doha-talks-with-taliban-after-kabul-visit-state-department-266270">The United States</a> is weighing sending up to&nbsp;14,000&nbsp;more&nbsp;troops&nbsp;to the Middle East in the face of a perceived threat from Iran, the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday.

The mulled deployment would include "dozens"&nbsp;more&nbsp;ships and double the number of&nbsp;troops&nbsp;added to the US force in the region since the beginning of this year, the Journal said, citing unnamed US officials.

It said President Donald Trump could make a decision on the troop boost as early as this month.

A Pentagon spokesperson declined to comment on the&nbsp;report&nbsp;to AFP.

The move would come after a series of attacks on shipping vessels and a drone and missile attack on Saudi oil installations in September blamed on Iran.

Washington has already ratcheted up its military presence in <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/mending-gulf-fences-could-weaken-support-for-us-sanctions-against-iran-264123">the Gulf</a> and expanded economic sanctions on the country, elevating tensions across the region.&nbsp;

In mid-November the US aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln sailed through the Strait of Hormuz in a show of force aimed at reassuring allies worried about the Iran threat.

In October Defence Secretary Mark Esper announced that two fighter squadrons and additional missile defence batteries were being sent to Saudi Arabia, for a total of about 3,000&nbsp;new&nbsp;troops.

Earlier Wednesday Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said the country was willing to return to the negotiating table over its nuclear program if the United States first drops sanctions, which have hampered the country's economy and may have contributed to recent domestic turmoil sparked by fuel price hikes.

Speaking at a defence conference in Manama, Bahrain on November 23, General Kenneth McKenzie, commander of US Central Command, said the US does not have all the resources it needs to cover the Middle East region.

"There is a lot of water to cover. Simply put, we don't have sufficient resources to be where we want to be in the right numbers all the time," he told the annual Manama Dialogue on regional security.

But McKenzie rebuffed criticism that Washington has been disengaging from the region.

"We have a carrier in the theatre, we've reinforced Saudi Arabia," he said.

"So I'm not sure I would agree with the narrative of abandonment or a narrative of walking away."

"Clearly <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-willing-to-compromise-us-security-impeachment-hearing-chair-266274">the United States</a> has different global priorities and this is probably not the highest global priority, but I think it remains a very important thing for the United States," he added.

The United States is weighing sending up to 14,000 more troops to the Middle East in the face of a perceived threat from Iran, the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday.

The United States is weighing sending up to 14,000 more troops to the Middle East in the face of a perceived threat from Iran, the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday. The mulled deployment would include "dozens" more ships and double the number of troops added to the US force in the region since the beginning of this year, the Journal said, citing unnamed US officials. It said President Donald Trump could make a decision on the troop boost as early as this month. A Pentagon spokesperson declined to comment on the report to AFP. The move would come after a series of attacks on shipping vessels and a drone and missile attack on Saudi oil installations in September blamed on Iran. Washington has already ratcheted up its military presence in the Gulf and expanded economic sanctions on the country, elevating tensions across the region. In mid-November the US aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln sailed through the Strait of Hormuz in a show of force aimed at reassuring allies worried about the Iran threat. In October Defence Secretary Mark Esper announced that two fighter squadrons and additional missile defence batteries were being sent to Saudi Arabia, for a total of about 3,000 new troops. Earlier Wednesday Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said the country was willing to return to the negotiating table over its nuclear program if the United States first drops sanctions, which have hampered the country's economy and may have contributed to recent domestic turmoil sparked by fuel price hikes. Speaking at a defence conference in Manama, Bahrain on November 23, General Kenneth McKenzie, commander of US Central Command, said the US does not have all the resources it needs to cover the Middle East region. "There is a lot of water to cover. Simply put, we don't have sufficient resources to be where we want to be in the right numbers all the time," he told the annual Manama Dialogue on regional security. But McKenzie rebuffed criticism that Washington has been disengaging from the region. "We have a carrier in the theatre, we've reinforced Saudi Arabia," he said. "So I'm not sure I would agree with the narrative of abandonment or a narrative of walking away." "Clearly the United States has different global priorities and this is probably not the highest global priority, but I think it remains a very important thing for the United States," he added.

United States planning to send 14,000 troops to Middle East: Report

Should US&nbsp;President Donald Trump call North Korean leader Kim Jong Un "Rocket Man" again, that would represent a "very dangerous challenge" reminiscent of two years ago, a senior North Korean official warned on Thursday.

Choe Son Hui, who was quoted by state-run KCNA news agency, was referring to a time when tensions between when Washington and Pyongyang ran high.

Trump said on Tuesday he still had confidence in the North Korean leader but noted that Kim "likes sending rockets up".

"...That's why I call him Rocket Man," Trump told reporters at a NATO meeting in London.

Breaking a month-long lull in missile tests, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/north-korea-test-fires-rockets-in-thanksgiving-reminder-of-year-end-deadline-for-us-265157">North Korea fired two short range projectiles into the sea</a> off its east coast last week in what appeared to be the latest try out of its new multiple rocket launchers, South Korea's military said.

The test-firing came as the clock ticks down on the year-end deadline that Pyongyang had given the United States to show flexibility in their stalled denuclearisation talks.

It also coincided with the US Thanksgiving holiday and took place one day before the second anniversary of the North's test of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of hitting the US mainland.

US Special Representative for North Korea Stephen Biegun said the year-end deadline was an artificial one, but could mean a return to "provocative" steps that preceded the past two years of diplomacy.

US President Donald Trump, who is seeking re-election next year, has repeatedly pointed to Kim's suspension of long-range missile and nuclear bomb tests as a major achievement of his engagement with North Korea.

Should US President Donald Trump call North Korean leader Kim Jong Un "Rocket Man" again, that would represent a "very dangerous challenge" reminiscent of two years ago, a senior North Korean official warned on Thursday.

Should US President Donald Trump call North Korean leader Kim Jong Un "Rocket Man" again, that would represent a "very dangerous challenge" reminiscent of two years ago, a senior North Korean official warned on Thursday. Choe Son Hui, who was quoted by state-run KCNA news agency, was referring to a time when tensions between when Washington and Pyongyang ran high. Trump said on Tuesday he still had confidence in the North Korean leader but noted that Kim "likes sending rockets up". "...That's why I call him Rocket Man," Trump told reporters at a NATO meeting in London. Breaking a month-long lull in missile tests, North Korea fired two short range projectiles into the sea off its east coast last week in what appeared to be the latest try out of its new multiple rocket launchers, South Korea's military said. The test-firing came as the clock ticks down on the year-end deadline that Pyongyang had given the United States to show flexibility in their stalled denuclearisation talks. It also coincided with the US Thanksgiving holiday and took place one day before the second anniversary of the North's test of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of hitting the US mainland. US Special Representative for North Korea Stephen Biegun said the year-end deadline was an artificial one, but could mean a return to "provocative" steps that preceded the past two years of diplomacy. US President Donald Trump, who is seeking re-election next year, has repeatedly pointed to Kim's suspension of long-range missile and nuclear bomb tests as a major achievement of his engagement with North Korea.

'Very dangerous challenge' if Trump calls Kim 'Rocket Man' again: North Korea

Beijing and Washington are "maintaining close communication" over a much-anticipated <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/after-trump-china-says-no-time-limit-on-trade-deal-with-us-266194">phase one trade deal</a>, China's commerce ministry said Thursday, reiterating that tariffs must be reduced&nbsp;as part of any&nbsp;agreement.

Hopes had risen that the two sides were close to reaching a mini deal, but comments from President Trump and recent US legislation backing Hong Kong pro-democracy protests and China's <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-house-approves-uighur-bill-demanding-sanctions-on-senior-chinese-officials-266033">Uighur minority</a> had appeared to throw the talks off track.&nbsp;

China's commerce ministry spokesman Gao Feng said at a press briefing Thursday that the two sides were "maintaining close communication."

He added, however, that "if the two sides are to reach a phase one deal, tariffs should be reduced accordingly."

On Tuesday, US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-calls-macrons-criticism-of-nato-very-very-nasty-before-summit-266035">Donald Trump</a> appeared to dash hopes for a deal this month by suggesting he would be happy waiting until after the 2020 presidential election before signing off on one.

China echoed those comments Wednesday by saying they "will not set any time limit" on signing an agreement.

But markets rebounded Thursday on a Bloomberg News report saying US negotiators expected a deal to be completed before a new round of US tariffs on China is due to hit on December 15.

Bloomberg quoted unnamed sources as saying Trump's comments on waiting until after the 2020 election should not have been taken as a sign the talks had stalled.

The world's two biggest economies have been locked in a bruising trade conflict for more than a year, hitting each other with tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of goods.

Beijing and Washington are "maintaining close communication" over a much-anticipated phase one trade deal, China's commerce ministry said Thursday, reiterating that tariffs must be reduced as part of any agreement.

Beijing and Washington are "maintaining close communication" over a much-anticipated phase one trade deal, China's commerce ministry said Thursday, reiterating that tariffs must be reduced as part of any agreement. Hopes had risen that the two sides were close to reaching a mini deal, but comments from President Trump and recent US legislation backing Hong Kong pro-democracy protests and China's Uighur minority had appeared to throw the talks off track. China's commerce ministry spokesman Gao Feng said at a press briefing Thursday that the two sides were "maintaining close communication." He added, however, that "if the two sides are to reach a phase one deal, tariffs should be reduced accordingly." On Tuesday, US President Donald Trump appeared to dash hopes for a deal this month by suggesting he would be happy waiting until after the 2020 presidential election before signing off on one. China echoed those comments Wednesday by saying they "will not set any time limit" on signing an agreement. But markets rebounded Thursday on a Bloomberg News report saying US negotiators expected a deal to be completed before a new round of US tariffs on China is due to hit on December 15. Bloomberg quoted unnamed sources as saying Trump's comments on waiting until after the 2020 election should not have been taken as a sign the talks had stalled. The world's two biggest economies have been locked in a bruising trade conflict for more than a year, hitting each other with tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of goods.

In 'close communication' with US over trade deal: China

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/opec-gearing-up-for-deeper-oil-cuts-russia-yet-to-agree-266198">OPEC</a> and its allies led by Russia were moving closer on Thursday to agree to deeper oil supply cuts next year to support crude prices and prevent a glut, sources from OPEC and its allied producers said.

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) meets on Thursday in Vienna followed by a meeting with Russia and others, a grouping known as OPEC+, on Friday.

OPEC+ has curbed supply since 2017 to counter booming output from the United States, which has become the world's biggest producer.

Next year, rising production in the United States and other non-OPEC countries such as Brazil and Norway threaten to add to the glut.

OPEC's actions in the past have angered US&nbsp;President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly demanded OPEC's de facto leader Saudi Arabia to bring oil prices down if it wants Washington's to provide Riyadh with military support against arch-rival Iran.

In the past few months, Trump has said little about OPEC but that might change later in 2020 if oil and gasoline prices rise a politically sensitive issue as he seeks re-election in November.

Washington's ongoing trade dispute with China has also clouded the economic and therefore oil demand outlook for 2020.

Two OPEC+ sources told Reuters on Thursday the group would discuss increasing current cuts of 1.2 million barrels per day by more than 400,000 BPD.

Iraq, OPEC's second-largest producer, said on Tuesday OPEC de facto leader Saudi Arabia was supporting cuts of 1.6 million BPD, or 1.6 per cent&nbsp;of global demand.

The current cuts expire in March and OPEC sources and delegates have said the new deal could be extended to June or until the end of 2020.

Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman has so far declined to comment on policy matters in Vienna.

Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak was cited by his ministry as telling Prince Abdulaziz on Thursday that Russia-Saudi energy cooperation should continue.

Saudi Arabia needs higher oil prices to support its budget revenue and the pending initial public offering (IPO) of state-owned oil giant Saudi Aramco with the pricing of the IPO expected on Thursday.

OPEC's actions have supported oil prices at around $50-$75 per barrel over the past year. Brent crude futures on Thursday were trading near $63 per barrel.

OPEC sources have also said Riyadh was pressing fellow members Iraq and Nigeria to improve their compliance with quotas, which could provide an additional reduction of up to 400,000 BPD.

Non-OPEC Russia has yet to agree to extend or deepen cuts from its current pledge of 228,000 BPD as its companies are arguing they are finding it tough to reduce output during winter months due to very low temperatures.

A source familiar with the Russian thinking told Reuters that Moscow would likely reach a deal with OPEC this week and just needed to iron out a few outstanding issues.

One sticking point for Russia is how its output is measured. Russia includes gas condensate in production figures, while other producers do not.

OPEC and its allies led by Russia were moving closer on Thursday to agree to deeper oil supply cuts next year to support crude prices and prevent a glut, sources from OPEC and its allied producers said.

OPEC and its allies led by Russia were moving closer on Thursday to agree to deeper oil supply cuts next year to support crude prices and prevent a glut, sources from OPEC and its allied producers said. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) meets on Thursday in Vienna followed by a meeting with Russia and others, a grouping known as OPEC+, on Friday. OPEC+ has curbed supply since 2017 to counter booming output from the United States, which has become the world's biggest producer. Next year, rising production in the United States and other non-OPEC countries such as Brazil and Norway threaten to add to the glut. OPEC's actions in the past have angered US President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly demanded OPEC's de facto leader Saudi Arabia to bring oil prices down if it wants Washington's to provide Riyadh with military support against arch-rival Iran. In the past few months, Trump has said little about OPEC but that might change later in 2020 if oil and gasoline prices rise a politically sensitive issue as he seeks re-election in November. Washington's ongoing trade dispute with China has also clouded the economic and therefore oil demand outlook for 2020. Two OPEC+ sources told Reuters on Thursday the group would discuss increasing current cuts of 1.2 million barrels per day by more than 400,000 BPD. Iraq, OPEC's second-largest producer, said on Tuesday OPEC de facto leader Saudi Arabia was supporting cuts of 1.6 million BPD, or 1.6 per cent of global demand. The current cuts expire in March and OPEC sources and delegates have said the new deal could be extended to June or until the end of 2020. Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman has so far declined to comment on policy matters in Vienna. Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak was cited by his ministry as telling Prince Abdulaziz on Thursday that Russia-Saudi energy cooperation should continue. Saudi Arabia needs higher oil prices to support its budget revenue and the pending initial public offering (IPO) of state-owned oil giant Saudi Aramco with the pricing of the IPO expected on Thursday. OPEC's actions have supported oil prices at around $50-$75 per barrel over the past year. Brent crude futures on Thursday were trading near $63 per barrel. OPEC sources have also said Riyadh was pressing fellow members Iraq and Nigeria to improve their compliance with quotas, which could provide an additional reduction of up to 400,000 BPD. Non-OPEC Russia has yet to agree to extend or deepen cuts from its current pledge of 228,000 BPD as its companies are arguing they are finding it tough to reduce output during winter months due to very low temperatures. A source familiar with the Russian thinking told Reuters that Moscow would likely reach a deal with OPEC this week and just needed to iron out a few outstanding issues. One sticking point for Russia is how its output is measured. Russia includes gas condensate in production figures, while other producers do not.

OPEC and allies prepare to deepen oil output cuts

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/oil-prices-tumble-ahead-of-opec-meeting-global-stocks-fall-265363">Oil prices</a> edged higher on Thursday ahead of an OPEC meeting where members are expected to agree on deeper output cuts in an effort to prop up prices and prevent a glut next year.

Sources told Reuters that OPEC was seeking to increase production cuts by the group and its allies by Russia by more than 400,000 barrels per day (BPD) from their current level of 1.2 million BPD.

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries meets on Thursday in Vienna followed by a meeting on Friday with Russia and other producers. The group is known as <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/oil-prices-jump-to-61-over-opec-supply-cut-reports-265782">OPEC+</a>.

Brent crude&nbsp;futures were up 21 cents, or 0.33 per cent, to $63.21 a barrel at 1005 GMT. Brent surged 3.6 per cent&nbsp;on Wednesday. <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/crude-oil-prices-fall-1-on-fears-for-global-economy-233148">West Texas Intermediate</a> (WTI) crude&nbsp; futures were up 1 cents to $58.44 a barrel. They settled up 4.2 per cent&nbsp;on Wednesday.

The OPEC+ group has been curbing output since 2017 to counter surging production from the United States, now the world's biggest oil producer thanks to rapid growth in shale oil output.

Next year, rising production in other non-OPEC countries such as Brazil and Norway threatens to add to the glut.

"We expect a constructive outcome to today's meeting in terms of a prolongation of the deal, but are not yet convinced that a strong bullish surprise with a sizeable adjustment to the target level will really transpire," Vienna-based consultancy JBC Energy said in a note.

OPEC's effort to deepen cuts and increase member compliance was also driven by the group's de facto leader Saudi Arabia's hopes to see higher oil prices to support its budget and <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/worlds-biggest-initial-public-offering-saudi-aramco-seeks-171-trillion-in-valuation-262778">initial public offering </a>(IPO) of state-owned Saudi Aramco.

Oil prices surged on Wednesday on expectations of deeper OPEC cuts and data showing a large drop in US&nbsp;crude inventories last week. But prices are still roughly where they were a week ago, as concerns about a US-Chinese trade war persist.

US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/global-stocks-rattled-after-donald-trump-says-no-deadline-on-us-china-trade-deal-266025">Donald Trump </a>on Wednesday described trade talks with China as going "very well", a day after saying it could take until after next year's presidential election to complete an agreement.

Oil prices edged higher on Thursday ahead of an OPEC meeting where members are expected to agree on deeper output cuts in an effort to prop up prices and prevent a glut next year.

Oil prices edged higher on Thursday ahead of an OPEC meeting where members are expected to agree on deeper output cuts in an effort to prop up prices and prevent a glut next year. Sources told Reuters that OPEC was seeking to increase production cuts by the group and its allies by Russia by more than 400,000 barrels per day (BPD) from their current level of 1.2 million BPD. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries meets on Thursday in Vienna followed by a meeting on Friday with Russia and other producers. The group is known as OPEC+. Brent crude futures were up 21 cents, or 0.33 per cent, to $63.21 a barrel at 1005 GMT. Brent surged 3.6 per cent on Wednesday. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude futures were up 1 cents to $58.44 a barrel. They settled up 4.2 per cent on Wednesday. The OPEC+ group has been curbing output since 2017 to counter surging production from the United States, now the world's biggest oil producer thanks to rapid growth in shale oil output. Next year, rising production in other non-OPEC countries such as Brazil and Norway threatens to add to the glut. "We expect a constructive outcome to today's meeting in terms of a prolongation of the deal, but are not yet convinced that a strong bullish surprise with a sizeable adjustment to the target level will really transpire," Vienna-based consultancy JBC Energy said in a note. OPEC's effort to deepen cuts and increase member compliance was also driven by the group's de facto leader Saudi Arabia's hopes to see higher oil prices to support its budget and initial public offering (IPO) of state-owned Saudi Aramco. Oil prices surged on Wednesday on expectations of deeper OPEC cuts and data showing a large drop in US crude inventories last week. But prices are still roughly where they were a week ago, as concerns about a US-Chinese trade war persist. US President Donald Trump on Wednesday described trade talks with China as going "very well", a day after saying it could take until after next year's presidential election to complete an agreement.

Oil rises as OPEC weighs deeper output cuts

By Martin Farr

Foreign affairs rarely play a role in British elections. The exception, of course, is Europe: both Labour in 1974 and the Conservatives in 2015 won a narrow parliamentary majority after promising a referendum on UK membership.

For reasons of practicality and protocol, elections are usually scheduled to avoid summits, or the visits of foreign leaders. But nothing is normal any more and 2019’s rushed general election features the first visit of a US president to Watford, an unprepossessing commuter town north of London. Donald Trump flew into the UK on December 2 for a two-day visit to attend a meeting of NATO leaders marking the 70th anniversary of the alliance.

One of the many curiosities of our age is that this most unpopular US president for the British should come so often. Another is that Boris Johnson, a US-born, Atlanticist prime minister, earnestly wishes the leader of the free world was not in the UK. At the same time, Jeremy Corbyn, a very-far-from Atlanticist leader of the opposition, is delighted that he should be.

Using the special relationship 
 
The Foreign Office may be the second most prestigious office of state, but in elections, foreign secretaries or their shadows from the opposition seldom find themselves much called on. Defence has had an impact though, such as in 1983 and 1987 when Labour was portrayed as too pacifistic, and in 2005, when the party wished they had been so.

Those episodes revolved around the special relationship between the US and UK – and prime ministers have not been averse to the blandishments of presidents on pre-election visits to the US, such as Harold Macmillan in 1959, and David Cameron in 2015.

Presidents have been prepared to assist in other ways, as I’ve been examining in my research on the historical relationships between US presidents and British premiers. Ronald Reagan’s humiliation of Labour leader Neil Kinnock in 1987 calculatedly bolstered the then prime minister Margaret Thatcher. But there has never been a presidential visit during a general election before now.

Part of the appeal of the Leave campaign in the EU referendum was Britain going out into the world and making more of its historic ties with what Winston Churchill called “English-speaking peoples”. This overlooked the fact that every American president since Dwight Eisenhower in the 1950s has wanted Britain to lead in Europe because it enhanced US interests to have its closest ally at the centre of what became the world’s largest trading bloc. The exception, as ever, is President Trump.

The special relationship has weakened in the topsy-turvy political world since 2015 – the year Corbyn became Labour leader, Trump announced his presidential candidacy and the British parliament passed legislation to hold a referendum on EU membership. In April 2016 Barack Obama – the most popular recent American president for the British public – visited the UK at the invitation of the prime minister, David Cameron, to assist with the increasingly panicked Remain campaign.

At the personal request of Cameron, Obama told the world that in the event of Brexit, Britain would be at “the back of the queue” for a trade deal. His intervention backfired, reinforcing the Leave narrative of a remote and condescending elite – and Remain never recovered.

Always keen to present himself in opposition to Obama, Trump has pushed his own anti-establishment narrative, which extended to condemnation of transnational institutions including NATO and the EU. In offering the promise of a free trade agreement to the UK, Trump has presented himself as a champion of self-government and so of Brexit, responsibility for which he characteristically ascribed to himself.

As if that were not a sufficient transgression of diplomatic norms, Trump also suggested in 2016 that Brexit Party leader, Nigel Farage, should be appointed British ambassador to the US.

More seriously, his relationship with Johnson’s predecessor, Theresa May, was quite unlike that of any other president and prime minister, as I’ve examined in forthcoming research. Standing alongside May in 2018 and 2019, Trump embarrassed her, and breaking with any sense of protocol or propriety, also praised the person clearly positioning himself to replace her – who, shortly thereafter, did just that.

US presidents have attended NATO summits in the UK before – Jimmy Carter in 1977, George HW Bush in 1990, and Obama in 2014. But Trump’s attitudes towards NATO were originally the principal source of British consternation at his election.

It wasn’t known then that he wasn’t a man of settled policies. In three years he has moved from being NATO’s most prominent critic, to its staunchest defender in the face of criticism of the alliance by the French president, Emmanuel Macron.

A liability for Johnson

It would never have been necessary with any other president, but on this December visit Trump has done as requested – he has observed convention and said he would “stay out of the election”. Except that, insofar as he flagrantly contradicted something he said the last time he was in the UK in the express interest of the prime minister, he has not stayed out of British politics.

Significantly, the impact of Trump’s visit to the UK is on a domestic policy area that is, by contrast, always central to elections: the National Health Service. In a campaign characterised on all sides by millions of this, billions of that, and trillions of the other, Labour has persistently claimed there will be a US-imposed increase in the NHS drugs bill of £500m a week. NHS staff duly joined the now-traditional public protests that mark a Trump visit.

If Trump was ever an asset for Johnson, he’s now deemed a liability. The president sees something of himself in man he’s called “Britain Trump”, not least perhaps their at times disarming physical resemblance. But given British public attitudes to Trump, it’s prudent for Johnson to maintain distance during the last week of a tight election. Trump’s toxicity has the potential to poison Johnson’s hitherto effective campaign.

So after much speculation as to whether they would meet – itself extraordinary – Johnson and Trump did, but, equally extraordinarily, there were no photographs of the host and his guest at that meeting at Number 10 or at a Buckingham Palace reception. The two were eventually photographed together arriving at The Grove, the venue for the NATO leaders summit in Watford.

By contrast, Corbyn has wanted nothing more than the chance to be photographed challenging Trump on the NHS – though it emerged they did not meet at the palace. But not on NATO. On which they agree. A voter could be forgiven for being confused. 
 
(Martin Farr is Senior Lecturer in Modern and Contemporary British History, Newcastle University)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/donald-trump-goes-to-watford-what-happens-when-us-presidents-enter-british-elections-127651">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) &nbsp; 
&nbsp;

By Martin Farr Foreign affairs rarely play a role in British elections. The exception, of course, is Europe: both Labour in 1974 and the Conservatives in 2015 won a narrow parliamentary majority after promising a referendum on UK membership.

By Martin Farr Foreign affairs rarely play a role in British elections. The exception, of course, is Europe: both Labour in 1974 and the Conservatives in 2015 won a narrow parliamentary majority after promising a referendum on UK membership. For reasons of practicality and protocol, elections are usually scheduled to avoid summits, or the visits of foreign leaders. But nothing is normal any more and 2019’s rushed general election features the first visit of a US president to Watford, an unprepossessing commuter town north of London. Donald Trump flew into the UK on December 2 for a two-day visit to attend a meeting of NATO leaders marking the 70th anniversary of the alliance. One of the many curiosities of our age is that this most unpopular US president for the British should come so often. Another is that Boris Johnson, a US-born, Atlanticist prime minister, earnestly wishes the leader of the free world was not in the UK. At the same time, Jeremy Corbyn, a very-far-from Atlanticist leader of the opposition, is delighted that he should be. Using the special relationship The Foreign Office may be the second most prestigious office of state, but in elections, foreign secretaries or their shadows from the opposition seldom find themselves much called on. Defence has had an impact though, such as in 1983 and 1987 when Labour was portrayed as too pacifistic, and in 2005, when the party wished they had been so. Those episodes revolved around the special relationship between the US and UK – and prime ministers have not been averse to the blandishments of presidents on pre-election visits to the US, such as Harold Macmillan in 1959, and David Cameron in 2015. Presidents have been prepared to assist in other ways, as I’ve been examining in my research on the historical relationships between US presidents and British premiers. Ronald Reagan’s humiliation of Labour leader Neil Kinnock in 1987 calculatedly bolstered the then prime minister Margaret Thatcher. But there has never been a presidential visit during a general election before now. Part of the appeal of the Leave campaign in the EU referendum was Britain going out into the world and making more of its historic ties with what Winston Churchill called “English-speaking peoples”. This overlooked the fact that every American president since Dwight Eisenhower in the 1950s has wanted Britain to lead in Europe because it enhanced US interests to have its closest ally at the centre of what became the world’s largest trading bloc. The exception, as ever, is President Trump. The special relationship has weakened in the topsy-turvy political world since 2015 – the year Corbyn became Labour leader, Trump announced his presidential candidacy and the British parliament passed legislation to hold a referendum on EU membership. In April 2016 Barack Obama – the most popular recent American president for the British public – visited the UK at the invitation of the prime minister, David Cameron, to assist with the increasingly panicked Remain campaign. At the personal request of Cameron, Obama told the world that in the event of Brexit, Britain would be at “the back of the queue” for a trade deal. His intervention backfired, reinforcing the Leave narrative of a remote and condescending elite – and Remain never recovered. Always keen to present himself in opposition to Obama, Trump has pushed his own anti-establishment narrative, which extended to condemnation of transnational institutions including NATO and the EU. In offering the promise of a free trade agreement to the UK, Trump has presented himself as a champion of self-government and so of Brexit, responsibility for which he characteristically ascribed to himself. As if that were not a sufficient transgression of diplomatic norms, Trump also suggested in 2016 that Brexit Party leader, Nigel Farage, should be appointed British ambassador to the US. More seriously, his relationship with Johnson’s predecessor, Theresa May, was quite unlike that of any other president and prime minister, as I’ve examined in forthcoming research. Standing alongside May in 2018 and 2019, Trump embarrassed her, and breaking with any sense of protocol or propriety, also praised the person clearly positioning himself to replace her – who, shortly thereafter, did just that. US presidents have attended NATO summits in the UK before – Jimmy Carter in 1977, George HW Bush in 1990, and Obama in 2014. But Trump’s attitudes towards NATO were originally the principal source of British consternation at his election. It wasn’t known then that he wasn’t a man of settled policies. In three years he has moved from being NATO’s most prominent critic, to its staunchest defender in the face of criticism of the alliance by the French president, Emmanuel Macron. A liability for Johnson It would never have been necessary with any other president, but on this December visit Trump has done as requested – he has observed convention and said he would “stay out of the election”. Except that, insofar as he flagrantly contradicted something he said the last time he was in the UK in the express interest of the prime minister, he has not stayed out of British politics. Significantly, the impact of Trump’s visit to the UK is on a domestic policy area that is, by contrast, always central to elections: the National Health Service. In a campaign characterised on all sides by millions of this, billions of that, and trillions of the other, Labour has persistently claimed there will be a US-imposed increase in the NHS drugs bill of £500m a week. NHS staff duly joined the now-traditional public protests that mark a Trump visit. If Trump was ever an asset for Johnson, he’s now deemed a liability. The president sees something of himself in man he’s called “Britain Trump”, not least perhaps their at times disarming physical resemblance. But given British public attitudes to Trump, it’s prudent for Johnson to maintain distance during the last week of a tight election. Trump’s toxicity has the potential to poison Johnson’s hitherto effective campaign. So after much speculation as to whether they would meet – itself extraordinary – Johnson and Trump did, but, equally extraordinarily, there were no photographs of the host and his guest at that meeting at Number 10 or at a Buckingham Palace reception. The two were eventually photographed together arriving at The Grove, the venue for the NATO leaders summit in Watford. By contrast, Corbyn has wanted nothing more than the chance to be photographed challenging Trump on the NHS – though it emerged they did not meet at the palace. But not on NATO. On which they agree. A voter could be forgiven for being confused. (Martin Farr is Senior Lecturer in Modern and Contemporary British History, Newcastle University) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

What happens when US presidents enter British elections

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/nato-and-the-eu-a-short-history-of-an-uneasy-relationship-265984">NATO</a>&nbsp;leaders will&nbsp;tell&nbsp;US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/global-stocks-rattled-after-donald-trump-says-no-deadline-on-us-china-trade-deal-266025">Donald&nbsp;Trump</a>&nbsp;on Wednesday they are spending billions more dollars on their militaries in the hope that he pares back his attacks on the Western alliance.

Informal&nbsp;talks&nbsp;following a Buckingham Palace reception on Tuesday to celebrate 70 years of&nbsp;NATO, European leaders led by&nbsp;Germany&nbsp;and&nbsp;France&nbsp;aim to&nbsp;tell&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;they will not be treated as junior partners as they confront global conflicts.

Despite&nbsp;Trump's accusations on Tuesday that allies were "delinquent" in their failure to spend as much as the United States on their armed forces, Europe, Turkey, and Canada will use the gathering at a luxury golf club north of London to argue they will spend $400 billion (£312 billion) collectively on defence by 2024.

"If we invest money and risk our soldiers' lives we should be clear on&nbsp;NATO's fundamentals," French President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-calls-macrons-criticism-of-nato-very-very-nasty-before-summit-266035">Emmanuel Macron </a>said on Twitter, adding that on Wednesday he would "defend the interests of&nbsp;France&nbsp;and Europe."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
My statements on NATO triggered some reactions. I do stand by them. It is a burden we share: we can't put money and pay the cost of our soldiers' lives without being clear on the fundamentals of what NATO should be. Tomorrow, I will stand up for the French and European interests.
— Emmanuel Macron (@EmmanuelMacron) <a href="https://twitter.com/EmmanuelMacron/status/1201943677163253762?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 3, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

That is likely to include a push to broaden&nbsp;NATO&nbsp;politically to consider a bigger role for the alliance in the Middle East and possibly Africa, although Berlin and Paris must first seek&nbsp;NATO&nbsp;support for a "wise persons" group to draw up reform plans.

In a final communique,&nbsp;NATO&nbsp;allies will recommit to their pledge to defend each other, while Britain is also expected to put six warships, two fighter squadrons and thousands of troops at&nbsp;NATO's disposal to meet a US&nbsp;demand for European armies to be more combat-ready.

NATO&nbsp;will also warn China for the first time that it is monitoring Beijing's growing military might, agreeing to gradually prepare the alliance to defend against any possible future hostilities, in arenas ranging from the Arctic to computer networks.

But the debate is unlikely to be easy.

Tuesday's gathering in London was marked by testy exchanges between&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;and Macron over the future of transatlantic ties, while the US&nbsp;leader reiterated his criticism of&nbsp;Germany&nbsp;for not spending enough on defence, seemingly unaware of Berlin's new defence plans to reach a&nbsp;NATO&nbsp;spending target by 2031.

"I'm a politician, and I'm used to being criticised for good rhetoric but bad substance. In the case of&nbsp;NATO, it is the opposite. We have had bad rhetoric but extremely good substance,"&nbsp;NATO&nbsp;Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told diplomats and experts at an event in London on Tuesday.

Macron also accused Turkey of working with Islamic State proxies in Syria, although Canada's leader played down tensions.

"NATO&nbsp;has survived because we've always had frank conversations," Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said.

NATO leaders will tell US President Donald Trump on Wednesday they are spending billions more dollars on their militaries in the hope that he pares back his attacks on the Western alliance.

NATO leaders will tell US President Donald Trump on Wednesday they are spending billions more dollars on their militaries in the hope that he pares back his attacks on the Western alliance. Informal talks following a Buckingham Palace reception on Tuesday to celebrate 70 years of NATO, European leaders led by Germany and France aim to tell Trump they will not be treated as junior partners as they confront global conflicts. Despite Trump's accusations on Tuesday that allies were "delinquent" in their failure to spend as much as the United States on their armed forces, Europe, Turkey, and Canada will use the gathering at a luxury golf club north of London to argue they will spend $400 billion (£312 billion) collectively on defence by 2024. "If we invest money and risk our soldiers' lives we should be clear on NATO's fundamentals," French President Emmanuel Macron said on Twitter, adding that on Wednesday he would "defend the interests of France and Europe." My statements on NATO triggered some reactions. I do stand by them. It is a burden we share: we can't put money and pay the cost of our soldiers' lives without being clear on the fundamentals of what NATO should be. Tomorrow, I will stand up for the French and European interests. — Emmanuel Macron (@EmmanuelMacron) December 3, 2019 × That is likely to include a push to broaden NATO politically to consider a bigger role for the alliance in the Middle East and possibly Africa, although Berlin and Paris must first seek NATO support for a "wise persons" group to draw up reform plans. In a final communique, NATO allies will recommit to their pledge to defend each other, while Britain is also expected to put six warships, two fighter squadrons and thousands of troops at NATO's disposal to meet a US demand for European armies to be more combat-ready. NATO will also warn China for the first time that it is monitoring Beijing's growing military might, agreeing to gradually prepare the alliance to defend against any possible future hostilities, in arenas ranging from the Arctic to computer networks. But the debate is unlikely to be easy. Tuesday's gathering in London was marked by testy exchanges between Trump and Macron over the future of transatlantic ties, while the US leader reiterated his criticism of Germany for not spending enough on defence, seemingly unaware of Berlin's new defence plans to reach a NATO spending target by 2031. "I'm a politician, and I'm used to being criticised for good rhetoric but bad substance. In the case of NATO, it is the opposite. We have had bad rhetoric but extremely good substance," NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told diplomats and experts at an event in London on Tuesday. Macron also accused Turkey of working with Islamic State proxies in Syria, although Canada's leader played down tensions. "NATO has survived because we've always had frank conversations," Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said.

'Cool it,' France and Germany to tell Trump at NATO talks

Democrats accused President Donald Trump of a readiness to sell out US national security to bolster his 2020 reelection effort as hearings opened Wednesday to draw up <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-house-panel-impeachment-report-to-be-released-tuesday-adam-schiff-266202">impeachment charges against the US leader</a>.

But in a fiery start to the House Judiciary Committee's review of the evidence, Republicans countered that Democrats were trying to reverse the 2016 election that brought Trump to power and were pushing towards <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/how-us-public-opinion-has-evolved-on-impeachment-of-trump-266209">impeachment</a> without due process.

Trump "directly and explicitly invited foreign interference in our elections," said House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler, referring to Trump's effort to get dirt on his Democratic rivals from Ukraine.

"He used the powers of his office to try to make it happen. He sent his agents to make clear that this is what he wanted and demanded," Nadler said.&nbsp;

"He was willing to compromise our security and his office for personal, political gain."

Doug Collins, the senior Republican on the panel, countered with the suggestion the hearing was a partisan political effort to undermine a democratically elected president.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-democrats-release-impeachment-report-on-donald-trump-266213/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

"We're having a factless impeachment," he said, rejecting the final report on the investigation of Trump released on Tuesday.

"We have just a deep-seated hatred of a man who came to the White House and did what he said he was going to do," Collins said, referring to Trump.

"This is not an impeachment. This is just a simple railroad job. And today's is a waste of time."

On Tuesday, congressional Democrats made a forceful case that Trump should be removed from office for abusing his powers by pressuring Ukraine for dirt on a Democratic election rival.

The final report on the House Intelligence Committee's probe, led by lawmaker Adam Schiff, concluded that "the president placed his personal political interests above the national interests of the United States, sought to undermine the integrity of the US presidential election process and endangered US national security."

The report is expected to form the basis for the Judiciary Committee to draw up formal charges -- articles of impeachment -- that could include bribery, abuse of power, obstruction and contempt of Congress.

Kicking of the next phase of impeachment, four constitutional scholars were called to testify Wednesday before the House Judiciary Committee in the first of a series of hearings to establish the gravity of Trump's alleged crimes.

In London for a NATO summit, President Donald Trump slammed the Democratic report presenting the case for his impeachment as a "joke" and lambasted his opponents for proceeding with hearings during his trip.

"What they are doing is a very bad thing for our country," Trump said when asked about the report. "It's a joke."

Democrats reportedly aim to have articles of impeachment presented for a vote to the entire House of Representatives before Christmas on December 25.

If they pass as expected, Trump would then stand trial for removal in the Republican-controlled Senate, where he is expected to be exonerated.

Democrats accused President Donald Trump of a readiness to sell out US national security to bolster his 2020 reelection effort as hearings opened Wednesday to draw up impeachment charges against the US leader.

Democrats accused President Donald Trump of a readiness to sell out US national security to bolster his 2020 reelection effort as hearings opened Wednesday to draw up impeachment charges against the US leader. But in a fiery start to the House Judiciary Committee's review of the evidence, Republicans countered that Democrats were trying to reverse the 2016 election that brought Trump to power and were pushing towards impeachment without due process. Trump "directly and explicitly invited foreign interference in our elections," said House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler, referring to Trump's effort to get dirt on his Democratic rivals from Ukraine. "He used the powers of his office to try to make it happen. He sent his agents to make clear that this is what he wanted and demanded," Nadler said. "He was willing to compromise our security and his office for personal, political gain." Doug Collins, the senior Republican on the panel, countered with the suggestion the hearing was a partisan political effort to undermine a democratically elected president. × "We're having a factless impeachment," he said, rejecting the final report on the investigation of Trump released on Tuesday. "We have just a deep-seated hatred of a man who came to the White House and did what he said he was going to do," Collins said, referring to Trump. "This is not an impeachment. This is just a simple railroad job. And today's is a waste of time." On Tuesday, congressional Democrats made a forceful case that Trump should be removed from office for abusing his powers by pressuring Ukraine for dirt on a Democratic election rival. The final report on the House Intelligence Committee's probe, led by lawmaker Adam Schiff, concluded that "the president placed his personal political interests above the national interests of the United States, sought to undermine the integrity of the US presidential election process and endangered US national security." The report is expected to form the basis for the Judiciary Committee to draw up formal charges -- articles of impeachment -- that could include bribery, abuse of power, obstruction and contempt of Congress. Kicking of the next phase of impeachment, four constitutional scholars were called to testify Wednesday before the House Judiciary Committee in the first of a series of hearings to establish the gravity of Trump's alleged crimes. In London for a NATO summit, President Donald Trump slammed the Democratic report presenting the case for his impeachment as a "joke" and lambasted his opponents for proceeding with hearings during his trip. "What they are doing is a very bad thing for our country," Trump said when asked about the report. "It's a joke." Democrats reportedly aim to have articles of impeachment presented for a vote to the entire House of Representatives before Christmas on December 25. If they pass as expected, Trump would then stand trial for removal in the Republican-controlled Senate, where he is expected to be exonerated.

Trump 'willing to compromise US security': Impeachment hearing chair

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, often spoke to Representative Devin Nunes, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, as Giuliani peddled unproven allegations at the heart of the Trump <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/democrat-report-makes-forceful-impeachment-case-against-trump-266049">impeachment inquiry</a>, a congressional report said on Tuesday.

Previously undisclosed telephone records appended to a 300-page report by the Democratic-led committee showed that Nunes also contacted Lev Parnas, a Ukrainian-American businessman who was helping Giuliani and has been indicted on charges of violating campaign finance law. Parnas has pleaded not guilty.

Others with whom Giuliani had phone calls included current and former Nunes staffers, the White House budget office, and a journalist who promoted conspiracy theories involving Democratic former Vice President Joe Biden and the 2016 US&nbsp;election.

Giuliani's numerous calls with Nunes and aides are significant because, as the top Republican on the committee, the California lawmaker cited those same theories as he led the fight against impeaching Trump.

Asked if he had talked to Parnas, Nunes told Fox News Channel: “It’s possible, but I haven’t gone through all my phone records. I don’t really recall that name. I remember that name now because he’s been indicted.”

Bennett Gershman, a Pace Law School professor who specializes in government ethics, said the disclosures raised "ethics questions with respect to Nunes."

"Just on the face of it, I would say Nunes has a lot of explaining to do," Gershman said. "At the very least he should have recused himself and being as aggressive as he was with this lurking in the background, I would say it’s pretty shocking."

Nunes' office did not respond to a request for comment on the phone records.

Watch: Donald Trump impeachment hearings set for December 4

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/donald-trump-impeachment-hearings-set-for-dec-4-265791/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Neither Giuliani nor his attorney, Robert Costello, responded to a request for comment on the report and on Nunes in particular.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/witnesses-named-for-trump-impeachment-hearing-in-united-states-house-265830">The intelligence panel report</a>, which will form the basis of any impeachment charges, accused Trump of using his power to push Ukraine to investigate Biden in return for a White House meeting for its newly elected president and $391 million in withheld security aid approved by Congress for Ukraine's defense against Russia-backed separatists.

Representative Adam Schiff, the Democratic chairman of the committee, declined to comment specifically on Nunes.

But, he said that it was "deeply concerning that at a time when the president of the United States was using the power of his office to dig up dirt on a political rival, that there may be evidence that there were members of Congress complicit in that activity."

The phone records were obtained from, the report said. The company acknowledged it complied with a request.

Biden is a leading contender for the Democratic nomination to run against Republican Trump in the November 2020 election.

Parnas' lawyer Joseph Bondy said his client was prepared to testify to Congress about the substance of the phone calls.

In an October&nbsp;5 interview with Reuters, Giuliani said he had been in contact with Nunes about Ukraine, but "not a lot" and that the lawmaker and his staff obtained information on their own.

"We’ve talked about some of it, yes,” Giuliani said. “But we haven’t investigated it together.”

The call records showed that Giuliani maintained more frequent contacts with Washington officials than were disclosed in some two months of private and public testimony by current and former US&nbsp;officials to House committees conducting the impeachment review.

In the hearings, Nunes cited the same unproven allegations supported by Giuliani that Biden tried to curb an investigation into a Ukrainian energy firm on whose board his son was a member. He and other Republicans also referred to the debunked conspiracy theory that it was Ukraine – not Russia – that interfered in the 2016 US&nbsp;election.

The call records showed that over the course of four days in April, Giuliani had calls with Nunes, John Solomon, a conservative columnist whose articles for the Hill newspaper promoted the allegations, and Parnas.

On April 12, the records showed that Parnas called Nunes in the late afternoon. The call lasted for one minute. Less than an hour later, Nunes placed two calls to Parnas that appear to have gone unanswered. Parnas later called Nunes and the two spoke for more than eight minutes, according to the records.

During that same period, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-democrats-set-the-stage-for-trump-impeachment-with-key-hearing-265798">Giuliani received three calls</a> from someone at the White House budget office, which in July held up the security aid to Ukraine.

On May 8, Giuliani spoke with Derek Harvey, a member of Nunes' staff and a former White House official, and on May 10 with Kashyap Patel, a former Nunes staff member who is now a senior counterterrorism official at the White House's National Security Council.

US President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, often spoke to Representative Devin Nunes, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, as Giuliani peddled unproven allegations at the heart of the Trump impeachment inquiry, a congressional report said on Tuesday.

US President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, often spoke to Representative Devin Nunes, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, as Giuliani peddled unproven allegations at the heart of the Trump impeachment inquiry, a congressional report said on Tuesday. Previously undisclosed telephone records appended to a 300-page report by the Democratic-led committee showed that Nunes also contacted Lev Parnas, a Ukrainian-American businessman who was helping Giuliani and has been indicted on charges of violating campaign finance law. Parnas has pleaded not guilty. Others with whom Giuliani had phone calls included current and former Nunes staffers, the White House budget office, and a journalist who promoted conspiracy theories involving Democratic former Vice President Joe Biden and the 2016 US election. Giuliani's numerous calls with Nunes and aides are significant because, as the top Republican on the committee, the California lawmaker cited those same theories as he led the fight against impeaching Trump. Asked if he had talked to Parnas, Nunes told Fox News Channel: “It’s possible, but I haven’t gone through all my phone records. I don’t really recall that name. I remember that name now because he’s been indicted.” Bennett Gershman, a Pace Law School professor who specializes in government ethics, said the disclosures raised "ethics questions with respect to Nunes." "Just on the face of it, I would say Nunes has a lot of explaining to do," Gershman said. "At the very least he should have recused himself and being as aggressive as he was with this lurking in the background, I would say it’s pretty shocking." Nunes' office did not respond to a request for comment on the phone records. Watch: Donald Trump impeachment hearings set for December 4 Neither Giuliani nor his attorney, Robert Costello, responded to a request for comment on the report and on Nunes in particular. The intelligence panel report, which will form the basis of any impeachment charges, accused Trump of using his power to push Ukraine to investigate Biden in return for a White House meeting for its newly elected president and $391 million in withheld security aid approved by Congress for Ukraine's defense against Russia-backed separatists. Representative Adam Schiff, the Democratic chairman of the committee, declined to comment specifically on Nunes. But, he said that it was "deeply concerning that at a time when the president of the United States was using the power of his office to dig up dirt on a political rival, that there may be evidence that there were members of Congress complicit in that activity." The phone records were obtained from, the report said. The company acknowledged it complied with a request. Biden is a leading contender for the Democratic nomination to run against Republican Trump in the November 2020 election. Parnas' lawyer Joseph Bondy said his client was prepared to testify to Congress about the substance of the phone calls. In an October 5 interview with Reuters, Giuliani said he had been in contact with Nunes about Ukraine, but "not a lot" and that the lawmaker and his staff obtained information on their own. "We’ve talked about some of it, yes,” Giuliani said. “But we haven’t investigated it together.” The call records showed that Giuliani maintained more frequent contacts with Washington officials than were disclosed in some two months of private and public testimony by current and former US officials to House committees conducting the impeachment review. In the hearings, Nunes cited the same unproven allegations supported by Giuliani that Biden tried to curb an investigation into a Ukrainian energy firm on whose board his son was a member. He and other Republicans also referred to the debunked conspiracy theory that it was Ukraine – not Russia – that interfered in the 2016 US election. The call records showed that over the course of four days in April, Giuliani had calls with Nunes, John Solomon, a conservative columnist whose articles for the Hill newspaper promoted the allegations, and Parnas. On April 12, the records showed that Parnas called Nunes in the late afternoon. The call lasted for one minute. Less than an hour later, Nunes placed two calls to Parnas that appear to have gone unanswered. Parnas later called Nunes and the two spoke for more than eight minutes, according to the records. During that same period, Giuliani received three calls from someone at the White House budget office, which in July held up the security aid to Ukraine. On May 8, Giuliani spoke with Derek Harvey, a member of Nunes' staff and a former White House official, and on May 10 with Kashyap Patel, a former Nunes staff member who is now a senior counterterrorism official at the White House's National Security Council.

Trump impeachment row: According to call records, Nunes had frequent contact with Giuliani

Democrat trailblazer Kamala Harris and <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/democrat-report-makes-forceful-impeachment-case-against-trump-266049">US President Donald Trump</a> on Tuesday traded Twitter jabs after she dropped&nbsp;out of the 2020 presidential race.

President Donald Trump sarcastically expressed sympathy on Twitter for the California Democrat saying, "Too bad. We will miss you Kamala!"&nbsp;

The president was responding to a tweet posted by his former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, who mocked Harris' decision to withdraw her bid for the top post.

But Kamala Harris tweeted a quick response to Trump: "Don't worry, Mr. President, I'll see you at your trial."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Don’t worry, Mr. President. I’ll see you at your trial. <a href="https://t.co/iiS17NY4Ry">https://t.co/iiS17NY4Ry</a>
— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) <a href="https://twitter.com/KamalaHarris/status/1202008446083698689?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 3, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Kamala was referring to the impeachment enquiry initiated against him for his dealings with Ukraine.

Earlier, in a video message on Twitter, Harris has said that she was finding it difficult to manage her campaign due to paucity of financial resources and vowed to continue her fight for the future of the country by defeating Trump.

The Democrat's withdrawal from the 2020 race marked the end of her bid for the top post that saw her poll numbers plummeting and fundraising performances drying up.

Watch: Donald Trump impeachment hearings set for December 4

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/donald-trump-impeachment-hearings-set-for-dec-4-265791/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Harris, who officially announced her candidacy for the US president in January this year, was seen as a front-runner for the top post even before beginning her campaign with a massive public gathering in her hometown Oakland in California.

However, she struggled to convert the early enthusiasm into a proper and sustained movement for the presidency and was criticised for her inability to articulate a vision on issues like healthcare, The Hill reported.

Harris' polling charts soared when she took on former Vice President Joe Biden in the first Democratic presidential debate in June. Since then, her campaign failed to gain traction and her polling numbers continued to sink.

In the last debate, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-and-harris-go-on-the-attack-in-us-democratic-debate-239808">Harris confronted with Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard</a>, another Democratic presidential hopeful.

The Democrat Senator from California was the first African-American woman to announce a run for the White House in 2020.

(With inputs from ANI)

Democrat trailblazer Kamala Harris and US President Donald Trump on Tuesday traded Twitter jabs after she dropped out of the 2020 presidential race. President Donald Trump sarcastically expressed sympathy on Twitter for the California Democrat saying, "Too bad.

Democrat trailblazer Kamala Harris and US President Donald Trump on Tuesday traded Twitter jabs after she dropped out of the 2020 presidential race. President Donald Trump sarcastically expressed sympathy on Twitter for the California Democrat saying, "Too bad. We will miss you Kamala!" The president was responding to a tweet posted by his former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, who mocked Harris' decision to withdraw her bid for the top post. But Kamala Harris tweeted a quick response to Trump: "Don't worry, Mr. President, I'll see you at your trial." Don’t worry, Mr. President. I’ll see you at your trial. https://t.co/iiS17NY4Ry — Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) December 3, 2019 × Kamala was referring to the impeachment enquiry initiated against him for his dealings with Ukraine. Earlier, in a video message on Twitter, Harris has said that she was finding it difficult to manage her campaign due to paucity of financial resources and vowed to continue her fight for the future of the country by defeating Trump. The Democrat's withdrawal from the 2020 race marked the end of her bid for the top post that saw her poll numbers plummeting and fundraising performances drying up. Watch: Donald Trump impeachment hearings set for December 4 Harris, who officially announced her candidacy for the US president in January this year, was seen as a front-runner for the top post even before beginning her campaign with a massive public gathering in her hometown Oakland in California. However, she struggled to convert the early enthusiasm into a proper and sustained movement for the presidency and was criticised for her inability to articulate a vision on issues like healthcare, The Hill reported. Harris' polling charts soared when she took on former Vice President Joe Biden in the first Democratic presidential debate in June. Since then, her campaign failed to gain traction and her polling numbers continued to sink. In the last debate, Harris confronted with Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, another Democratic presidential hopeful. The Democrat Senator from California was the first African-American woman to announce a run for the White House in 2020. (With inputs from ANI)

Don't worry, Mr President, I'll see you at your trial: Kamala Harris hits back at Donald Trump

US Democrats presented a&nbsp;forceful&nbsp;case&nbsp;for <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/witnesses-named-for-trump-impeachment-hearing-in-united-states-house-265830">impeaching and removing President Donald&nbsp;Trump</a>&nbsp;from office Tuesday in a&nbsp;report&nbsp;detailing "overwhelming evidence" of misconduct in office and obstruction.

Immediately dismissed by the White House as the product of a "one-sided sham process," the House Intelligence Committee&nbsp;report&nbsp;accused&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;of subverting national security as he pressured Ukraine for dirt on a Democratic election rival.

Behind closed doors late Tuesday, the Democratic-led panel voted 13 to 9, along strict party lines as expected, to officially adopt and issue the&nbsp;report&nbsp;to the House Judiciary Committee, which is tasked with drafting articles of&nbsp;impeachment&nbsp;against&nbsp;the president.

The 300-page document, meant to serve as the basis for the charges&nbsp;against&nbsp;Trump, also mapped out in detail what it called an unparalleled effort of obstruction, including witness intimidation, to stifle the investigation into&nbsp;Trump's Ukraine scheme.

"The president placed his personal political interests above the national interests of the United States, sought to undermine the integrity of the US presidential election process, and endangered US national security," said the final&nbsp;report&nbsp;on the Intelligence Committee's investigation.

"President&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;and his senior officials may see nothing wrong with using the power of the office of the president to pressure a foreign country to help the president's reelection campaign," it said.

"However, the Founding Fathers prescribed a remedy for a chief executive who places his personal interests above those of the country:&nbsp;impeachment."

Watch: Donald Trump impeachment hearings set for December 4

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/donald-trump-impeachment-hearings-set-for-dec-4-265791/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

'The president's dirty work'&nbsp;

The&nbsp;report, the product of a rapid-fire probe sparked by a whistleblower's complaint in August, mapped out a months-long scheme by&nbsp;Trump, his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and senior diplomats to pressure Ukraine's president into investigating Joe Biden, the current favourite to win the Democratic 2020 White House nomination.

Trump&nbsp;also pressured President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate a "conspiracy theory" that it was Ukraine, and not Russia, that interfered in the 2016 US election, to benefit the Democrats.

In both cases, the&nbsp;report&nbsp;said,&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;conditioned nearly $400 million in US military aid and a high-profile summit with Zelensky on Kiev opening the investigations.

Democrat&nbsp;Adam Schiff, the head of the House Intelligence Committee, said the White House demands left Ukraine, which is under constant threat from Russia-backed rebels, vulnerable as&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;sought help for his 2020 reelection.

"This&nbsp;report&nbsp;chronicles a scheme by the president of the United States to coerce an ally, Ukraine, that is at war with an adversary, Russia, into doing the president's dirty work," he told reporters.

'Ramblings of a basement blogger'

Secondly, the&nbsp;report&nbsp;said,&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;actively sought to obstruct the congressional probe, refusing to provide documents to investigators, preventing witnesses from appearing, and threatening some of those who did appear.

"Donald&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;is the first president in the history of the United States to seek to completely obstruct an&nbsp;impeachment&nbsp;inquiry undertaken by the House of Representatives," it said.

"President&nbsp;Trump's ongoing effort to thwart Congress'&nbsp;impeachment&nbsp;power risks doing grave harm to the institution of Congress."

In London for a NATO summit,&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;again accused the Democrats of playing a political game.

"The&nbsp;impeachment&nbsp;is a hoax. It's turned out to be a hoax. It's done for purely political gain," he said.

His spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham doubled down in dismissing both the&nbsp;report&nbsp;and Schiff's investigation.&nbsp;

"At the end of a one-sided sham process, Chairman Schiff and the Democrats utterly failed to produce any evidence of wrongdoing by President&nbsp;Trump," she said in a statement.

The&nbsp;report&nbsp;"reads like the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-democrats-set-the-stage-for-trump-impeachment-with-key-hearing-265798">ramblings of a basement blogger</a> straining to prove something when there is evidence of nothing."

Impeachment&nbsp;before Christmas?

The&nbsp;report&nbsp;is expected to form the basis for the Judiciary Committee to draw up formal charges, or <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/how-does-the-impeachment-of-a-us-president-work-265766">articles of&nbsp;impeachment</a>, in the coming weeks.

If, as expected, the articles are passed by the Democratic-led House, the&nbsp;case&nbsp;will go to the Republican-controlled Senate for trial in January.

The Judiciary panel, which begins meeting Wednesday, has set no formal timeframe.

But Democrats aim to hold a full House&nbsp;impeachment&nbsp;vote before the body goes on break for Christmas, December 25.&nbsp;

Schiff said that while the Judiciary Committee meets, his panel could continue investigating other angles of the Ukraine scheme, including whether&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;actually began much earlier to pressure Zelensky's predecessor Petro Poroshenko for the investigations, and whether some members of Congress were involved.

But he stressed the need to move quickly, accusing&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;of seeking election help not only from Ukraine but Russia and China.

"There is I think grave risk to the country with waiting until we have every last fact when we already know enough about the president's misconduct to make a responsible judgement," Schiff said.

US Democrats presented a forceful case for impeaching and removing President Donald Trump from office Tuesday in a report detailing "overwhelming evidence" of misconduct in office and obstruction.

US Democrats presented a forceful case for impeaching and removing President Donald Trump from office Tuesday in a report detailing "overwhelming evidence" of misconduct in office and obstruction. Immediately dismissed by the White House as the product of a "one-sided sham process," the House Intelligence Committee report accused Trump of subverting national security as he pressured Ukraine for dirt on a Democratic election rival. Behind closed doors late Tuesday, the Democratic-led panel voted 13 to 9, along strict party lines as expected, to officially adopt and issue the report to the House Judiciary Committee, which is tasked with drafting articles of impeachment against the president. The 300-page document, meant to serve as the basis for the charges against Trump, also mapped out in detail what it called an unparalleled effort of obstruction, including witness intimidation, to stifle the investigation into Trump's Ukraine scheme. "The president placed his personal political interests above the national interests of the United States, sought to undermine the integrity of the US presidential election process, and endangered US national security," said the final report on the Intelligence Committee's investigation. "President Trump and his senior officials may see nothing wrong with using the power of the office of the president to pressure a foreign country to help the president's reelection campaign," it said. "However, the Founding Fathers prescribed a remedy for a chief executive who places his personal interests above those of the country: impeachment." Watch: Donald Trump impeachment hearings set for December 4 'The president's dirty work' The report, the product of a rapid-fire probe sparked by a whistleblower's complaint in August, mapped out a months-long scheme by Trump, his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and senior diplomats to pressure Ukraine's president into investigating Joe Biden, the current favourite to win the Democratic 2020 White House nomination. Trump also pressured President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate a "conspiracy theory" that it was Ukraine, and not Russia, that interfered in the 2016 US election, to benefit the Democrats. In both cases, the report said, Trump conditioned nearly $400 million in US military aid and a high-profile summit with Zelensky on Kiev opening the investigations. Democrat Adam Schiff, the head of the House Intelligence Committee, said the White House demands left Ukraine, which is under constant threat from Russia-backed rebels, vulnerable as Trump sought help for his 2020 reelection. "This report chronicles a scheme by the president of the United States to coerce an ally, Ukraine, that is at war with an adversary, Russia, into doing the president's dirty work," he told reporters. 'Ramblings of a basement blogger' Secondly, the report said, Trump actively sought to obstruct the congressional probe, refusing to provide documents to investigators, preventing witnesses from appearing, and threatening some of those who did appear. "Donald Trump is the first president in the history of the United States to seek to completely obstruct an impeachment inquiry undertaken by the House of Representatives," it said. "President Trump's ongoing effort to thwart Congress' impeachment power risks doing grave harm to the institution of Congress." In London for a NATO summit, Trump again accused the Democrats of playing a political game. "The impeachment is a hoax. It's turned out to be a hoax. It's done for purely political gain," he said. His spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham doubled down in dismissing both the report and Schiff's investigation. "At the end of a one-sided sham process, Chairman Schiff and the Democrats utterly failed to produce any evidence of wrongdoing by President Trump," she said in a statement. The report "reads like the ramblings of a basement blogger straining to prove something when there is evidence of nothing." Impeachment before Christmas? The report is expected to form the basis for the Judiciary Committee to draw up formal charges, or articles of impeachment, in the coming weeks. If, as expected, the articles are passed by the Democratic-led House, the case will go to the Republican-controlled Senate for trial in January. The Judiciary panel, which begins meeting Wednesday, has set no formal timeframe. But Democrats aim to hold a full House impeachment vote before the body goes on break for Christmas, December 25. Schiff said that while the Judiciary Committee meets, his panel could continue investigating other angles of the Ukraine scheme, including whether Trump actually began much earlier to pressure Zelensky's predecessor Petro Poroshenko for the investigations, and whether some members of Congress were involved. But he stressed the need to move quickly, accusing Trump of seeking election help not only from Ukraine but Russia and China. "There is I think grave risk to the country with waiting until we have every last fact when we already know enough about the president's misconduct to make a responsible judgement," Schiff said.

Democrat report makes forceful impeachment case against Trump

A senior Pentagon official said on Wednesday that there were indications that Iran could potentially carry out aggressive actions in the future, amid simmering tensions between Iran and the United States.

John Rood, the Pentagon’s No. 3 official, told reporters that the United States was concerned about potential Iranian behaviour but did not provide details about what information he was basing that concern on or any timeline.

Tensions in the Gulf have risen since attacks on oil tankers this summer, including off the coast of the United Arab Emirates, and a major assault on energy facilities in Saudi Arabia. Washington has blamed Iran, which has denied being behind the attacks on global energy infrastructure.

A senior Pentagon official said on Wednesday that there were indications that Iran could potentially carry out aggressive actions in the future, amid simmering tensions between Iran and the United States.

A senior Pentagon official said on Wednesday that there were indications that Iran could potentially carry out aggressive actions in the future, amid simmering tensions between Iran and the United States. John Rood, the Pentagon’s No. 3 official, told reporters that the United States was concerned about potential Iranian behaviour but did not provide details about what information he was basing that concern on or any timeline. Tensions in the Gulf have risen since attacks on oil tankers this summer, including off the coast of the United Arab Emirates, and a major assault on energy facilities in Saudi Arabia. Washington has blamed Iran, which has denied being behind the attacks on global energy infrastructure.

Indications Iranian 'aggression' could occur: Pentagon official

European stocks opened higher on Wednesday, recovering some of the losses made in the previous session when US&nbsp;President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/global-stocks-rattled-after-donald-trump-says-no-deadline-on-us-china-trade-deal-266025">Donald Trump</a> surprised world markets by saying a trade deal with China could wait until after the 2020 presidential election.

US&nbsp;stocks sold off for a third consecutive session overnight, while Asian shares extended losses as hopes for a quick preliminary agreement between the world's two biggest economies were dashed.

A full-blown global trade war is currently seen as the biggest threat to world markets. Fresh US tariffs on Argentina and Brazil, plus a threaten to impose duties on French goods, are fuelling fears that risks are tilting towards an escalation of the crisis.

"Any doubts about the vulnerability of equity markets to the mood of the US&nbsp;President should have been dispelled, as his recent tweets and comments have nearly wiped out the entirety of November's gains," said Ian Williams, economics &amp; strategy analyst at Peel Hunt.

The pan-European equity index STOXX 600, which had slumped 2.2 per cent&nbsp;since the beginning of the month, rose 0.4 per cent&nbsp;but futures markets were still pointing to a slightly negative open on Wall Street.

The mood on the European trading floor is subject to change, with investors awaiting a salvo of surveys on the health of the service sector of major European countries.

"For some months now there has been a concern that the weakness in the manufacturing sector might start to weigh on services activity and there has been some evidence of that in recent months, though not quite to the same extent," wrote Michael Hewson, chief market analyst at CMC Markets, to clients.

The latest trade war scare has put the brakes on a rally that had lifted the S&amp;P 500 since early October when top diplomats from China and the United States met and outlined an initial agreement that Trump said he hoped could be sealed within weeks.

US&nbsp;Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said that if no substantial progress was made soon, another round of duties on Chinese imports including cell phones, laptops and toys would take effect on December 15.

The US&nbsp;House of Representatives' passage of a bill proposing a stronger response to a crackdown on Muslims in China's west also added yet another layer of tension, drawing swift condemnation from Beijing on Wednesday.

Beijing's handling of civil unrest in Hong Kong has also drawn criticism from Washington.

"The market was too complacent, thinking both superpowers would be able to compartmentalize these issues away from the broader trade narrative," Stephen Innes chief&nbsp;Asia market strategist at AxiTrader,&nbsp;said in a note.

In currency markets, the euro was flat against the dollar at 1.1081. The Japanese yen and Swiss franc, seen as safe havens stood during market storms were making gains, up 0.17 per cent and 0.13 per cent&nbsp;respectively.

European yields continued their descent on Wednesday as investors continued to fret about the impact of America's trade war, falling between one and two basis points.

The yield on benchmark 10-year US&nbsp;Treasuries fell as low as 1.6930 per cent&nbsp;overnight, the sharpest fall since May and was trading at 1.7105 per cent&nbsp;on Wednesday.

Gold XAU= rose 0.4 per cent&nbsp;to $1,482.9 per ounce.

Brent crude futures were up 0.58 per cent at $61.17 a barrel while US&nbsp;West Texas Intermediate crude gained 0.52 per cent&nbsp;to $56.39 per barrel.

European stocks opened higher on Wednesday, recovering some of the losses made in the previous session when US President Donald Trump surprised world markets by saying a trade deal with China could wait until after the 2020 presidential election.

European stocks opened higher on Wednesday, recovering some of the losses made in the previous session when US President Donald Trump surprised world markets by saying a trade deal with China could wait until after the 2020 presidential election. US stocks sold off for a third consecutive session overnight, while Asian shares extended losses as hopes for a quick preliminary agreement between the world's two biggest economies were dashed. A full-blown global trade war is currently seen as the biggest threat to world markets. Fresh US tariffs on Argentina and Brazil, plus a threaten to impose duties on French goods, are fuelling fears that risks are tilting towards an escalation of the crisis. "Any doubts about the vulnerability of equity markets to the mood of the US President should have been dispelled, as his recent tweets and comments have nearly wiped out the entirety of November's gains," said Ian Williams, economics & strategy analyst at Peel Hunt. The pan-European equity index STOXX 600, which had slumped 2.2 per cent since the beginning of the month, rose 0.4 per cent but futures markets were still pointing to a slightly negative open on Wall Street. The mood on the European trading floor is subject to change, with investors awaiting a salvo of surveys on the health of the service sector of major European countries. "For some months now there has been a concern that the weakness in the manufacturing sector might start to weigh on services activity and there has been some evidence of that in recent months, though not quite to the same extent," wrote Michael Hewson, chief market analyst at CMC Markets, to clients. The latest trade war scare has put the brakes on a rally that had lifted the S&P 500 since early October when top diplomats from China and the United States met and outlined an initial agreement that Trump said he hoped could be sealed within weeks. US Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said that if no substantial progress was made soon, another round of duties on Chinese imports including cell phones, laptops and toys would take effect on December 15. The US House of Representatives' passage of a bill proposing a stronger response to a crackdown on Muslims in China's west also added yet another layer of tension, drawing swift condemnation from Beijing on Wednesday. Beijing's handling of civil unrest in Hong Kong has also drawn criticism from Washington. "The market was too complacent, thinking both superpowers would be able to compartmentalize these issues away from the broader trade narrative," Stephen Innes chief Asia market strategist at AxiTrader, said in a note. In currency markets, the euro was flat against the dollar at 1.1081. The Japanese yen and Swiss franc, seen as safe havens stood during market storms were making gains, up 0.17 per cent and 0.13 per cent respectively. European yields continued their descent on Wednesday as investors continued to fret about the impact of America's trade war, falling between one and two basis points. The yield on benchmark 10-year US Treasuries fell as low as 1.6930 per cent overnight, the sharpest fall since May and was trading at 1.7105 per cent on Wednesday. Gold XAU= rose 0.4 per cent to $1,482.9 per ounce. Brent crude futures were up 0.58 per cent at $61.17 a barrel while US West Texas Intermediate crude gained 0.52 per cent to $56.39 per barrel.

Stocks in tentative rebound after Trump's trade war scare

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/oil-prices-tumble-ahead-of-opec-meeting-global-stocks-fall-265363">OPEC</a> is gearing up to deepen production cuts later this week but still needs to agree with allies such as Russia over details of a deal to support oil prices and head off a looming oil glut next year.

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) meets on Thursday in Vienna followed by a meeting with Russia and others, a grouping known as<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/oil-prices-jump-to-61-over-opec-supply-cut-reports-265782"> OPEC+</a>, on Friday.

OPEC+ has been curbing output since 2017 to counter oversupply as a result of booming output in the United States, which has become the world's biggest producer and is not taking part in cuts.

Next year, rising production in non-OPEC countries such as Brazil and Norway threatens to add to the glut.

OPEC's actions in the past have angered US&nbsp;President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly demanded OPEC's de facto leader Saudi Arabia to bring oil prices down if it wants Washington's to provide Riyadh with military support against arch-rival Iran.

In the past few months, Trump has remained silent on OPEC but he faces re-election in November next year when the issue of gasoline prices is likely to become a hot political topic again.

Washington's ongoing trade dispute with China has also clouded the economic and therefore oil demand outlook for 2020.

OPEC's second-largest oil producer Iraq said on Tuesday key members supported deepening cuts for OPEC+ from the current level of 1.2 million barrels per day, or 1.2 per cent of global demand.

"My understanding is that they (Saudis) do (prefer it)," Iraqi Oil Minister Thamer Ghadhban told reporters in Vienna.

The current deal expires in March and two OPEC sources have said it would be extended at least until June. Oman's oil minister Mohammed al-Rumhi said on Wednesday his delegation would recommend extending cuts until the end of 2020.

Saudi Arabia needs higher oil prices to support its budget revenue and the pending share sale of state-owned oil giant Saudi Aramco with pricing expected on Thursday.

OPEC's actions have supported oil prices at around $50-$75 per barrel over the past year and on Wednesday they traded at $61 per barrel.

Iraq's Ghadhban said new cuts could be expanded to 1.6 million BPD while OPEC sources have also said Riyadh was pressing fellow members Iraq and Nigeria to improve their compliance with quotas, which could provide an additional reduction of up to 400,000 BPD.

Not all OPEC members were convinced of the need to cut deeper, however. One OPEC delegate said the move would boost prices and help spur a new phase of US&nbsp;oil output growth.

Non-OPEC Russia has yet to agree to extend or deepen cuts from its current pledge of 228,000 BPD as its companies are arguing they are finding it tough to reduce output during winter months due to very low temperatures.

Russian Energy Minister <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/russian-oil-contamination-crisis-is-almost-over-energy-minister-alexander-novak-225266">Alexander Novak</a> said on Tuesday that Moscow had yet to finalise its position: "Let's wait but I think the meeting, as usual, will be of a constructive nature."

A source familiar with the Russian thinking told Reuters that Moscow would "most likely" reach a consensus with OPEC this week and just needed to iron out a few outstanding issues.

One sticking point for Russia this time is how its output is measured it includes gas condensate in its figures, while other producers do not.

OPEC is gearing up to deepen production cuts later this week but still needs to agree with allies such as Russia over details of a deal to support oil prices and head off a looming oil glut next year.

OPEC is gearing up to deepen production cuts later this week but still needs to agree with allies such as Russia over details of a deal to support oil prices and head off a looming oil glut next year. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) meets on Thursday in Vienna followed by a meeting with Russia and others, a grouping known as OPEC+, on Friday. OPEC+ has been curbing output since 2017 to counter oversupply as a result of booming output in the United States, which has become the world's biggest producer and is not taking part in cuts. Next year, rising production in non-OPEC countries such as Brazil and Norway threatens to add to the glut. OPEC's actions in the past have angered US President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly demanded OPEC's de facto leader Saudi Arabia to bring oil prices down if it wants Washington's to provide Riyadh with military support against arch-rival Iran. In the past few months, Trump has remained silent on OPEC but he faces re-election in November next year when the issue of gasoline prices is likely to become a hot political topic again. Washington's ongoing trade dispute with China has also clouded the economic and therefore oil demand outlook for 2020. OPEC's second-largest oil producer Iraq said on Tuesday key members supported deepening cuts for OPEC+ from the current level of 1.2 million barrels per day, or 1.2 per cent of global demand. "My understanding is that they (Saudis) do (prefer it)," Iraqi Oil Minister Thamer Ghadhban told reporters in Vienna. The current deal expires in March and two OPEC sources have said it would be extended at least until June. Oman's oil minister Mohammed al-Rumhi said on Wednesday his delegation would recommend extending cuts until the end of 2020. Saudi Arabia needs higher oil prices to support its budget revenue and the pending share sale of state-owned oil giant Saudi Aramco with pricing expected on Thursday. OPEC's actions have supported oil prices at around $50-$75 per barrel over the past year and on Wednesday they traded at $61 per barrel. Iraq's Ghadhban said new cuts could be expanded to 1.6 million BPD while OPEC sources have also said Riyadh was pressing fellow members Iraq and Nigeria to improve their compliance with quotas, which could provide an additional reduction of up to 400,000 BPD. Not all OPEC members were convinced of the need to cut deeper, however. One OPEC delegate said the move would boost prices and help spur a new phase of US oil output growth. Non-OPEC Russia has yet to agree to extend or deepen cuts from its current pledge of 228,000 BPD as its companies are arguing they are finding it tough to reduce output during winter months due to very low temperatures. Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak said on Tuesday that Moscow had yet to finalise its position: "Let's wait but I think the meeting, as usual, will be of a constructive nature." A source familiar with the Russian thinking told Reuters that Moscow would "most likely" reach a consensus with OPEC this week and just needed to iron out a few outstanding issues. One sticking point for Russia this time is how its output is measured it includes gas condensate in its figures, while other producers do not.

OPEC gearing up for deeper oil cuts, Russia yet to agree

Public opinion always fractures along party lines when it comes to President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-impeachment-row-according-to-call-records-nunes-had-frequent-contact-with-giuliani-266054">Donald Trump</a>, and the congressional impeachment inquiry into whether he abused his office for personal political gain in his handling of Ukraine has done little to change that.

While most Democrats want to see him impeached, most Republicans do not. And the televised hearings last month that were meant to build public support for impeachment appear to have pushed the two sides further apart. With Democrats and Republicans increasingly dug in, the balance may shift according to the feelings of those few Americans who do not favor either party and are nearly evenly split on impeachment: political independents.

Here is what Americans have said about the impeachment inquiry over the past year, according to polling by Reuters/Ipsos:

Most Americans believe the kind of thing that Trump is accused of using his power to unfairly attack a political rival is common in US&nbsp;politics. Yet they differ on what to do with those officials who are caught.

While eight out of 10 Democrats think they should be removed, Republicans are much more likely to argue to keep them in office. Only five out of 10 Republicans think elected officials should be removed if they use the power of their office to attack a rival. And that support plunges to one in 10 when Republicans are asked about a US&nbsp;president, not just an elected official, who leverages the office for personal gain.

Independents are in the middle. While a majority share the Democrats’ stance on removing elected officials who improperly use the power of their position, independents are much more lenient on presidents.

A majority of independents oppose an impeachment inquiry for anything short of outright lawbreaking by the president.

Eight in 10 said they oppose an inquiry for a president who uses the office to do something that is unethical “but not strictly illegal” and seven in 10 opposed an inquiry for a president who uses the office to get an unfair political advantage.

Six in 10 independents said an inquiry was justified for a president who breaks the law, and four in 10 said it was not.

Independents generally lean toward supporting the congressional inquiry. Yet many are skeptical of the Democrat-led proceedings in the House, and they may sour on the entire process if it slows down other business in Washington.

About four in 10 independents say they think the congressional impeachment inquiry is not being conducted fairly.

And more than six in 10 said that Congress should “focus on fixing important problems facing Americans, rather than focusing on investigating President Trump.”

Support for impeachment is generally higher now than it was earlier in 2019.

However, Democrats are responsible for much of the increase. Republicans continue to be mostly opposed and independents are split.

The latest poll, conducted November&nbsp;25-26, found that 47 per cent&nbsp;of Americans supported impeachment, including eight in 10 Democrats, one in 10 Republicans and four in 10 independents. It also found that 40 per cent&nbsp;of Americans opposed impeachment, including one in 10 Democrats, eight in 10 Republicans and five in 10 independents.

Public opinion always fractures along party lines when it comes to President Donald Trump, and the congressional impeachment inquiry into whether he abused his office for personal political gain in his handling of Ukraine has done little to change that.

Public opinion always fractures along party lines when it comes to President Donald Trump, and the congressional impeachment inquiry into whether he abused his office for personal political gain in his handling of Ukraine has done little to change that. While most Democrats want to see him impeached, most Republicans do not. And the televised hearings last month that were meant to build public support for impeachment appear to have pushed the two sides further apart. With Democrats and Republicans increasingly dug in, the balance may shift according to the feelings of those few Americans who do not favor either party and are nearly evenly split on impeachment: political independents. Here is what Americans have said about the impeachment inquiry over the past year, according to polling by Reuters/Ipsos: Most Americans believe the kind of thing that Trump is accused of using his power to unfairly attack a political rival is common in US politics. Yet they differ on what to do with those officials who are caught. While eight out of 10 Democrats think they should be removed, Republicans are much more likely to argue to keep them in office. Only five out of 10 Republicans think elected officials should be removed if they use the power of their office to attack a rival. And that support plunges to one in 10 when Republicans are asked about a US president, not just an elected official, who leverages the office for personal gain. Independents are in the middle. While a majority share the Democrats’ stance on removing elected officials who improperly use the power of their position, independents are much more lenient on presidents. A majority of independents oppose an impeachment inquiry for anything short of outright lawbreaking by the president. Eight in 10 said they oppose an inquiry for a president who uses the office to do something that is unethical “but not strictly illegal” and seven in 10 opposed an inquiry for a president who uses the office to get an unfair political advantage. Six in 10 independents said an inquiry was justified for a president who breaks the law, and four in 10 said it was not. Independents generally lean toward supporting the congressional inquiry. Yet many are skeptical of the Democrat-led proceedings in the House, and they may sour on the entire process if it slows down other business in Washington. About four in 10 independents say they think the congressional impeachment inquiry is not being conducted fairly. And more than six in 10 said that Congress should “focus on fixing important problems facing Americans, rather than focusing on investigating President Trump.” Support for impeachment is generally higher now than it was earlier in 2019. However, Democrats are responsible for much of the increase. Republicans continue to be mostly opposed and independents are split. The latest poll, conducted November 25-26, found that 47 per cent of Americans supported impeachment, including eight in 10 Democrats, one in 10 Republicans and four in 10 independents. It also found that 40 per cent of Americans opposed impeachment, including one in 10 Democrats, eight in 10 Republicans and five in 10 independents.

How US public opinion has evolved on impeachment of Trump

Germany's main automobile industry body said on Wednesday it expects global car sales to fall by 5 per cent&nbsp;this year, the steepest drop since the financial crisis, and warned of more job cuts in 2020 as a result.

"The competition is getting tougher, the headwinds are getting stronger," Bernhard Mattes, president of industry association VDA, told reporters, adding that the association expected global car sales to fall by 4.1 million to 80.1 million this year.

Germany's export-dependent car industry is struggling with weaker foreign demand, tariff disputes sparked by US&nbsp;President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/after-trump-china-says-no-time-limit-on-trade-deal-with-us-266194">Donald Trump</a>'s 'America First' policies and business uncertainty linked to Britain's decision to leave the European Union.

The sector, an important driver of overall growth in Europe's largest economy, is also having trouble adjusting to stricter regulation following an emissions-cheating scandal and managing a broader shift away from combustion engines toward electric cars.

"Capacity utilization has declined, limited-term employment contracts are not being renewed, and the instrument of short-time work is being employed once again," Mattes said. This meant that the number of permanent staff in car factories was likely to fall further.

Mattes said the association already expected a drop in employment this year, and this trend would worsen in 2020, though he gave no figures for the predicted layoffs.

In 2018, employment in the car industry in Germany reached 834,000, its highest level since 1991.

VDA expects car sales in Germany to fall by 4 per cent&nbsp;to 3.43 million in 2020 and to drop by 2 per cent&nbsp;to 15.3 million in Europe.

The US&nbsp;market for light vehicles is seen shrinking by 3 per cent&nbsp;to 16.5 million while car sales in China are expected to go down by 2 per cent&nbsp;to 20.5 million, VDA said.

Mattes called on Chancellor Angela Merkel's shaky ruling coalition to get its act together and help companies to better master the structural changes in the car industry that also include trends like digitisation and autonomous driving.

"Now it must be all about improving the framework conditions in Germany as an industrial business location," Mattes said. "What we need right now, therefore, is a stable government capable of taking action."

Germany's main automobile industry body said on Wednesday it expects global car sales to fall by 5 per cent this year, the steepest drop since the financial crisis, and warned of more job cuts in 2020 as a result.

Germany's main automobile industry body said on Wednesday it expects global car sales to fall by 5 per cent this year, the steepest drop since the financial crisis, and warned of more job cuts in 2020 as a result. "The competition is getting tougher, the headwinds are getting stronger," Bernhard Mattes, president of industry association VDA, told reporters, adding that the association expected global car sales to fall by 4.1 million to 80.1 million this year. Germany's export-dependent car industry is struggling with weaker foreign demand, tariff disputes sparked by US President Donald Trump's 'America First' policies and business uncertainty linked to Britain's decision to leave the European Union. The sector, an important driver of overall growth in Europe's largest economy, is also having trouble adjusting to stricter regulation following an emissions-cheating scandal and managing a broader shift away from combustion engines toward electric cars. "Capacity utilization has declined, limited-term employment contracts are not being renewed, and the instrument of short-time work is being employed once again," Mattes said. This meant that the number of permanent staff in car factories was likely to fall further. Mattes said the association already expected a drop in employment this year, and this trend would worsen in 2020, though he gave no figures for the predicted layoffs. In 2018, employment in the car industry in Germany reached 834,000, its highest level since 1991. VDA expects car sales in Germany to fall by 4 per cent to 3.43 million in 2020 and to drop by 2 per cent to 15.3 million in Europe. The US market for light vehicles is seen shrinking by 3 per cent to 16.5 million while car sales in China are expected to go down by 2 per cent to 20.5 million, VDA said. Mattes called on Chancellor Angela Merkel's shaky ruling coalition to get its act together and help companies to better master the structural changes in the car industry that also include trends like digitisation and autonomous driving. "Now it must be all about improving the framework conditions in Germany as an industrial business location," Mattes said. "What we need right now, therefore, is a stable government capable of taking action."

German car industry to slash more jobs in 2020

A 300-page report containing 100-hours of testimony is released by Democrats on Donald Trump, Report to go next to the house judiciary committee

US: Democrats release impeachment report on  Donald Trump

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was filmed at a Buckingham Palace reception on Tuesday evening describing how surprised US&nbsp;President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/after-trump-china-says-no-time-limit-on-trade-deal-with-us-266194">Donald Trump</a>'s team appeared to be by his performance at a press conference.

Earlier on Tuesday Trump had addressed issues ranging from NATO to North Korea and trade to <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-impeachment-row-according-to-call-records-nunes-had-frequent-contact-with-giuliani-266054">impeachment</a> proceedings at two long question-and-answer sessions with reporters, first alongside <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/cool-it-france-and-germany-to-tell-trump-at-nato-talks-266086">NATO</a> Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and then with French President Emmanuel Macron.

At one, he described earlier comments by Macron as "very nasty".

The later conversation at the reception between Trudeau, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Macron and Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte was recorded on video and snippets were audible. Queen Elizabeth's daughter Princess Anne was also there.

"Is that why you were late?" Johnson asked Macron.

"...It was like a 40-minute press conference," Trudeau said. "Yeah, yeah, yeah! Forty minutes."

Other words were exchanged but could not be heard, before Trudeau added: "I just watched his team's jaws drop to the floor."

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was filmed at a Buckingham Palace reception on Tuesday evening describing how surprised US President Donald Trump's team appeared to be by his performance at a press conference.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was filmed at a Buckingham Palace reception on Tuesday evening describing how surprised US President Donald Trump's team appeared to be by his performance at a press conference. Earlier on Tuesday Trump had addressed issues ranging from NATO to North Korea and trade to impeachment proceedings at two long question-and-answer sessions with reporters, first alongside NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and then with French President Emmanuel Macron. At one, he described earlier comments by Macron as "very nasty". The later conversation at the reception between Trudeau, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Macron and Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte was recorded on video and snippets were audible. Queen Elizabeth's daughter Princess Anne was also there. "Is that why you were late?" Johnson asked Macron. "...It was like a 40-minute press conference," Trudeau said. "Yeah, yeah, yeah! Forty minutes." Other words were exchanged but could not be heard, before Trudeau added: "I just watched his team's jaws drop to the floor."

Trudeau says 'jaws drop to the floor' during Trump remarks

A US&nbsp;House Intelligence Committee report laying out the Democratic case for President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-impeachment-row-according-to-call-records-nunes-had-frequent-contact-with-giuliani-266054">Donald Trump's impeachment</a> will be publicly released on Tuesday, the panel's chairman said in a television interview.

"We’re putting the finishing touches on the report, which will be released tomorrow,” Democrat Adam Schiff said on MSNBC on Monday night.

The Democratic-controlled panel is expected to vote on the report's approval on Tuesday night.

A copy of the report was made available privately to House Intelligence members on Monday night for a 24-hour review period.

Republican Representative Jim Jordan, an ardent defender of Trump, told reporters he had read portions of the report in a secure room at the Capitol but was instructed not to discuss the contents until Tuesday night.

House Republicans issued their own rebuttal report on Monday, saying <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/democrat-report-makes-forceful-impeachment-case-against-trump-266049">Democrats</a> had not established an impeachable offense by Trump.

Democrats have been looking into the Republican president's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate political rival Joe Biden, the former US&nbsp;vice president who is seeking the Democratic nomination to face Trump in the 2020 election, and his son Hunter Biden, who was a board member of a Ukrainian energy company.

Congressional Democrats on Monday named the four witnesses who will testify this week at a public hearing in the impeachment inquiry of Trump, in what is seen as a likely precursor to the announcement of formal charges within weeks.

As opinion polls show Americans are bitterly divided over whether to impeach Trump, the Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday in the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives will feature four legal scholars discussing the constitutional grounds for removing a US&nbsp;president from office.

The impeachment inquiry has heard testimony from current and former officials that military aid was withheld from Ukraine and that a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was conditioned on investigations into the Bidens and a debunked conspiracy theory about Ukraine interference in the 2016 US&nbsp;election.

Trump has denied any wrongdoing and says a July 25 phone call with Zelenskiy, in which he pressed for the probes, was "perfect." He and fellow Republicans say Democrats are seeking to overturn the results of the 2016 presidential election.

Wednesday's hearing, while academic in nature, will set the stage for the Judiciary Committee to begin determining whether Trump should face formal articles of impeachment. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a letter to supporters last week that Trump had committed "bribery" and needed to be held accountable.

The hearing witnesses, announced by the committee on Monday, are Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School, Pamela Karlan of Stanford Law School, Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina School of Law and Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University Law School.

Also watch:&nbsp;Donald Trump impeachment hearings set for Dec 4

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/donald-trump-impeachment-hearings-set-for-dec-4-265791/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

In a defiant response on Sunday night, the White House informed Democrats that Trump and his lawyers would not participate in Wednesday's hearing, citing a lack of "fundamental fairness."

Speaking to reporters as he departed the White House on Monday en route to London for a <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/cool-it-france-and-germany-to-tell-trump-at-nato-talks-266086">NATO summit</a>, Trump said he had declined to participate in the hearing because it was a hoax.

Representative Jerrold Nadler, the Democratic chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, called the White House's decision "unfortunate" and said that allowing Trump to participate had been a priority from the outset of the impeachment probe.

White House counsel Pat Cipollone has not ruled out taking part in future proceedings if Democrats address a list of procedural complaints.

The committee, which is not expected to consider evidence against Trump until next week, has given the president until 5 p.m. (2200 GMT) on Friday to say whether he plans to mount a defense by calling witnesses and introducing evidence.

The 110-page House Republican report said the witnesses called during the impeachment inquiry had painted a picture of "unelected bureaucrats" who "fundamentally disagreed with President Trump's style, world view and decisions," and had presented no evidence that amounted to an impeachable offense.

Schiff said the Republican report "ignores voluminous evidence that the president used the power of his office to pressure Ukraine into investigating his political rival," which Schiff said was outside the law and "a violation of his oath of office."

If the House approves articles of impeachment, the Republican-controlled Senate would hold a trial to see if Trump should be removed from office. That move is unlikely, as few Senate Republicans have shown an appetite for removing the president.

But the impeachment inquiry has cast a shadow over Trump's already tumultuous presidency and sharpened a divide among Americans that is likely to intensify as election campaigning heats up in the coming weeks.

Democratic aides said a vote on possible articles of impeachment would follow quickly on the heels of an evidentiary hearing.

A US House Intelligence Committee report laying out the Democratic case for President Donald Trump's impeachment will be publicly released on Tuesday, the panel's chairman said in a television interview.

A US House Intelligence Committee report laying out the Democratic case for President Donald Trump's impeachment will be publicly released on Tuesday, the panel's chairman said in a television interview. "We’re putting the finishing touches on the report, which will be released tomorrow,” Democrat Adam Schiff said on MSNBC on Monday night. The Democratic-controlled panel is expected to vote on the report's approval on Tuesday night. A copy of the report was made available privately to House Intelligence members on Monday night for a 24-hour review period. Republican Representative Jim Jordan, an ardent defender of Trump, told reporters he had read portions of the report in a secure room at the Capitol but was instructed not to discuss the contents until Tuesday night. House Republicans issued their own rebuttal report on Monday, saying Democrats had not established an impeachable offense by Trump. Democrats have been looking into the Republican president's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate political rival Joe Biden, the former US vice president who is seeking the Democratic nomination to face Trump in the 2020 election, and his son Hunter Biden, who was a board member of a Ukrainian energy company. Congressional Democrats on Monday named the four witnesses who will testify this week at a public hearing in the impeachment inquiry of Trump, in what is seen as a likely precursor to the announcement of formal charges within weeks. As opinion polls show Americans are bitterly divided over whether to impeach Trump, the Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday in the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives will feature four legal scholars discussing the constitutional grounds for removing a US president from office. The impeachment inquiry has heard testimony from current and former officials that military aid was withheld from Ukraine and that a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was conditioned on investigations into the Bidens and a debunked conspiracy theory about Ukraine interference in the 2016 US election. Trump has denied any wrongdoing and says a July 25 phone call with Zelenskiy, in which he pressed for the probes, was "perfect." He and fellow Republicans say Democrats are seeking to overturn the results of the 2016 presidential election. Wednesday's hearing, while academic in nature, will set the stage for the Judiciary Committee to begin determining whether Trump should face formal articles of impeachment. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a letter to supporters last week that Trump had committed "bribery" and needed to be held accountable. The hearing witnesses, announced by the committee on Monday, are Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School, Pamela Karlan of Stanford Law School, Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina School of Law and Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University Law School. Also watch: Donald Trump impeachment hearings set for Dec 4 × In a defiant response on Sunday night, the White House informed Democrats that Trump and his lawyers would not participate in Wednesday's hearing, citing a lack of "fundamental fairness." Speaking to reporters as he departed the White House on Monday en route to London for a NATO summit, Trump said he had declined to participate in the hearing because it was a hoax. Representative Jerrold Nadler, the Democratic chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, called the White House's decision "unfortunate" and said that allowing Trump to participate had been a priority from the outset of the impeachment probe. White House counsel Pat Cipollone has not ruled out taking part in future proceedings if Democrats address a list of procedural complaints. The committee, which is not expected to consider evidence against Trump until next week, has given the president until 5 p.m. (2200 GMT) on Friday to say whether he plans to mount a defense by calling witnesses and introducing evidence. The 110-page House Republican report said the witnesses called during the impeachment inquiry had painted a picture of "unelected bureaucrats" who "fundamentally disagreed with President Trump's style, world view and decisions," and had presented no evidence that amounted to an impeachable offense. Schiff said the Republican report "ignores voluminous evidence that the president used the power of his office to pressure Ukraine into investigating his political rival," which Schiff said was outside the law and "a violation of his oath of office." If the House approves articles of impeachment, the Republican-controlled Senate would hold a trial to see if Trump should be removed from office. That move is unlikely, as few Senate Republicans have shown an appetite for removing the president. But the impeachment inquiry has cast a shadow over Trump's already tumultuous presidency and sharpened a divide among Americans that is likely to intensify as election campaigning heats up in the coming weeks. Democratic aides said a vote on possible articles of impeachment would follow quickly on the heels of an evidentiary hearing.

US House panel impeachment report to be released Tuesday: Adam Schiff

China warned Wednesday that a "price must be paid" after the<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-calls-macrons-criticism-of-nato-very-very-nasty-before-summit-266035"> US House of Representatives</a> passed legislation seeking sanctions against senior Chinese officials over the crackdown on mainly Muslim Uighurs in Xinjiang.

The<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-house-approves-uighur-bill-demanding-sanctions-on-senior-chinese-officials-266033"> Uighur Act of 2019</a> condemns Beijing's "gross human rights violations" in the northwestern region of Xinjiang, where upwards of one million Uighurs and other mostly Muslim minorities are believed to be held in re-education camps.

Watch: US House ramps up China tensions by passing Uighur bill

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-house-ramps-up-china-tensions-with-passing-uighur-bill-266047/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

"For all wrong actions and words the proper price must be paid," foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said at a regular press briefing.&nbsp;

When asked if the passing of the bill would impact on talks for a phase one trade deal between the two economic giants, Hua did not directly answer the question.

But she said there was "no way this can have no effect on China-US relations as well as the two countries' cooperation in important areas."

The foreign ministry had earlier slammed the bill, saying it "viciously attacks the Chinese government's policy of governing Xinjiang."

Without giving any more details about what measures China would take, Hua said the "price that must be paid will come eventually."

Washington had already angered Beijing when US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/cool-it-france-and-germany-to-tell-trump-at-nato-talks-266086">Donald Trump</a> signed legislation supporting pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong, prompting Beijing&nbsp;earlier this week to impose sanctions on US NGOs and suspend future visits by US warships to the semi-autonomous city.

China warned Wednesday that a "price must be paid" after the US House of Representatives passed legislation seeking sanctions against senior Chinese officials over the crackdown on mainly Muslim Uighurs in Xinjiang.

China warned Wednesday that a "price must be paid" after the US House of Representatives passed legislation seeking sanctions against senior Chinese officials over the crackdown on mainly Muslim Uighurs in Xinjiang. The Uighur Act of 2019 condemns Beijing's "gross human rights violations" in the northwestern region of Xinjiang, where upwards of one million Uighurs and other mostly Muslim minorities are believed to be held in re-education camps. Watch: US House ramps up China tensions by passing Uighur bill "For all wrong actions and words the proper price must be paid," foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said at a regular press briefing. When asked if the passing of the bill would impact on talks for a phase one trade deal between the two economic giants, Hua did not directly answer the question. But she said there was "no way this can have no effect on China-US relations as well as the two countries' cooperation in important areas." The foreign ministry had earlier slammed the bill, saying it "viciously attacks the Chinese government's policy of governing Xinjiang." Without giving any more details about what measures China would take, Hua said the "price that must be paid will come eventually." Washington had already angered Beijing when US President Donald Trump signed legislation supporting pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong, prompting Beijing earlier this week to impose sanctions on US NGOs and suspend future visits by US warships to the semi-autonomous city.

'Price must be paid,' says China after US House passes Uighur bill

President Donald&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;said on Wednesday&nbsp;he&nbsp;discussed with British Prime Minister Boris&nbsp;Johnson&nbsp;the&nbsp;NATO&nbsp;military alliance and&nbsp;trade&nbsp;at a meeting a day earlier.

"Enjoyed&nbsp;my meeting with Prime Minister Boris&nbsp;Johnson&nbsp;of the&nbsp;United Kingdom at 10 Downing Street last night. Talked about numerous subjects including&nbsp;NATO&nbsp;and&nbsp;Trade," the&nbsp;U.S. leader said on Twitter.

President Donald Trump said on Wednesday he discussed with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson the NATO military alliance and trade at a meeting a day earlier. "Enjoyed my meeting with Prime Minister Boris Johnson of the United Kingdom at 10 Downing Street last night.

President Donald Trump said on Wednesday he discussed with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson the NATO military alliance and trade at a meeting a day earlier. "Enjoyed my meeting with Prime Minister Boris Johnson of the United Kingdom at 10 Downing Street last night. Talked about numerous subjects including NATO and Trade," the U.S. leader said on Twitter.

Enjoyed discussing NATO and trade with UK PM Johnson: Trump

Global equities mostly retreated Tuesday after US President Donald Trump warned there was no deadline for doing a trade deal with China.

The announcement added to trade uncertainty already stoked by the United States reimposing tariffs on Argentina and Brazil, threatening France with steep levies -- and warning China of possible new measures if ongoing talks fall through.

Trump, in Britain for a NATO summit, warned that efforts to resolve a trade dispute could wait until after next November's US election.

"I have no deadline," Trump told reporters upon his arrival.

"In some ways I like the idea of waiting until after the election for the China deal."

Trump's trade war with China and on-again-off-again attempts to reach a deal have destabilised markets and stoked geopolitical tensions.

'Another turn lower'&nbsp;

"The chances of a deal by December 15 just took another turn lower," said Markets.com analyst Neil Wilson.

"After weeks of making generally positive noises on a deal being very close, there is a real sense now that a deal is not so very near at all and markets need to reprice," Wilson added.

As recently as last week Trump boasted that he was in the "final throes" of negotiating "one of the most important deals in trade ever".

But Washington has since courted Chinese anger by expressing support for Hong Kong protesters.

Optimism that Beijing and Washington will eventually hammer out a partial agreement as part of a wider deal had supported equities for weeks, helping Wall Street to set numerous records.

Wine and cheese&nbsp;

But investor sentiment was dealt a blow on Monday when Trump said he would reinstate tariffs on steel and aluminium from Argentina and Brazil whom he accused of manipulating their currencies and hurting US farmers.

Later, officials warned they would also hit France with up to 100 per cent levies on $2.4 billion in goods, saying a French digital tax was discriminatory against US tech firms such as Google, Apple and Amazon.

Sparkling wine, yoghurt and Roquefort cheese could be affected as soon as next month, while US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer warned his office was also considering similar moves against Austria, Italy, and Turkey.

On Tuesday, France vowed a "strong" response to any tariffs.

Oil prices were firmer ahead of a key meeting of OPEC and other major producers, which is expected to see them maintain output cuts into June, with speculation they could go on until the end of 2020.

Key figures around 1645 GMT&nbsp;

London - FTSE 100: DOWN 1.8 percent at 7,158.76 points (close)

Frankfurt - DAX 30: UP 0.2 percent at 12,989.29 (close)

Paris - CAC 40: DOWN 1.0 percent at 5,727.22 (close)

EURO STOXX 50: DOWN 0.4 percent at 3,610.99

New York - Dow: DOWN 1.4 percent at 27,392.08

Tokyo - Nikkei 225: DOWN 0.6 percent at 23,379.81 (close)

Hong Kong - Hang Seng: DOWN 0.2 percent at 26,391.30 (close)

Shanghai - Composite: UP 0.3 percent at 2,884.70 (close)

Euro/dollar: UP at $1.1085 from $1.1078 at 2145 GMT

Pound/dollar: UP at $1.3000 from $1.2939

Euro/pound: DOWN at 85.25 pence from 85.63

Dollar/yen: DOWN at 108.56 from 108.98 yen

Brent North Sea crude: UP 0.2 percent at $61.03 per barrel

West Texas Intermediate: UP 0.2 percent at $56.08&nbsp;

Global equities mostly retreated Tuesday after US President Donald Trump warned there was no deadline for doing a trade deal with China. The announcement added to trade uncertainty already stoked by the United States reimposing tariffs on Argentina and Brazil, threatening France with steep levies -- and warning China of possible new measures if ongoing talks fall through.

Global equities mostly retreated Tuesday after US President Donald Trump warned there was no deadline for doing a trade deal with China. The announcement added to trade uncertainty already stoked by the United States reimposing tariffs on Argentina and Brazil, threatening France with steep levies -- and warning China of possible new measures if ongoing talks fall through. Trump, in Britain for a NATO summit, warned that efforts to resolve a trade dispute could wait until after next November's US election. "I have no deadline," Trump told reporters upon his arrival. "In some ways I like the idea of waiting until after the election for the China deal." Trump's trade war with China and on-again-off-again attempts to reach a deal have destabilised markets and stoked geopolitical tensions. 'Another turn lower' "The chances of a deal by December 15 just took another turn lower," said Markets.com analyst Neil Wilson. "After weeks of making generally positive noises on a deal being very close, there is a real sense now that a deal is not so very near at all and markets need to reprice," Wilson added. As recently as last week Trump boasted that he was in the "final throes" of negotiating "one of the most important deals in trade ever". But Washington has since courted Chinese anger by expressing support for Hong Kong protesters. Optimism that Beijing and Washington will eventually hammer out a partial agreement as part of a wider deal had supported equities for weeks, helping Wall Street to set numerous records. Wine and cheese But investor sentiment was dealt a blow on Monday when Trump said he would reinstate tariffs on steel and aluminium from Argentina and Brazil whom he accused of manipulating their currencies and hurting US farmers. Later, officials warned they would also hit France with up to 100 per cent levies on $2.4 billion in goods, saying a French digital tax was discriminatory against US tech firms such as Google, Apple and Amazon. Sparkling wine, yoghurt and Roquefort cheese could be affected as soon as next month, while US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer warned his office was also considering similar moves against Austria, Italy, and Turkey. On Tuesday, France vowed a "strong" response to any tariffs. Oil prices were firmer ahead of a key meeting of OPEC and other major producers, which is expected to see them maintain output cuts into June, with speculation they could go on until the end of 2020. Key figures around 1645 GMT London - FTSE 100: DOWN 1.8 percent at 7,158.76 points (close) Frankfurt - DAX 30: UP 0.2 percent at 12,989.29 (close) Paris - CAC 40: DOWN 1.0 percent at 5,727.22 (close) EURO STOXX 50: DOWN 0.4 percent at 3,610.99 New York - Dow: DOWN 1.4 percent at 27,392.08 Tokyo - Nikkei 225: DOWN 0.6 percent at 23,379.81 (close) Hong Kong - Hang Seng: DOWN 0.2 percent at 26,391.30 (close) Shanghai - Composite: UP 0.3 percent at 2,884.70 (close) Euro/dollar: UP at $1.1085 from $1.1078 at 2145 GMT Pound/dollar: UP at $1.3000 from $1.2939 Euro/pound: DOWN at 85.25 pence from 85.63 Dollar/yen: DOWN at 108.56 from 108.98 yen Brent North Sea crude: UP 0.2 percent at $61.03 per barrel West Texas Intermediate: UP 0.2 percent at $56.08

Global stocks rattled after Donald Trump says no 'deadline' on US-China trade deal

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump said his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron gave "one of the greatest non-answers I have ever heard" at a <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/some-countries-not-fulfilling-their-commitments-in-nato-they-will-be-dealt-with-trump-266019">joint news conference </a>on Tuesday (December 3).

In response to a question posed to Trump by a US&nbsp;journalist, the US&nbsp;president said he would pass the question of whether France should do more to take ISIS fighters captured in the Middle East on to Macron, asking the French President in a light-hearted tone if he would like "some nice ISIS fighters."

The French president gave a long answer, in which he argued that foreign fighters from European countries were a small minority among ISIS troops, and that it would be unhelpful to focus on them rather than on the broader problem.

He said the priority was to finish the war against the militant group. Trump stated that this response from Macron was 'non-answer'.

Asked about NATO members which do not meet a target of spending 2% of economic output on defence, Trump said the alliance "has come a long way" adding that it has become "much fairer" as it lowered the US spending.

US President Donald Trump said his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron gave "one of the greatest non-answers I have ever heard" at a joint news conference on Tuesday (December 3).

US President Donald Trump said his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron gave "one of the greatest non-answers I have ever heard" at a joint news conference on Tuesday (December 3). In response to a question posed to Trump by a US journalist, the US president said he would pass the question of whether France should do more to take ISIS fighters captured in the Middle East on to Macron, asking the French President in a light-hearted tone if he would like "some nice ISIS fighters." The French president gave a long answer, in which he argued that foreign fighters from European countries were a small minority among ISIS troops, and that it would be unhelpful to focus on them rather than on the broader problem. He said the priority was to finish the war against the militant group. Trump stated that this response from Macron was 'non-answer'. Asked about NATO members which do not meet a target of spending 2% of economic output on defence, Trump said the alliance "has come a long way" adding that it has become "much fairer" as it lowered the US spending.

"One of the greatest non-answers": Donald Trump lauds Macron's political skills

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-democrats-set-the-stage-for-trump-impeachment-with-key-hearing-265798">Congressional Democrats</a> on Monday&nbsp;named&nbsp;the four&nbsp;witnesses&nbsp;who will testify this week at a public&nbsp;hearing&nbsp;in the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-democrats-set-the-stage-for-trump-impeachment-with-key-hearing-265798">impeachment&nbsp;inquiry</a> of&nbsp;US&nbsp;President Donald&nbsp;Trump, in what is seen as a likely precursor to the announcement of formal charges within weeks.

As opinion polls show Americans are bitterly divided over whether to impeach&nbsp;Trump, the Judiciary Committee&nbsp;hearing&nbsp;on Wednesday in the Democratic-controlled&nbsp;House&nbsp;of Representatives will feature four legal scholars discussing the constitutional grounds for removing a&nbsp;US&nbsp;president from office.

The Judiciary panel is also expected to receive a report this week from the&nbsp;House&nbsp;Intelligence Committee laying out the Democratic case for&nbsp;Trump's&nbsp;impeachment.

A copy of the report was made available privately to&nbsp;House&nbsp;Intelligence members on Monday night for a 24-hour review period, and the Democratic-controlled panel is expected to vote on approval on Tuesday night.

Republican Representative Jim Jordan, an ardent defender of&nbsp;Trump, told reporters he had read portions of the report in a secure room at the Capitol but was instructed not to discuss&nbsp;the contents until Tuesday night.

House&nbsp;Republicans issued their own rebuttal report on Monday, saying Democrats had not established an impeachable offence by&nbsp;Trump.

Democrats have been looking into the Republican president's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate political rival Joe Biden, the former&nbsp;US&nbsp;vice president who is seeking the Democratic nomination to face&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;in the 2020 election, and his son Hunter Biden, who was a board member of a Ukrainian energy company.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-impeachment-congressional-panel-to-begin-drawing-up-charges-against-us-president-265633">The&nbsp;impeachment&nbsp;inquiry</a> has heard testimony from current and former officials that military aid was withheld from Ukraine and that a White&nbsp;House&nbsp;meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was conditioned on investigations into the Bidens and a debunked conspiracy theory about Ukraine interference in the 2016&nbsp;US&nbsp;election.

Trump&nbsp;has denied any wrongdoing and says a July 25 phone call with Zelenskiy, in which he pressed for the probes, was "perfect." He and fellow Republicans say Democrats are seeking to overturn the results of the 2016 presidential election.

Wednesday's&nbsp;hearing, while academic in nature, will set the stage for the Judiciary Committee to begin determining whether&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;should face formal articles of&nbsp;impeachment.&nbsp;House&nbsp;Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a letter to supporters last week that&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;had committed "bribery" and needed to be held accountable.

The&nbsp;hearing&nbsp;witnesses, announced by the committee on Monday, are Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School, Pamela Karlan of Stanford Law School, Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina School of Law and Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University Law School.

In a defiant response on Sunday night, the White&nbsp;House&nbsp;informed Democrats that&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;and his lawyers would not participate in Wednesday's&nbsp;hearing, citing a lack of "fundamental fairness."

Speaking to reporters as he departed the White&nbsp;House&nbsp;on Monday en route to London for a NATO summit,&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;said he had declined to participate in the&nbsp;hearing&nbsp;because it was a hoax.

Representative Jerrold Nadler, the Democratic chairman of the&nbsp;House&nbsp;Judiciary Committee, called the White&nbsp;House's decision "unfortunate" and said that allowing&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;to participate had been a priority from the outset of the&nbsp;impeachment&nbsp;probe.

Watch: Donald Trump impeachment hearings set for December 4

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/donald-trump-impeachment-hearings-set-for-dec-4-265791/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Friday deadline

White&nbsp;House&nbsp;counsel Pat Cipollone has not ruled out taking part in future proceedings if Democrats address a list of procedural complaints.

The committee, which is not expected to consider evidence against&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;until next week, has given the president until 5 pm&nbsp;(2200 GMT) on Friday to say whether he plans to mount a defence by calling&nbsp;witnesses&nbsp;and introducing evidence.

The 110-page&nbsp;House&nbsp;Republican report&nbsp;said the&nbsp;witnesses&nbsp;called during the&nbsp;impeachment&nbsp;inquiry had painted a picture of "unelected bureaucrats" who "fundamentally disagreed with President&nbsp;Trump's style, world view and decisions," and had presented no evidence that amounted to an impeachable offence.

House&nbsp;Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said the Republican report "ignores voluminous evidence that the president used the power of his office to pressure Ukraine into investigating his political rival," which Schiff said was outside the law and "a violation of his oath of office."

If the&nbsp;House&nbsp;approves <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/white-house-says-it-will-refuse-to-take-part-in-impeachment-hearing-265629">articles of&nbsp;impeachment</a>, the Republican-controlled Senate would hold a trial to see if&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;should be removed from office. That move is unlikely, as few Senate Republicans have shown an appetite for removing the president.

But the&nbsp;impeachment&nbsp;inquiry has cast a shadow over&nbsp;Trump's already tumultuous presidency and sharpened a divide among Americans that is likely to intensify as election campaigning heats up in the coming weeks.

Democratic aides said a vote on possible articles of&nbsp;impeachment&nbsp;would follow quickly on the heels of an evidentiary&nbsp;hearing.

Congressional Democrats on Monday named the four witnesses who will testify this week at a public hearing in the impeachment inquiry of US President Donald Trump, in what is seen as a likely precursor to the announcement of formal charges within weeks.

Congressional Democrats on Monday named the four witnesses who will testify this week at a public hearing in the impeachment inquiry of US President Donald Trump, in what is seen as a likely precursor to the announcement of formal charges within weeks. As opinion polls show Americans are bitterly divided over whether to impeach Trump, the Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday in the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives will feature four legal scholars discussing the constitutional grounds for removing a US president from office. The Judiciary panel is also expected to receive a report this week from the House Intelligence Committee laying out the Democratic case for Trump's impeachment. A copy of the report was made available privately to House Intelligence members on Monday night for a 24-hour review period, and the Democratic-controlled panel is expected to vote on approval on Tuesday night. Republican Representative Jim Jordan, an ardent defender of Trump, told reporters he had read portions of the report in a secure room at the Capitol but was instructed not to discuss the contents until Tuesday night. House Republicans issued their own rebuttal report on Monday, saying Democrats had not established an impeachable offence by Trump. Democrats have been looking into the Republican president's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate political rival Joe Biden, the former US vice president who is seeking the Democratic nomination to face Trump in the 2020 election, and his son Hunter Biden, who was a board member of a Ukrainian energy company. The impeachment inquiry has heard testimony from current and former officials that military aid was withheld from Ukraine and that a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was conditioned on investigations into the Bidens and a debunked conspiracy theory about Ukraine interference in the 2016 US election. Trump has denied any wrongdoing and says a July 25 phone call with Zelenskiy, in which he pressed for the probes, was "perfect." He and fellow Republicans say Democrats are seeking to overturn the results of the 2016 presidential election. Wednesday's hearing, while academic in nature, will set the stage for the Judiciary Committee to begin determining whether Trump should face formal articles of impeachment. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a letter to supporters last week that Trump had committed "bribery" and needed to be held accountable. The hearing witnesses, announced by the committee on Monday, are Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School, Pamela Karlan of Stanford Law School, Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina School of Law and Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University Law School. In a defiant response on Sunday night, the White House informed Democrats that Trump and his lawyers would not participate in Wednesday's hearing, citing a lack of "fundamental fairness." Speaking to reporters as he departed the White House on Monday en route to London for a NATO summit, Trump said he had declined to participate in the hearing because it was a hoax. Representative Jerrold Nadler, the Democratic chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, called the White House's decision "unfortunate" and said that allowing Trump to participate had been a priority from the outset of the impeachment probe. Watch: Donald Trump impeachment hearings set for December 4 Friday deadline White House counsel Pat Cipollone has not ruled out taking part in future proceedings if Democrats address a list of procedural complaints. The committee, which is not expected to consider evidence against Trump until next week, has given the president until 5 pm (2200 GMT) on Friday to say whether he plans to mount a defence by calling witnesses and introducing evidence. The 110-page House Republican report said the witnesses called during the impeachment inquiry had painted a picture of "unelected bureaucrats" who "fundamentally disagreed with President Trump's style, world view and decisions," and had presented no evidence that amounted to an impeachable offence. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said the Republican report "ignores voluminous evidence that the president used the power of his office to pressure Ukraine into investigating his political rival," which Schiff said was outside the law and "a violation of his oath of office." If the House approves articles of impeachment, the Republican-controlled Senate would hold a trial to see if Trump should be removed from office. That move is unlikely, as few Senate Republicans have shown an appetite for removing the president. But the impeachment inquiry has cast a shadow over Trump's already tumultuous presidency and sharpened a divide among Americans that is likely to intensify as election campaigning heats up in the coming weeks. Democratic aides said a vote on possible articles of impeachment would follow quickly on the heels of an evidentiary hearing.

Witnesses named for Trump impeachment hearing in United States House

Donald Trump Vs Michael Bloomberg: The battle of the millionaires. To know more watch the video

Donald Trump Vs Michael Bloomberg: The battle of the millionaires

U.S government claims move will combat travel fraud by Face scan. It will help the identification of criminals and terrorists.

The U.S Mulls face scan for travellers now it's mandatory for all U.S citizens

US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/it-would-be-best-if-trump-doesnt-get-involved-in-britains-election-boris-johnson-265300">Donald Trump </a>said on Tuesday he did not want to interfere in Britain's election, but that he thought current Prime Minister Boris Johnson was very capable and would do a good job.

"I think Boris is very capable and I think he'll do a good job," Trump said in London, where he is attending a meeting of NATO leaders.

Trump also reaffirmed his support for Brexit - the central objective of Johnson's election campaign. Britain holds its election on Dec. 12.

US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday he did not want to interfere in Britain's election, but that he thought current Prime Minister Boris Johnson was very capable and would do a good job.

US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday he did not want to interfere in Britain's election, but that he thought current Prime Minister Boris Johnson was very capable and would do a good job. "I think Boris is very capable and I think he'll do a good job," Trump said in London, where he is attending a meeting of NATO leaders. Trump also reaffirmed his support for Brexit - the central objective of Johnson's election campaign. Britain holds its election on Dec. 12.

UK PM Boris Johnson 'very capable', says Trump

Democratic lawmakers in Congress will take a big step this week in what appears to be a now inexorable march toward <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/how-does-the-impeachment-of-a-us-president-work-265766">impeaching </a>US&nbsp;President Donald Trump, with the start of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-impeachment-congressional-panel-to-begin-drawing-up-charges-against-us-president-265633">hearings </a>seen as a precursor to formal charges being announced within weeks.

As opinion polls show Americans bitterly divided over whether to impeach Trump, the Judiciary Committee in the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives will hold a hearing on Wednesday to explain to the public what constitutes an impeachable offence.

It will also receive a report from the House Intelligence Committee laying out the evidence Democrats say shows Trump abused his office for personal political gain.

Democrats have been looking into the Republican president's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate political rival Joe Biden, a former Democratic vice president who is seeking his party's nomination to face Trump in the 2020 presidential election, and his son Hunter Biden, who was a board member of a Ukrainian energy company.

The impeachment inquiry has heard testimony from current and former officials that military aid was withheld from Ukraine and that a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was conditioned on investigations into the Bidens and a debunked conspiracy theory about interference in the 2016 US&nbsp;election being carried out.

Trump has denied any wrongdoing and says a July 25 phone call with Zelenskiy, in which he pressed for the probes, was "perfect." He and fellow Republicans say Democrats are seeking to overturn the will of the people in the 2016 presidential election.

The judiciary panel will hear public testimony from four legal scholars on what constitutional basis a US&nbsp;president can be removed from office.

In a defiant response on Sunday night, the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/white-house-says-it-will-refuse-to-take-part-in-impeachment-hearing-265629">White House </a>informed Democrats that Trump and his lawyers would not participate in Wednesday's hearing, citing a lack of "fundamental fairness."

Speaking to reporters as he departed the White House on Monday en route to London for a NATO summit, Trump said he had declined to participate in the hearing because it was a hoax.

The proceedings would have been the first direct involvement by the Trump camp in the process.

But White House counsel Pat Cipollone has not ruled out taking part in future proceedings if Democrats addressed a list of procedural complaints.

The committee, which is not expected to consider evidence against Trump until next week, has given the president until 5 pm&nbsp;(2200 GMT) on Friday to say whether he plans to mount a defence by calling witnesses and introducing evidence.

Deepening divide

The Republican-controlled Senate, where any impeachment trial would be held, is highly unlikely to vote to oust Trump. Few Senate Republicans have shown an appetite for removing the president.

But the impeachment inquiry has cast a shadow over Trump's already tumultuous presidency and sharpened a divide among Americans that is likely to intensify as election campaigning heats up in the coming weeks.

"We're on an exercise with a very predictable outcome and one that's going to divide the country further. It'll be a live issue through the election itself, and the American people will make the final determination," Republican Representative Tom Cole told Reuters.

Wednesday's hearing, while academic in nature, will set the stage for the Judiciary Committee to begin determining whether Trump should face formal articles of impeachment. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a letter to supporters last week that Trump had committed "bribery" and needed to be held accountable.

"Impeachment is the people's last line of self-defence against a president who insists upon acting like a king and trampling the rule of law," said Representative Jamie Raskin, a Democrat on the Judiciary Committee.

"We've had an intensive focus over the last several weeks on the facts," Raskin said in an interview. "We are now about to revisit the basic values and structures of the American Constitution."

Democratic aides said a vote on possible articles of impeachment would follow quickly on the heels of an evidentiary hearing.

Democratic lawmakers in Congress will take a big step this week in what appears to be a now inexorable march toward impeaching US President Donald Trump, with the start of hearings seen as a precursor to formal charges being announced within weeks.

Democratic lawmakers in Congress will take a big step this week in what appears to be a now inexorable march toward impeaching US President Donald Trump, with the start of hearings seen as a precursor to formal charges being announced within weeks. As opinion polls show Americans bitterly divided over whether to impeach Trump, the Judiciary Committee in the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives will hold a hearing on Wednesday to explain to the public what constitutes an impeachable offence. It will also receive a report from the House Intelligence Committee laying out the evidence Democrats say shows Trump abused his office for personal political gain. Democrats have been looking into the Republican president's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate political rival Joe Biden, a former Democratic vice president who is seeking his party's nomination to face Trump in the 2020 presidential election, and his son Hunter Biden, who was a board member of a Ukrainian energy company. The impeachment inquiry has heard testimony from current and former officials that military aid was withheld from Ukraine and that a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy was conditioned on investigations into the Bidens and a debunked conspiracy theory about interference in the 2016 US election being carried out. Trump has denied any wrongdoing and says a July 25 phone call with Zelenskiy, in which he pressed for the probes, was "perfect." He and fellow Republicans say Democrats are seeking to overturn the will of the people in the 2016 presidential election. The judiciary panel will hear public testimony from four legal scholars on what constitutional basis a US president can be removed from office. In a defiant response on Sunday night, the White House informed Democrats that Trump and his lawyers would not participate in Wednesday's hearing, citing a lack of "fundamental fairness." Speaking to reporters as he departed the White House on Monday en route to London for a NATO summit, Trump said he had declined to participate in the hearing because it was a hoax. The proceedings would have been the first direct involvement by the Trump camp in the process. But White House counsel Pat Cipollone has not ruled out taking part in future proceedings if Democrats addressed a list of procedural complaints. The committee, which is not expected to consider evidence against Trump until next week, has given the president until 5 pm (2200 GMT) on Friday to say whether he plans to mount a defence by calling witnesses and introducing evidence. Deepening divide The Republican-controlled Senate, where any impeachment trial would be held, is highly unlikely to vote to oust Trump. Few Senate Republicans have shown an appetite for removing the president. But the impeachment inquiry has cast a shadow over Trump's already tumultuous presidency and sharpened a divide among Americans that is likely to intensify as election campaigning heats up in the coming weeks. "We're on an exercise with a very predictable outcome and one that's going to divide the country further. It'll be a live issue through the election itself, and the American people will make the final determination," Republican Representative Tom Cole told Reuters. Wednesday's hearing, while academic in nature, will set the stage for the Judiciary Committee to begin determining whether Trump should face formal articles of impeachment. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a letter to supporters last week that Trump had committed "bribery" and needed to be held accountable. "Impeachment is the people's last line of self-defence against a president who insists upon acting like a king and trampling the rule of law," said Representative Jamie Raskin, a Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. "We've had an intensive focus over the last several weeks on the facts," Raskin said in an interview. "We are now about to revisit the basic values and structures of the American Constitution." Democratic aides said a vote on possible articles of impeachment would follow quickly on the heels of an evidentiary hearing.

US Democrats set the stage for Trump impeachment with key hearing

Donald Trump Impeachment Hearings Set for Dec 4. Watch video to know more.

Donald Trump Impeachment Hearings Set for Dec 4

donald-trump

Donald Trump, News on Donald Trump, stories on Donald Trump, articles on Donald Trump, Donald Trump stories at Wion, Donald Trump news, Donald Trump latest news

donald trump