The much vaunted “flat world” of Tom Friedman is under threat in many parts of the globe and nowhere more than in the original capital of the free world, the United States of America. With non-tariff trade and immigration barriers being erected all over the world and President Trump making aggressive moves to fulfil his “Make in America” and “Bring jobs back to America” promises, the scenario seems to be fairly bleak for India’s many hopeful US residents.

The most recent salvo fired by the Trump Administration in the US is the amendment to the Labor Condition Application (LCA) that has come into force from November 19, 2018. This requires prospective employers of people entering the US on H-1B visas to disclose all intended places of employment including any proposed short-term assignments and a large amount of information on the company status including identification of secondary entities and locations and the number of H-1B visa workers currently employed in the firm and at third-party works sites of the firm. While one could argue that this is only a demand for more disclosures, the increased paperwork required will become a further deterrent for companies already concerned at the substantial delays and high rejection rates in visa applications to work in the US.

Another deterrent for middle and senior-level professionals seeking to work and build careers in the US is the introduction of legislation by two US lawmakers that seeks to revoke the work authorisation given by the Obama Administration to spouses of H-1B visa holders. The permission given to H-4 dependent visa holders to work while their spouses were employed in the US had made it feasible for career-minded spouses to seek gainful employment. This group of over a hundred thousand people, largely women, &nbsp;would be seriously challenged if this revocation actually happens.

A positive development in this regard has been the letter sent by 130 senior lawmakers to the Secretary of US Homeland Security asking that the decision of the previous administration should not be rescinded. The subsequent assurance provided by a US Citizenship and Immigration spokesman that the rule-making process is still incomplete and a new economic analysis would be a determinant in the final decision should give a boost to the tens of thousands of bright and highly employable people who would be potentially adversely affected by this reversal.&nbsp;

Even if the Administration were to ignore the adverse impact on families, on purely economic grounds, the arguments in favour of letting these talented people work in the US are many. Most of the spouses in the US are extremely well qualified and more than capable of getting and outperforming in highly skilled vocations. Nipping their promising careers in the bud could well deny American employers the opportunity to add substantial productivity to their work force. And it is almost inevitable that in a world where two jobs in a family are useful in building a better lifestyle and opportunities for children, this could sow the seeds of marital discord and even result in some spouses deserting the H-1B holder and returning to their country of origin to seek gainful employment and an identity for themselves.

For the Indian tech sector, the increased tightening of opportunities to send manpower to the US to staff critical positions has led to three tactical steps – local hiring, subcontracting and a mitigation in the efforts to sell an American dream. Local hiring started on a significant scale a few years ago and rightly so since it is only appropriate that jobs in a country where the business originates are offered to citizens and residents of that country where possible, rather than getting temporary staff from India or elsewhere. Today, local hiring has moved from anecdotal levels to tens of thousands with centres of Indian companies springing up in many parts of the US. Sub-contracting to local and Latin American firms have also commenced and professionals are also being recruited from Mexico and Canada through the TN visa category, which has the potential for indefinite renewal and are easy to procure and process.&nbsp;

Hundreds of thousands of young Indians, who for decades had seen the American dream, have realised them through the vista of opportunities that the H-1B visa and subsequently the H-4 visa gave to them and their families. In families around the country, fortunes have been re-written by children in the US and they have also added greatly to the success of companies in the US, initially in the tech sector and today in all sections of the economy. Will any administration not see the immense value offered by the Indian diaspora in the US and thwart its continuing contribution and success? President Trump, we are glad you choose to celebrate Diwali in the White House but now the time has come to make the great land of America truly inclusive and “keep America great” by being the beacon of opportunity for the whole world that it has always been!

(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-us-visas-a-call-to-action-2689284">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The much vaunted “flat world” of Tom Friedman is under threat in many parts of the globe and nowhere more than in the original capital of the free world, the United States of America.

The much vaunted “flat world” of Tom Friedman is under threat in many parts of the globe and nowhere more than in the original capital of the free world, the United States of America. With non-tariff trade and immigration barriers being erected all over the world and President Trump making aggressive moves to fulfil his “Make in America” and “Bring jobs back to America” promises, the scenario seems to be fairly bleak for India’s many hopeful US residents. The most recent salvo fired by the Trump Administration in the US is the amendment to the Labor Condition Application (LCA) that has come into force from November 19, 2018. This requires prospective employers of people entering the US on H-1B visas to disclose all intended places of employment including any proposed short-term assignments and a large amount of information on the company status including identification of secondary entities and locations and the number of H-1B visa workers currently employed in the firm and at third-party works sites of the firm. While one could argue that this is only a demand for more disclosures, the increased paperwork required will become a further deterrent for companies already concerned at the substantial delays and high rejection rates in visa applications to work in the US. Another deterrent for middle and senior-level professionals seeking to work and build careers in the US is the introduction of legislation by two US lawmakers that seeks to revoke the work authorisation given by the Obama Administration to spouses of H-1B visa holders. The permission given to H-4 dependent visa holders to work while their spouses were employed in the US had made it feasible for career-minded spouses to seek gainful employment. This group of over a hundred thousand people, largely women, would be seriously challenged if this revocation actually happens. A positive development in this regard has been the letter sent by 130 senior lawmakers to the Secretary of US Homeland Security asking that the decision of the previous administration should not be rescinded. The subsequent assurance provided by a US Citizenship and Immigration spokesman that the rule-making process is still incomplete and a new economic analysis would be a determinant in the final decision should give a boost to the tens of thousands of bright and highly employable people who would be potentially adversely affected by this reversal. Even if the Administration were to ignore the adverse impact on families, on purely economic grounds, the arguments in favour of letting these talented people work in the US are many. Most of the spouses in the US are extremely well qualified and more than capable of getting and outperforming in highly skilled vocations. Nipping their promising careers in the bud could well deny American employers the opportunity to add substantial productivity to their work force. And it is almost inevitable that in a world where two jobs in a family are useful in building a better lifestyle and opportunities for children, this could sow the seeds of marital discord and even result in some spouses deserting the H-1B holder and returning to their country of origin to seek gainful employment and an identity for themselves. For the Indian tech sector, the increased tightening of opportunities to send manpower to the US to staff critical positions has led to three tactical steps – local hiring, subcontracting and a mitigation in the efforts to sell an American dream. Local hiring started on a significant scale a few years ago and rightly so since it is only appropriate that jobs in a country where the business originates are offered to citizens and residents of that country where possible, rather than getting temporary staff from India or elsewhere. Today, local hiring has moved from anecdotal levels to tens of thousands with centres of Indian companies springing up in many parts of the US. Sub-contracting to local and Latin American firms have also commenced and professionals are also being recruited from Mexico and Canada through the TN visa category, which has the potential for indefinite renewal and are easy to procure and process. Hundreds of thousands of young Indians, who for decades had seen the American dream, have realised them through the vista of opportunities that the H-1B visa and subsequently the H-4 visa gave to them and their families. In families around the country, fortunes have been re-written by children in the US and they have also added greatly to the success of companies in the US, initially in the tech sector and today in all sections of the economy. Will any administration not see the immense value offered by the Indian diaspora in the US and thwart its continuing contribution and success? President Trump, we are glad you choose to celebrate Diwali in the White House but now the time has come to make the great land of America truly inclusive and “keep America great” by being the beacon of opportunity for the whole world that it has always been! (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US visas – a call to action

US officials briefly closed a border crossing in southern California on Sunday after <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/migrants-at-us-border-say-they-will-cross-over-despite-trump-stance-179282">hundreds of migrants</a>, part of the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/mexico-will-hold-us-bound-refugees-while-claims-processed-trump-179220">"caravan" condemned by President Donald Trump</a>, tried to breach a fence from the Mexican city of Tijuana, authorities announced.

The dramatic shutdown took place only three days after Trump threatened to close the "whole border" with Mexico if "it gets to a level where we're going to lose control or people are going to start getting hurt."

Border officials in San Diego, California, said on Twitter that they had temporarily closed the San Ysidro crossing point -- one of the busiest between the two countries -- to both vehicular and pedestrian traffic.

The order was lifted some hours later.

Mexican Interior Minister Alfonso Navarrete accused some of the migrants of attempting the Tijuana crossing in a "violent way."

"We are going to act and proceed to their deportation," he told the Milenio television network, adding: "Far from helping the caravan, they are hurting it."&nbsp;

Video clips posted on Twitter showed large numbers of migrants dashing across a shallow concrete waterway toward the border. Several thousand migrants, mostly from Central America, have been gathering in Tijuana in hopes of entering the US.

Secretary of the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Kirstjen Nielsen later issued a statement accusing the migrants of seeking to harm border patrol personnel "by throwing projectiles at them."

"As I have continually stated, DHS will not tolerate this type of lawlessness and will not hesitate to shut down ports of entry for security and public safety reasons," she said, adding the US would "seek to prosecute" offenders.

'Are we in the US yet?'

At least 500 migrants, including women and children, had been taking part in a peaceful demonstration in Tijuana before dashing toward the border in an attempt to clamber over a first metal barrier there.

"Are we in the United States yet?" some asked in desperate tones.

Several hundred made it over the first barrier and were trying to cross a second -- topped with spikes -- when US border officers began firing tear gas at them even as US Army helicopters flew low overhead, according to an AFP journalist on the scene.

The migrants tried to protect themselves -- covering their faces, with mothers holding their children close. There were cries of pain, desperation and frustration as the crowd swirled over the border line and back.

Some migrants shouted that they only wanted to make their way to a better life.

But amid the stinging gas, several migrants turned back.

Trump has repeatedly warned that the large group of migrants moving through Mexico toward the US included criminals and possibly terrorists, while providing no evidence to support that.

A reported asylum deal

The US president has deployed some 9,000 troops along the border in support of Customs and Border Protection agents.

Approximately 5,000 migrants reached Tijuana over the past week, after an exhausting trip of up to 2,500 miles (4,000 kilometers) covered in just over a month. Many were fleeing violence and poverty in Honduras in hopes of finding asylum in the US.

To enter the US legally, migrants must formally apply for asylum, but the wait for those requests to be processed can last up to a year.

Trump signed a proclamation earlier this month to prevent anyone filing asylum claims except at legal ports of entry, but a federal judge in San Francisco temporarily blocked the order, pointing to "irreconcilable conflicts" with immigration law.

The Washington Post reported Saturday that the Trump administration had gained the support of Mexico's incoming government for a plan to require asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their applications to be processed.

But officials in the incoming administration of President-elect Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said later -- after the Post report was met by stiff criticism in Mexico -- that the agreement was not yet final.

US officials briefly closed a border crossing in southern California on Sunday after hundreds of migrants, part of the "caravan" condemned by President Donald Trump, tried to breach a fence from the Mexican city of Tijuana, authorities announced.

US officials briefly closed a border crossing in southern California on Sunday after hundreds of migrants, part of the "caravan" condemned by President Donald Trump, tried to breach a fence from the Mexican city of Tijuana, authorities announced. The dramatic shutdown took place only three days after Trump threatened to close the "whole border" with Mexico if "it gets to a level where we're going to lose control or people are going to start getting hurt." Border officials in San Diego, California, said on Twitter that they had temporarily closed the San Ysidro crossing point -- one of the busiest between the two countries -- to both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The order was lifted some hours later. Mexican Interior Minister Alfonso Navarrete accused some of the migrants of attempting the Tijuana crossing in a "violent way." "We are going to act and proceed to their deportation," he told the Milenio television network, adding: "Far from helping the caravan, they are hurting it." Video clips posted on Twitter showed large numbers of migrants dashing across a shallow concrete waterway toward the border. Several thousand migrants, mostly from Central America, have been gathering in Tijuana in hopes of entering the US. Secretary of the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Kirstjen Nielsen later issued a statement accusing the migrants of seeking to harm border patrol personnel "by throwing projectiles at them." "As I have continually stated, DHS will not tolerate this type of lawlessness and will not hesitate to shut down ports of entry for security and public safety reasons," she said, adding the US would "seek to prosecute" offenders. 'Are we in the US yet?' At least 500 migrants, including women and children, had been taking part in a peaceful demonstration in Tijuana before dashing toward the border in an attempt to clamber over a first metal barrier there. "Are we in the United States yet?" some asked in desperate tones. Several hundred made it over the first barrier and were trying to cross a second -- topped with spikes -- when US border officers began firing tear gas at them even as US Army helicopters flew low overhead, according to an AFP journalist on the scene. The migrants tried to protect themselves -- covering their faces, with mothers holding their children close. There were cries of pain, desperation and frustration as the crowd swirled over the border line and back. Some migrants shouted that they only wanted to make their way to a better life. But amid the stinging gas, several migrants turned back. Trump has repeatedly warned that the large group of migrants moving through Mexico toward the US included criminals and possibly terrorists, while providing no evidence to support that. A reported asylum deal The US president has deployed some 9,000 troops along the border in support of Customs and Border Protection agents. Approximately 5,000 migrants reached Tijuana over the past week, after an exhausting trip of up to 2,500 miles (4,000 kilometers) covered in just over a month. Many were fleeing violence and poverty in Honduras in hopes of finding asylum in the US. To enter the US legally, migrants must formally apply for asylum, but the wait for those requests to be processed can last up to a year. Trump signed a proclamation earlier this month to prevent anyone filing asylum claims except at legal ports of entry, but a federal judge in San Francisco temporarily blocked the order, pointing to "irreconcilable conflicts" with immigration law. The Washington Post reported Saturday that the Trump administration had gained the support of Mexico's incoming government for a plan to require asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their applications to be processed. But officials in the incoming administration of President-elect Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said later -- after the Post report was met by stiff criticism in Mexico -- that the agreement was not yet final.

Migrants rush border, US guards beat them back with tear gas

A tweet by an Assam teen Astha Sarmah went viral as her reply to US President Donald Trump on Twitter explaining the difference between weather and climate generated over 21,000 likes with more than 4000 users retweeting her.

Astha Sarmah is an 18-yr-old girl from Jorhat district of Assam. &nbsp;

Donald Trump, tweeted on Wednesday about record cold temperatures striking the US on a single day, adding, 'Whatever happened to Global Warming?'

He wrote, “Brutal and Extended Cold Blast could shatter ALL RECORDS – Whatever happened to Global Warming?”

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Brutal and Extended Cold Blast could shatter ALL RECORDS - Whatever happened to Global Warming?
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1065400254151954432?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 22, 2018</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>

Nearly 113,000 people “liked” the tweet and some 28,000 retweeted it. Plus, 91,000 people replied to the president.

Astha Sarmah replied to the tweet saying, 'I am 54 years younger than you. I just finished high school with average marks. But even I can tell you that WEATHER IS NOT CLIMATE.'

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
I am 54 years younger than you. I just finished high school with average marks. But even I can tell you that WEATHER IS NOT CLIMATE. If you want help understanding that, I can lend you my encyclopedia from when I was in 2nd grade. It has pictures and everything.
— Astha Sarmah (@thebuttcracker7) <a href="https://twitter.com/thebuttcracker7/status/1065521728296640512?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 22, 2018</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>

The tweet went wildly viral, many praised the girl calling her 'hope of the future' and from some Twitter users, Astha Sarmah received backlash.

A tweet by an Assam teen Astha Sarmah went viral as her reply to US President Donald Trump on Twitter explaining the difference between weather and climate generated over 21,000 likes with more than 4000 users retweeting her.

A tweet by an Assam teen Astha Sarmah went viral as her reply to US President Donald Trump on Twitter explaining the difference between weather and climate generated over 21,000 likes with more than 4000 users retweeting her. Astha Sarmah is an 18-yr-old girl from Jorhat district of Assam. Donald Trump, tweeted on Wednesday about record cold temperatures striking the US on a single day, adding, 'Whatever happened to Global Warming?' He wrote, “Brutal and Extended Cold Blast could shatter ALL RECORDS – Whatever happened to Global Warming?” Brutal and Extended Cold Blast could shatter ALL RECORDS - Whatever happened to Global Warming? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 22, 2018 × Nearly 113,000 people “liked” the tweet and some 28,000 retweeted it. Plus, 91,000 people replied to the president. Astha Sarmah replied to the tweet saying, 'I am 54 years younger than you. I just finished high school with average marks. But even I can tell you that WEATHER IS NOT CLIMATE.' I am 54 years younger than you. I just finished high school with average marks. But even I can tell you that WEATHER IS NOT CLIMATE. If you want help understanding that, I can lend you my encyclopedia from when I was in 2nd grade. It has pictures and everything. — Astha Sarmah (@thebuttcracker7) November 22, 2018 × The tweet went wildly viral, many praised the girl calling her 'hope of the future' and from some Twitter users, Astha Sarmah received backlash.

Indian teen trolls US president Donald Trump over climate change

Except for designating Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism, the United States is looking at all possible tools at its disposal to convince Islamabad that it is in its interest to crack down on terrorist group, a senior US official has said.

"The focus of the discussions has not been on designating Pakistan a state sponsor of terrorism, rather how to use other tools at our disposal to convince Pakistan that it is in its interest to crack down on terrorist groups," the administration official told PTI.

"Pakistan has a stark choice: Cooperate and enjoy the benefits of close relationship with the US&nbsp;And the rest of the world, or face international isolation if it chooses not to change its behaviour," the official said in response to a question.

This past week, US President Donald Trump&nbsp;in an interview to Fox News, on twitter and in interaction with White House reporters&nbsp;accused Pakistan of doing nothing for the US in the fight against terrorism and reiterated that till the time Islamabad changes its behaviour his administration will continue to suspend all assistance to it.

"I want Pakistan to help us. We're no longer paying $ 1.3 billion to Pakistan. We're paying them nothing because that's what they've done to help us. Nothing," President Trump told reporters at the White House on November 20.

And on November 18, in an interview to Fox News, Trump alleged that people in Pakistan knew that Osama bin Laden was living in a mansion near their garrison city of Abbottabad, but they did not tell the US and kept on accepting billions of dollars in aid.

At the same time, he said that his administration hopes to have a "good relationship" with Pakistan.&nbsp;

Speaking on the condition of anonymity, his administration officials say they are looking at ways through which they can convince Pakistan to change its behaviour.

Last August when Trump announced his South Asia Policy, White House officials had listed out some of these tools, like reviewing the major non-NATO ally status, or visa ban on officials having links with designated terrorist groups, adopting a tough posture against Pakistan at major international forums like the International Monetary Fund.

In January this year, Trump had announced to suspend all its security assistance to Pakistan. Last week, Pentagon said that so far it has suspended $1.66 billion in security assistance to Pakistan after Trump's January directive.

But the United States has not been thinking about designating Pakistan a state sponsor of terrorism, a demand being made by several American lawmakers including those from the ruling Republican party.&nbsp;

Currently four countries have been designated as state sponsor of terrorism. These are Iran, North Korea, Sudan and Syria. Recent media reports suggests that US is considering Venezuela in this list.

However, in its latest Country Report on Terrorism, the State Department listed Pakistan among countries that provide safe havens to terrorists. President Trump and top US officials have expressed their frustration over the fact that Pakistan has not been taking concrete steps in this regard.

Except for designating Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism, the United States is looking at all possible tools at its disposal to convince Islamabad that it is in its interest to crack down on terrorist group, a senior US official has said.

Except for designating Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism, the United States is looking at all possible tools at its disposal to convince Islamabad that it is in its interest to crack down on terrorist group, a senior US official has said. "The focus of the discussions has not been on designating Pakistan a state sponsor of terrorism, rather how to use other tools at our disposal to convince Pakistan that it is in its interest to crack down on terrorist groups," the administration official told PTI. "Pakistan has a stark choice: Cooperate and enjoy the benefits of close relationship with the US And the rest of the world, or face international isolation if it chooses not to change its behaviour," the official said in response to a question. This past week, US President Donald Trump in an interview to Fox News, on twitter and in interaction with White House reporters accused Pakistan of doing nothing for the US in the fight against terrorism and reiterated that till the time Islamabad changes its behaviour his administration will continue to suspend all assistance to it. "I want Pakistan to help us. We're no longer paying $ 1.3 billion to Pakistan. We're paying them nothing because that's what they've done to help us. Nothing," President Trump told reporters at the White House on November 20. And on November 18, in an interview to Fox News, Trump alleged that people in Pakistan knew that Osama bin Laden was living in a mansion near their garrison city of Abbottabad, but they did not tell the US and kept on accepting billions of dollars in aid. At the same time, he said that his administration hopes to have a "good relationship" with Pakistan. Speaking on the condition of anonymity, his administration officials say they are looking at ways through which they can convince Pakistan to change its behaviour. Last August when Trump announced his South Asia Policy, White House officials had listed out some of these tools, like reviewing the major non-NATO ally status, or visa ban on officials having links with designated terrorist groups, adopting a tough posture against Pakistan at major international forums like the International Monetary Fund. In January this year, Trump had announced to suspend all its security assistance to Pakistan. Last week, Pentagon said that so far it has suspended $1.66 billion in security assistance to Pakistan after Trump's January directive. But the United States has not been thinking about designating Pakistan a state sponsor of terrorism, a demand being made by several American lawmakers including those from the ruling Republican party. Currently four countries have been designated as state sponsor of terrorism. These are Iran, North Korea, Sudan and Syria. Recent media reports suggests that US is considering Venezuela in this list. However, in its latest Country Report on Terrorism, the State Department listed Pakistan among countries that provide safe havens to terrorists. President Trump and top US officials have expressed their frustration over the fact that Pakistan has not been taking concrete steps in this regard.

US looking at tools at its disposal to convince Pakistan to crack down on terrorist groups

Central Americans <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/crime-menaces-migrants-on-mexico-border-as-tijuana-declares-crisis-179208">in limbo at Mexico's border city of Tijuana</a> told Reuters they are still hoping to cross into the United States despite President Trump saying migrants at the US-Mexico border would stay in Mexico until their asylum claims were individually approved in US&nbsp;courts.

Olga Sanchez Cordero, the top domestic policy official for Mexican president-elect Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who takes office on Dec. 1, has said the incoming government was in talks with the United States on the migrant situation.

Mexico's incoming interior minister has denied any agreement had been made, despite Trump's tweet.

The plan, according to reports, foresees migrants staying in Mexico while their asylum claims in the United States are being processed, potentially ending a system Trump decries as "catch and release" that has until now often allowed those seeking refuge to wait on safer US&nbsp;soil.

For the thousands of migrants by the northern border, they told Reuters their plan to cross the border has not changed, despite the tough stance from the U.S. government.

Trump has been seeking to block thousands of Central Americans travelling in caravans from entering the United States, and has ordered that immigrants who enter the country illegally from Mexico are ineligible for asylum.

That order has been temporary suspended by a U.S. judge.

If Mexico were to assume "safe third country" status, asylum seekers would be required to claim refugee status in Mexico rather than the United States.

Migration activists have long argued that Mexico does not have the security conditions to offer safe haven for migrants feeling violence in Central America.

Central Americans in limbo at Mexico's border city of Tijuana told Reuters they are still hoping to cross into the United States despite President Trump saying migrants at the US-Mexico border would stay in Mexico until their asylum claims were individually approved in US courts.

Central Americans in limbo at Mexico's border city of Tijuana told Reuters they are still hoping to cross into the United States despite President Trump saying migrants at the US-Mexico border would stay in Mexico until their asylum claims were individually approved in US courts. Olga Sanchez Cordero, the top domestic policy official for Mexican president-elect Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who takes office on Dec. 1, has said the incoming government was in talks with the United States on the migrant situation. Mexico's incoming interior minister has denied any agreement had been made, despite Trump's tweet. The plan, according to reports, foresees migrants staying in Mexico while their asylum claims in the United States are being processed, potentially ending a system Trump decries as "catch and release" that has until now often allowed those seeking refuge to wait on safer US soil. For the thousands of migrants by the northern border, they told Reuters their plan to cross the border has not changed, despite the tough stance from the U.S. government. Trump has been seeking to block thousands of Central Americans travelling in caravans from entering the United States, and has ordered that immigrants who enter the country illegally from Mexico are ineligible for asylum. That order has been temporary suspended by a U.S. judge. If Mexico were to assume "safe third country" status, asylum seekers would be required to claim refugee status in Mexico rather than the United States. Migration activists have long argued that Mexico does not have the security conditions to offer safe haven for migrants feeling violence in Central America.

Migrants at US border say they will cross over despite Trump stance

Climate change to cost US billions

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/mexico-will-hold-us-bound-refugees-while-claims-processed-trump-179220">All migrants at </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/mexico-will-hold-us-bound-refugees-while-claims-processed-trump-179220">border</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/mexico-will-hold-us-bound-refugees-while-claims-processed-trump-179220"> to be held in Mexico while they're assessed: Trump</a>

Asylum seekers hoping to enter the US via its southern border will have to wait in Mexico while they are assessed, President Donald Trump announced Saturday, appearing to confirm a report about a bilateral deal published by The Washington Post.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/uks-may-pens-open-letter-to-britons-lauding-brexit-deal-179221">'A deal for a brighter future': Theresa May writes </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/uks-may-pens-open-letter-to-britons-lauding-brexit-deal-179221">open</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/uks-may-pens-open-letter-to-britons-lauding-brexit-deal-179221"> letter to Britons on Brexit deal</a>

British Prime Minister Theresa May wrote a "letter to the nation" Sunday vowing to campaign with "heart and soul" for her Brexit deal once EU leaders sign off on it this weekend.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/clashes-on-champs-elysees-as-french-protesters-rage-against-taxes-179223">'Shame' on you, Macron tells French fuel hike protesters</a>

Anti-government protesters clashed with French police on the Champs-Elysees in Paris on Saturday, leaving the area cloaked in tear gas and smoke from fires on a fresh day of demonstrations against President Emmanuel Macron.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/jk-4-terrorists-killed-in-encounter-with-security-forces-in-shopians-kapran-batagund-179227">J&amp;K: 4 terrorists killed in </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/jk-4-terrorists-killed-in-encounter-with-security-forces-in-shopians-kapran-batagund-179227">encounter</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/jk-4-terrorists-killed-in-encounter-with-security-forces-in-shopians-kapran-batagund-179227"> with security forces in Shopian's </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/jk-4-terrorists-killed-in-encounter-with-security-forces-in-shopians-kapran-batagund-179227">Kapran</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/jk-4-terrorists-killed-in-encounter-with-security-forces-in-shopians-kapran-batagund-179227"> Batagund</a>

An encounter between security forces and terrorists broke out in Kapran Batagund area of Jammu and Kashmir's Shopian district on Sunday.&nbsp;

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/lord-ram-statue-in-ayodhya-to-be-tallest-in-world-up-government-179232">Ram statue in Ayodhya to be tallest in the world: UP government</a>

Uttar Pradesh Principal Secretary (Information) Avanish Awasthi on Saturday said that the state government will install a 221-metre bronze statue of Lord Ram in Ayodhya.&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

All migrants at border to be held in Mexico while they're assessed: Trump Asylum seekers hoping to enter the US via its southern border will have to wait in Mexico while they are assessed, President Donald Trump announced Saturday, appearing to confirm a report about a bilateral deal published by The Washington Post.

All migrants at border to be held in Mexico while they're assessed: Trump Asylum seekers hoping to enter the US via its southern border will have to wait in Mexico while they are assessed, President Donald Trump announced Saturday, appearing to confirm a report about a bilateral deal published by The Washington Post. 'A deal for a brighter future': Theresa May writes open letter to Britons on Brexit deal British Prime Minister Theresa May wrote a "letter to the nation" Sunday vowing to campaign with "heart and soul" for her Brexit deal once EU leaders sign off on it this weekend. 'Shame' on you, Macron tells French fuel hike protesters Anti-government protesters clashed with French police on the Champs-Elysees in Paris on Saturday, leaving the area cloaked in tear gas and smoke from fires on a fresh day of demonstrations against President Emmanuel Macron. J&K: 4 terrorists killed in encounter with security forces in Shopian's Kapran Batagund An encounter between security forces and terrorists broke out in Kapran Batagund area of Jammu and Kashmir's Shopian district on Sunday. Ram statue in Ayodhya to be tallest in the world: UP government Uttar Pradesh Principal Secretary (Information) Avanish Awasthi on Saturday said that the state government will install a 221-metre bronze statue of Lord Ram in Ayodhya.

News brief: Big stories of the day

Asylum seekers hoping to enter the US via its <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/over-1500-caravan-migrants-arrive-at-us-border-177596">southern border</a> will have to wait in Mexico while they are assessed, President Donald Trump announced Saturday, appearing to confirm a report about a bilateral deal published by The Washington Post.

The move was cautiously welcomed by some refugees currently at the border, even as Mexico's incoming interior minister Olga Sanchez Cordero, who was quoted by the Post as confirming the agreement, later issued a denial.

"Migrants at the Southern Border will not be allowed into the United States until their claims are individually approved in court," Trump wrote on Twitter.

He added that the US "will allow those who come into our Country legally" and emphasized: "All will stay in Mexico."

The deal, which would overhaul US border policy, comes with Trump outraged over the presence of thousands of Central American migrants who marched to Mexico's border city of Tijuana hoping to enter the US for a better life free from the poverty and gang violence in their homelands.

"For now, we have agreed to this policy of Remain in Mexico," the Post quoted Sanchez Cordero as saying. The government of new President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador will enter office on December 1.

But her office later issued a statement saying: "There is no agreement of any type between the future federal government of Mexico and that of the United States of America."

Trump has sent almost 6,000 soldiers to the Mexican border in support of Customs and Border Protection agents and National Guard troops already there, to forestall what Trump has called an "invasion" by "very bad people."

After a trek of more than a month from Honduras, nearly 5,000 migrants -- including women and children -- are now in Tijuana living in a makeshift shelter.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Tcn7MoSzmlE" width="560"></iframe></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

A potential breakthrough

Trump "is within his right. He is in his government," but he is not like other presidents in his views of migrants, said a resident of the shelter, Carolina Flores, 38, of Honduras.

"He sees us as a bug that is going to eat there," she added. "We come for an opportunity!"

Another Honduran in the shelter, Orlinda Morales, 31, a housewife, said the reported new asylum rules seem "very good" because migrants will not be in limbo. "We will get work here," she said.

Hundreds of the migrants lined up this week at a special jobs fair set up for them in the manufacturing city, but others remain determined to reach the US.

No formal agreement has been signed, the Post said, but US officials view the deal, which would see would-be refugees' cases heard by US courts in Mexico, as a potential breakthrough in deterring migration.

US asylum officers will begin implementing the new procedures in coming days or weeks, Homeland Security officials cited by the Post said.

Asylum seekers will be given an initial screening to determine whether they face imminent danger by staying in Mexico, where violence is widespread.

Deportation to the homeland

American officials will be able to process at least twice as many asylum claims under the new system because they would not be limited by detention space at US ports of entry, the Post report said.

It added that under the new rules, an applicant whose asylum claim is denied would not be allowed to return to Mexico but would remain in US custody pending immediate deportation to his or her home country.

In a statement issued on Thursday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made no mention of a deal but said that he and Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen had "a constructive meeting" with Mexico's future foreign minister Marcelo Ebrard over the caravans.

"We have affirmed our shared commitment to addressing the current challenge. The caravans will not be permitted to enter the United States. There are real dangers to the safety and human rights of migrants from those who would prey on them," Pompeo said.

He added that he was looking forward to working with Mexico's new government, including on ways to spur job creation "to benefit the government and people of Mexico."

In 2018, border patrols registered more than 400,000 illegal crossers, according to Homeland Security, and in the last five years, the number of those requesting asylum has increased by 2,000 per cent.

Less than 10 per cent of cases result in asylum being granted, the government says.

Last week, a US federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from denying asylum to people who enter the country illegally.

The president issued a proclamation earlier this month saying that only people who enter the US at official checkpoints -- as opposed to sneaking across the border -- can apply for asylum.

&nbsp;

Asylum seekers hoping to enter the US via its southern border will have to wait in Mexico while they are assessed, President Donald Trump announced Saturday, appearing to confirm a report about a bilateral deal published by The Washington Post.

Asylum seekers hoping to enter the US via its southern border will have to wait in Mexico while they are assessed, President Donald Trump announced Saturday, appearing to confirm a report about a bilateral deal published by The Washington Post. The move was cautiously welcomed by some refugees currently at the border, even as Mexico's incoming interior minister Olga Sanchez Cordero, who was quoted by the Post as confirming the agreement, later issued a denial. "Migrants at the Southern Border will not be allowed into the United States until their claims are individually approved in court," Trump wrote on Twitter. He added that the US "will allow those who come into our Country legally" and emphasized: "All will stay in Mexico." The deal, which would overhaul US border policy, comes with Trump outraged over the presence of thousands of Central American migrants who marched to Mexico's border city of Tijuana hoping to enter the US for a better life free from the poverty and gang violence in their homelands. "For now, we have agreed to this policy of Remain in Mexico," the Post quoted Sanchez Cordero as saying. The government of new President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador will enter office on December 1. But her office later issued a statement saying: "There is no agreement of any type between the future federal government of Mexico and that of the United States of America." Trump has sent almost 6,000 soldiers to the Mexican border in support of Customs and Border Protection agents and National Guard troops already there, to forestall what Trump has called an "invasion" by "very bad people." After a trek of more than a month from Honduras, nearly 5,000 migrants -- including women and children -- are now in Tijuana living in a makeshift shelter. × A potential breakthrough Trump "is within his right. He is in his government," but he is not like other presidents in his views of migrants, said a resident of the shelter, Carolina Flores, 38, of Honduras. "He sees us as a bug that is going to eat there," she added. "We come for an opportunity!" Another Honduran in the shelter, Orlinda Morales, 31, a housewife, said the reported new asylum rules seem "very good" because migrants will not be in limbo. "We will get work here," she said. Hundreds of the migrants lined up this week at a special jobs fair set up for them in the manufacturing city, but others remain determined to reach the US. No formal agreement has been signed, the Post said, but US officials view the deal, which would see would-be refugees' cases heard by US courts in Mexico, as a potential breakthrough in deterring migration. US asylum officers will begin implementing the new procedures in coming days or weeks, Homeland Security officials cited by the Post said. Asylum seekers will be given an initial screening to determine whether they face imminent danger by staying in Mexico, where violence is widespread. Deportation to the homeland American officials will be able to process at least twice as many asylum claims under the new system because they would not be limited by detention space at US ports of entry, the Post report said. It added that under the new rules, an applicant whose asylum claim is denied would not be allowed to return to Mexico but would remain in US custody pending immediate deportation to his or her home country. In a statement issued on Thursday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made no mention of a deal but said that he and Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen had "a constructive meeting" with Mexico's future foreign minister Marcelo Ebrard over the caravans. "We have affirmed our shared commitment to addressing the current challenge. The caravans will not be permitted to enter the United States. There are real dangers to the safety and human rights of migrants from those who would prey on them," Pompeo said. He added that he was looking forward to working with Mexico's new government, including on ways to spur job creation "to benefit the government and people of Mexico." In 2018, border patrols registered more than 400,000 illegal crossers, according to Homeland Security, and in the last five years, the number of those requesting asylum has increased by 2,000 per cent. Less than 10 per cent of cases result in asylum being granted, the government says. Last week, a US federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from denying asylum to people who enter the country illegally. The president issued a proclamation earlier this month saying that only people who enter the US at official checkpoints -- as opposed to sneaking across the border -- can apply for asylum.

All migrants at border to be held in Mexico while they're assessed: Trump

When G20 world leaders met for the first time in 2008 their mission was a desperate one - to rescue the global economy from the worst financial crisis in more than 70 years. They were successful.

Ten years on, that picture of unity in the face of economic calamity is in the rear-view mirror. Leaders of the G20 industrialized nations meeting in Argentina next week are expected to struggle to agree on a joint statement on two of the biggest, and thorniest, global issues on their agenda - trade and climate change.

Officials in European and Asian capitals helping to prepare for the meeting said they were cautiously optimistic that a communique would be issued when the two-day meeting ends on December&nbsp;1.

But many said it would likely be watered down to try to ensure approval from US&nbsp;President Donald Trump, an avowed skeptic of man-made climate change who has adopted protectionist trade policies and a more isolationist foreign policy.

Recent history suggests those who draft the communique face a tough challenge when they begin their work in earnest in Buenos Aires on Monday.

Last weekend, officials from countries attending a major Asia-Pacific summit failed to agree on a joint communique for the first time as the United States clashed with China over trade and security.

In May Trump rejected a statement by fellow leaders of the G7 industrialized economies after a tense gathering ended in acrimony, again over tariffs and trade.

"It's a club that is even more difficult to manage than the G7," said a French diplomatic source. "Let's face it. The issues are difficult, the talks have been difficult since last year. It will be the case again this year, maybe even tougher."

It will be the first time the leaders have met since Trump imposed tariffs on $250 billion of Chinese imports to force concessions from Beijing on greater access to Chinese markets, forced technology transfer and intellectual property theft.

China responded with import tariffs on US&nbsp;goods.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) warned this week that an escalation in the trade war - the US&nbsp;tariff rate on $200 billion in Chinese goods is set to increase to 25 percent from 10 percent on January&nbsp;1 - would impede global economic growth.

Officials from some G20 countries, anxious to see a swift end to the US-China trade war, are hopeful but not confident that a meeting between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of G20 may yield at least a partial ceasefire.

But in the United States and China there is pessimism.

Within the White House there is uncertainty over how hard Trump is prepared to push Xi during their talks on trade and other disputes as the president sorts through sometimes conflicting advice from his own top aides, a senior Trump official said.

"Expectations (on the meeting) are low. But keeping the personal relationship going is an extremely high priority," the US&nbsp;official said, referring to Trump and Xi, who have sought to forge a close working relationship despite the tensions between their countries, the world's two biggest economies.

China's main goal at the G20 is to get the United States to refrain from raising the tariffs in January, said Chinese economists and academics. But Xi would not be bullied into making a bad deal.

"Even if they are able to reach a small agreement, the leaders of China and the United States cannot reach a fundamental agreement, so there would not be a ceasefire in the trade war," said Shi Yinhong, the head of the Center for American Studies at Beijing's elite Renmin University who has advised the Chinese government on diplomacy.

Trump said on Thursday he was well prepared for his meeting with Xi.

"It's not like, 'Oh gee, I'm going to sit down and study.' I know every ingredient. I know every stat. I know it better than anybody knows it. And my gut has always been right. And we're doing very well. And I will tell you China very much wants to make a deal."

Trump will also meet Russian President Vladimir Putin. The two leaders have not met face to face since a bilateral summit in July in Helsinki that prompted Trump critics to accuse him of cozying up to the Kremlin.

'No alternative'

G20 leaders are also expected to discuss reform of the World Trade Organization, but officials said it was unlikely any agreement would be reached.

The United States is increasingly skeptical of the WTO's ability to resolve international trade disputes. The European Union is also pushing to reform the body to make it better able to address modern trade problems.

European countries are anxious that the final communique refer to the fight against climate change, a senior European Union official said. Trump has announced his intention to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accord, casting doubt on the science underpinning the agreement.

Despite disagreements on key issues and the United States' growing skepticism about the usefulness of multilateral bodies, G20 members insist the forum remains an important opportunity for world leaders to meet and exchange views on pressing issues.

"Its existence itself helps us gather quickly and discuss key issues on a global level when needed," said a senior G20 official in Asia.

A senior German official involved in G20 preparations said Germany remained committed to G20 as a place for multilateral and bilateral discussions despite the current tensions.

"Sometimes you have to be patient. There is no alternative anyway than to try to work together," the official said.

When G20 world leaders met for the first time in 2008 their mission was a desperate one - to rescue the global economy from the worst financial crisis in more than 70 years.

When G20 world leaders met for the first time in 2008 their mission was a desperate one - to rescue the global economy from the worst financial crisis in more than 70 years. They were successful. Ten years on, that picture of unity in the face of economic calamity is in the rear-view mirror. Leaders of the G20 industrialized nations meeting in Argentina next week are expected to struggle to agree on a joint statement on two of the biggest, and thorniest, global issues on their agenda - trade and climate change. Officials in European and Asian capitals helping to prepare for the meeting said they were cautiously optimistic that a communique would be issued when the two-day meeting ends on December 1. But many said it would likely be watered down to try to ensure approval from US President Donald Trump, an avowed skeptic of man-made climate change who has adopted protectionist trade policies and a more isolationist foreign policy. Recent history suggests those who draft the communique face a tough challenge when they begin their work in earnest in Buenos Aires on Monday. Last weekend, officials from countries attending a major Asia-Pacific summit failed to agree on a joint communique for the first time as the United States clashed with China over trade and security. In May Trump rejected a statement by fellow leaders of the G7 industrialized economies after a tense gathering ended in acrimony, again over tariffs and trade. "It's a club that is even more difficult to manage than the G7," said a French diplomatic source. "Let's face it. The issues are difficult, the talks have been difficult since last year. It will be the case again this year, maybe even tougher." It will be the first time the leaders have met since Trump imposed tariffs on $250 billion of Chinese imports to force concessions from Beijing on greater access to Chinese markets, forced technology transfer and intellectual property theft. China responded with import tariffs on US goods. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) warned this week that an escalation in the trade war - the US tariff rate on $200 billion in Chinese goods is set to increase to 25 percent from 10 percent on January 1 - would impede global economic growth. Officials from some G20 countries, anxious to see a swift end to the US-China trade war, are hopeful but not confident that a meeting between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of G20 may yield at least a partial ceasefire. But in the United States and China there is pessimism. Within the White House there is uncertainty over how hard Trump is prepared to push Xi during their talks on trade and other disputes as the president sorts through sometimes conflicting advice from his own top aides, a senior Trump official said. "Expectations (on the meeting) are low. But keeping the personal relationship going is an extremely high priority," the US official said, referring to Trump and Xi, who have sought to forge a close working relationship despite the tensions between their countries, the world's two biggest economies. China's main goal at the G20 is to get the United States to refrain from raising the tariffs in January, said Chinese economists and academics. But Xi would not be bullied into making a bad deal. "Even if they are able to reach a small agreement, the leaders of China and the United States cannot reach a fundamental agreement, so there would not be a ceasefire in the trade war," said Shi Yinhong, the head of the Center for American Studies at Beijing's elite Renmin University who has advised the Chinese government on diplomacy. Trump said on Thursday he was well prepared for his meeting with Xi. "It's not like, 'Oh gee, I'm going to sit down and study.' I know every ingredient. I know every stat. I know it better than anybody knows it. And my gut has always been right. And we're doing very well. And I will tell you China very much wants to make a deal." Trump will also meet Russian President Vladimir Putin. The two leaders have not met face to face since a bilateral summit in July in Helsinki that prompted Trump critics to accuse him of cozying up to the Kremlin. 'No alternative' G20 leaders are also expected to discuss reform of the World Trade Organization, but officials said it was unlikely any agreement would be reached. The United States is increasingly skeptical of the WTO's ability to resolve international trade disputes. The European Union is also pushing to reform the body to make it better able to address modern trade problems. European countries are anxious that the final communique refer to the fight against climate change, a senior European Union official said. Trump has announced his intention to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accord, casting doubt on the science underpinning the agreement. Despite disagreements on key issues and the United States' growing skepticism about the usefulness of multilateral bodies, G20 members insist the forum remains an important opportunity for world leaders to meet and exchange views on pressing issues. "Its existence itself helps us gather quickly and discuss key issues on a global level when needed," said a senior G20 official in Asia. A senior German official involved in G20 preparations said Germany remained committed to G20 as a place for multilateral and bilateral discussions despite the current tensions. "Sometimes you have to be patient. There is no alternative anyway than to try to work together," the official said.

G20, forged in crisis, faces major test next week: Donald Trump

Climate change is already hurting the global economy and will cost the US hundreds of billions of dollars annually by century's end unless drastic action is taken to cut carbon emissions, a major US government report warned on Friday.

"With continued growth in emissions at historic rates, annual losses in some economic sectors are projected to reach hundreds of billions of dollars by the end of the century -- more than the current gross domestic product (GDP) of many US states," the latest edition of the National Climate Assessment said.

"Without substantial and sustained global mitigation and regional adaptation efforts, climate change is expected to cause growing losses to American infrastructure and property and impede the rate of economic growth over this century," it added.

The effects will spill over into global trade, affecting import and export prices and US businesses with overseas operations and supply chains, it added.

Some of these impacts are already being felt in the United States, the report said, and recent extreme weather and climate-related events can now be attributed "with increasingly higher confidence to human-caused warming."

Compiled by more than 300 scientists, the Fourth National Climate Assessment Volume II is a congressionally mandated report that spans more than 1,000 pages.

US President Donald Trump dismissed last year's report, and just this week appeared to confuse weather with climate when he tweeted: "Brutal and Extended Cold Blast could shatter ALL RECORDS - Whatever happened to Global Warming?"

Trump also yanked the United States out of the landmark 2015 Paris climate accord, signed by more than 190 nations to limit carbon emissions.

David Easterling, director of the technical support unit at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Centers for Environmental Information, said there had been "no external interference" in the report.

Scientists found "clear and compelling evidence that global average temperature is much higher and is rising more rapidly than anything modern civilization has experienced," he told reporters.

"And this warming trend can only be explained by human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere."

Cascading effects

Reporters questioned the timing of this year's release, which came on the Friday after Thanksgiving, a national holiday when many people are travelling and shopping.&nbsp;

A NOAA spokeswoman said the report was "out earlier than expected" and was released ahead of two major scientific meetings on climate change in the coming weeks.

Meanwhile, the report warned that even if major cuts are made to harmful greenhouse gases (GHGs) like carbon dioxide and methane, the damage will linger for years.

"Because several GHGs, in particular carbon dioxide, reside in the atmosphere for decades or longer, many climate-influenced effects are projected to continue changing through 2050, even if GHG emissions were to stop immediately," said the report.

Sea levels are continuing to rise, and extreme events like heavy rain and floods continue to increase worldwide, which will "cascade across economic sectors," Easterling said, warning of "substantial net damage to the US economy."

The report said it was "very likely that some physical and ecological impacts will be irreversible for thousands of years, while others will be permanent."

The publication is designed to inform policy makers but does not make any specific recommendations on actions to take.

"In light of the report's findings, it's critical that federal, state and local governments take aggressive action to protect US residents by both reigning in emissions and helping communities adapt to the climate impacts that are now inevitable," said Brenda Ekwurzel, the director of climate science at the Union of Concerned Scientists and one of the study's authors.

Rush Holt, chief executive officer of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, said the economic warning shows that "policymakers can no longer afford to dismiss or ignore the overwhelming scientific evidence of climate change."

Climate change is already hurting the global economy and will cost the US hundreds of billions of dollars annually by century's end unless drastic action is taken to cut carbon emissions, a major US government report warned on Friday.

Climate change is already hurting the global economy and will cost the US hundreds of billions of dollars annually by century's end unless drastic action is taken to cut carbon emissions, a major US government report warned on Friday. "With continued growth in emissions at historic rates, annual losses in some economic sectors are projected to reach hundreds of billions of dollars by the end of the century -- more than the current gross domestic product (GDP) of many US states," the latest edition of the National Climate Assessment said. "Without substantial and sustained global mitigation and regional adaptation efforts, climate change is expected to cause growing losses to American infrastructure and property and impede the rate of economic growth over this century," it added. The effects will spill over into global trade, affecting import and export prices and US businesses with overseas operations and supply chains, it added. Some of these impacts are already being felt in the United States, the report said, and recent extreme weather and climate-related events can now be attributed "with increasingly higher confidence to human-caused warming." Compiled by more than 300 scientists, the Fourth National Climate Assessment Volume II is a congressionally mandated report that spans more than 1,000 pages. US President Donald Trump dismissed last year's report, and just this week appeared to confuse weather with climate when he tweeted: "Brutal and Extended Cold Blast could shatter ALL RECORDS - Whatever happened to Global Warming?" Trump also yanked the United States out of the landmark 2015 Paris climate accord, signed by more than 190 nations to limit carbon emissions. David Easterling, director of the technical support unit at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Centers for Environmental Information, said there had been "no external interference" in the report. Scientists found "clear and compelling evidence that global average temperature is much higher and is rising more rapidly than anything modern civilization has experienced," he told reporters. "And this warming trend can only be explained by human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere." Cascading effects Reporters questioned the timing of this year's release, which came on the Friday after Thanksgiving, a national holiday when many people are travelling and shopping. A NOAA spokeswoman said the report was "out earlier than expected" and was released ahead of two major scientific meetings on climate change in the coming weeks. Meanwhile, the report warned that even if major cuts are made to harmful greenhouse gases (GHGs) like carbon dioxide and methane, the damage will linger for years. "Because several GHGs, in particular carbon dioxide, reside in the atmosphere for decades or longer, many climate-influenced effects are projected to continue changing through 2050, even if GHG emissions were to stop immediately," said the report. Sea levels are continuing to rise, and extreme events like heavy rain and floods continue to increase worldwide, which will "cascade across economic sectors," Easterling said, warning of "substantial net damage to the US economy." The report said it was "very likely that some physical and ecological impacts will be irreversible for thousands of years, while others will be permanent." The publication is designed to inform policy makers but does not make any specific recommendations on actions to take. "In light of the report's findings, it's critical that federal, state and local governments take aggressive action to protect US residents by both reigning in emissions and helping communities adapt to the climate impacts that are now inevitable," said Brenda Ekwurzel, the director of climate science at the Union of Concerned Scientists and one of the study's authors. Rush Holt, chief executive officer of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, said the economic warning shows that "policymakers can no longer afford to dismiss or ignore the overwhelming scientific evidence of climate change."

Climate change could cost US 'hundreds of billions' a year: Study

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump hinted on Thursday he may visit Afghanistan, scene of one of America's longest wars but a country he has yet to visit almost two years into his presidency.

Delivering a Thanksgiving holiday message by teleconference to troops in Afghanistan, Trump told a US&nbsp;Air Force general he would see him back in the United States, before adding: "Or maybe I'll even see you over there. You never know what's going to happen."

Recent US&nbsp;commanders-in-chief have routinely visited troops in active war zones. Trump has come under criticism for failing to do so, though Vice President Mike Pence made a surprise trip to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan last December to visit troops.

By this point in his presidency, former President Barack Obama had made a trip to Iraq and two to Afghanistan. Former President George W&nbsp;Bush travelled to Afghanistan twice and Iraq four times during his two terms in office.

Trump was criticized when he scrapped a planned visit to a major US&nbsp;military cemetery during a visit to Paris this month because his helicopter was grounded by bad weather during a trip that marked the 100th anniversary of the end of World War One.

Back in Washington on Veterans Day, he failed to visit Arlington National Cemetery, saying later that he was "extremely busy" but admitting that he should have.

Asked by a reporter whether he would visit a war zone, Trump said: "At the appropriate time, we`ll be doing some very interesting things."

He was then asked whether he knew the timing: "I do, but can't tell you. You're the last people I can tell," he told reporters.

Presidential trips to war zones are normally cloaked in secrecy for security reasons, revealed only when the commander in chiefs have landed, and sometimes only after they have safely left the region.

Responding to criticism that phoning the troops on Thanksgiving was not enough, Trump defended his actions, arguing that he had hiked spending on the military and veterans.

US&nbsp;Defense Secretary Jim Mattis on Wednesday was asked by reporters whether he thought Trump should visit troops in war zones.

"The president is the commander in chief and he decides where he needs to go. There are times I don`t want him in certain locations to be frank with you, for his security and the troops` security," Mattis said.

The United States has some 14,000 troops in Afghanistan, serving in the NATO-led Resolute Support training and advisory mission as well as in separate counter-terrorism operations against militant groups like Islamic State.

US&nbsp;troops arrived in Afghanistan in 2001 as part of the campaign to topple the Taliban following the September 11 attacks in the United States.

 
&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump hinted on Thursday he may visit Afghanistan, scene of one of America's longest wars but a country he has yet to visit almost two years into his presidency.

US President Donald Trump hinted on Thursday he may visit Afghanistan, scene of one of America's longest wars but a country he has yet to visit almost two years into his presidency. Delivering a Thanksgiving holiday message by teleconference to troops in Afghanistan, Trump told a US Air Force general he would see him back in the United States, before adding: "Or maybe I'll even see you over there. You never know what's going to happen." Recent US commanders-in-chief have routinely visited troops in active war zones. Trump has come under criticism for failing to do so, though Vice President Mike Pence made a surprise trip to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan last December to visit troops. By this point in his presidency, former President Barack Obama had made a trip to Iraq and two to Afghanistan. Former President George W Bush travelled to Afghanistan twice and Iraq four times during his two terms in office. Trump was criticized when he scrapped a planned visit to a major US military cemetery during a visit to Paris this month because his helicopter was grounded by bad weather during a trip that marked the 100th anniversary of the end of World War One. Back in Washington on Veterans Day, he failed to visit Arlington National Cemetery, saying later that he was "extremely busy" but admitting that he should have. Asked by a reporter whether he would visit a war zone, Trump said: "At the appropriate time, we`ll be doing some very interesting things." He was then asked whether he knew the timing: "I do, but can't tell you. You're the last people I can tell," he told reporters. Presidential trips to war zones are normally cloaked in secrecy for security reasons, revealed only when the commander in chiefs have landed, and sometimes only after they have safely left the region. Responding to criticism that phoning the troops on Thanksgiving was not enough, Trump defended his actions, arguing that he had hiked spending on the military and veterans. US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis on Wednesday was asked by reporters whether he thought Trump should visit troops in war zones. "The president is the commander in chief and he decides where he needs to go. There are times I don`t want him in certain locations to be frank with you, for his security and the troops` security," Mattis said. The United States has some 14,000 troops in Afghanistan, serving in the NATO-led Resolute Support training and advisory mission as well as in separate counter-terrorism operations against militant groups like Islamic State. US troops arrived in Afghanistan in 2001 as part of the campaign to topple the Taliban following the September 11 attacks in the United States.

Trump hints at visiting Afghanistan during Thanksgiving message to US general

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/migrants-attempt-to-cross-border-as-trump-threatens-to-temporarily-close-us-mexico-border-178865">Migrants attempt to </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/migrants-attempt-to-cross-border-as-trump-threatens-to-temporarily-close-us-mexico-border-178865">cross </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/migrants-attempt-to-cross-border-as-trump-threatens-to-temporarily-close-us-mexico-border-178865">border</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/migrants-attempt-to-cross-border-as-trump-threatens-to-temporarily-close-us-mexico-border-178865"> as Trump threatens to temporarily close US-Mexico border</a>

As President Trump threatened to close the US-Mexico border, hundreds of Central American migrants walked towards Tijuana San Ysidro crossing point from Tijuana into California as tensions mounted over the asylum issue in the US border town.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/sports/womens-t20-2018-semi-final-england-thrash-india-178881">Women's T20 2018: England thrash India in </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/sports/womens-t20-2018-semi-final-england-thrash-india-178881">semi-final</a>

England Women outclassed Indian Women to enter the final of Women's World T20 2018 by registering an easy win against 'Women in Blue' at Antigua's Sir Vivian Richards Stadium.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/jammu-and-kashmir-encounter-underway-in-anantnag-2-3-terrorist-trapped-178862">J&amp;K: 6 terrorists gunned down in Anantnag encounter; search operation is still on</a>

An encounter broke out between security forces and terrorist on Friday in Jammu and Kashmir's Anantnag district.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/pakistan-again-stops-indian-officials-from-entering-gurudwara-in-lahore-178872">Pakistan again stops Indian officials from entering Gurudwara in Lahore</a>

Pakistan once again stopped Indian High Commission officials from meeting India pilgrims visiting gurudwara Sacha Sauda In Farooqabad near Lahore.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/us-tourists-death-in-andaman-3-accused-taken-into-police-custody-178874">US tourist's death in Andaman: 3 accused taken into police custody</a>

Three of seven fishermen who were arrested earlier in the day in connection with the alleged killing of American Tourist John Allen Chau were taken into police custody on Thursday.

&nbsp;

Migrants attempt to cross border as Trump threatens to temporarily close US-Mexico border As President Trump threatened to close the US-Mexico border, hundreds of Central American migrants walked towards Tijuana San Ysidro crossing point from Tijuana into California as tensions mounted over the asylum issue in the US border town.

Migrants attempt to cross border as Trump threatens to temporarily close US-Mexico border As President Trump threatened to close the US-Mexico border, hundreds of Central American migrants walked towards Tijuana San Ysidro crossing point from Tijuana into California as tensions mounted over the asylum issue in the US border town. Women's T20 2018: England thrash India in semi-final England Women outclassed Indian Women to enter the final of Women's World T20 2018 by registering an easy win against 'Women in Blue' at Antigua's Sir Vivian Richards Stadium. J&K: 6 terrorists gunned down in Anantnag encounter; search operation is still on An encounter broke out between security forces and terrorist on Friday in Jammu and Kashmir's Anantnag district. Pakistan again stops Indian officials from entering Gurudwara in Lahore Pakistan once again stopped Indian High Commission officials from meeting India pilgrims visiting gurudwara Sacha Sauda In Farooqabad near Lahore. US tourist's death in Andaman: 3 accused taken into police custody Three of seven fishermen who were arrested earlier in the day in connection with the alleged killing of American Tourist John Allen Chau were taken into police custody on Thursday.

The US government on Friday will issue a new report detailing the threat climate change poses to the economy, in what is expected to be a dire warning at odds with the Trump administration’s pro-fossil fuels agenda.

The congressionally mandated report, written with the help of more than a dozen US government agencies and departments, will supplement a study issued last year that concluded humans are the main driver of global warming, and warned of potentially catastrophic effects to the planet.

"It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century," according to that report. "There is no convincing alternative explanation ...”

This year`s report is expected to detail the costs of climate change and provide scientific assessments of the risks and the extent to which people can adapt to it.&nbsp;

The report is expected clash with policy under President Donald Trump, who has been rolling back environmental and climate protections to maximize production of domestic fossil fuels, including crude oil, already the highest in the world above Saudi Arabia and Russia.

Trump last year announced his intention to withdraw the United States from the 2015 Paris Deal agreed by nearly 200 nations to combat climate change, arguing the accord would hurt the US economy and provide little tangible environmental benefit. Under the Paris pact`s rules, however, Trump can not officially withdraw from the agreement until after the 2020 US presidential election. The US government still sends delegations to UN climate negotiations.

Trump and several members of his cabinet have also repeatedly cast doubt on the science of climate change, saying the causes are not yet settled.&nbsp; 
That is despite the fact an overwhelming majority of climate scientists around the globe agree that the burning of fossil fuels drives global warming, and is leading to rising seas, flooding, droughts, and more frequent powerful storms.

Previous research, including from US government scientists, has concluded that climate change could have severe economic consequences, including damage to infrastructure, water supplies and agriculture.&nbsp;

Severe weather and other impacts also increase the risk of disease transmission, decrease air quality, and can increase mental health problems, among other effects, according to US and international studies.

Thirteen government departments and agencies, from the Agriculture Department to NASA, were part of the committee that compiled the new report.&nbsp;

The US government on Friday will issue a new report detailing the threat climate change poses to the economy, in what is expected to be a dire warning at odds with the Trump administration’s pro-fossil fuels agenda.

The US government on Friday will issue a new report detailing the threat climate change poses to the economy, in what is expected to be a dire warning at odds with the Trump administration’s pro-fossil fuels agenda. The congressionally mandated report, written with the help of more than a dozen US government agencies and departments, will supplement a study issued last year that concluded humans are the main driver of global warming, and warned of potentially catastrophic effects to the planet. "It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century," according to that report. "There is no convincing alternative explanation ...” This year`s report is expected to detail the costs of climate change and provide scientific assessments of the risks and the extent to which people can adapt to it. The report is expected clash with policy under President Donald Trump, who has been rolling back environmental and climate protections to maximize production of domestic fossil fuels, including crude oil, already the highest in the world above Saudi Arabia and Russia. Trump last year announced his intention to withdraw the United States from the 2015 Paris Deal agreed by nearly 200 nations to combat climate change, arguing the accord would hurt the US economy and provide little tangible environmental benefit. Under the Paris pact`s rules, however, Trump can not officially withdraw from the agreement until after the 2020 US presidential election. The US government still sends delegations to UN climate negotiations. Trump and several members of his cabinet have also repeatedly cast doubt on the science of climate change, saying the causes are not yet settled. That is despite the fact an overwhelming majority of climate scientists around the globe agree that the burning of fossil fuels drives global warming, and is leading to rising seas, flooding, droughts, and more frequent powerful storms. Previous research, including from US government scientists, has concluded that climate change could have severe economic consequences, including damage to infrastructure, water supplies and agriculture. Severe weather and other impacts also increase the risk of disease transmission, decrease air quality, and can increase mental health problems, among other effects, according to US and international studies. Thirteen government departments and agencies, from the Agriculture Department to NASA, were part of the committee that compiled the new report.

US report to detail costs of climate change as Trump downplays threat

US president Donald Trump may visit Afghanistan

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump said on Thursday the United States was "in very strong" peace negotiations in Afghanistan but he did not known whether they would be successful.

"I really think the people of Afghanistan ... are tired of fighting," Trump told reporters after delivering a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/donald-trump-hints-could-make-first-visit-to-afghanistan-178908">Thanksgiving holiday message</a> to US&nbsp;troops in Afghanistan, scene of one of America's longest-ever wars.

"We are talking about peace and we'll see if that happens ... We have negotiations going on. I don't know that they are going to be successful, probably they're not. Who knows? They might be, they might not be."

Trump was speaking after Taliban leaders met with US&nbsp;special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad at their political headquarters in Qatar last week for the second time in the past month.

Khalilzad said on Sunday he hoped to reach a peace deal by April 20, a deadline that coincides with the date set for presidential elections in Afghanistan.

However, the Taliban said their three-day meeting with Khalilzad to pave the way for peace talks ended with no agreement on any issue and they had not accepted any deadline set by the United States to wrap up talks.

Khalilzad's public statement that the Taliban believe they will "not win militarily" apparently angered senior members of the group, who warned US&nbsp;officials against mixed messages that could muddle the peace process.

US&nbsp;troops invaded Afghanistan in 2001 as part of a campaign to topple the Taliban following the Sept. 11 attacks in the United States. Some 14,000 US&nbsp;personnel are still there.

The Taliban have strengthened their grip over the past three years, with the government in Kabul controlling just 56 per cent of Afghanistan, down from 72 per cent in 2015, a US&nbsp;government report showed this month.

Two senior US officials confirmed this week that a second round of peace talks ended last week and the Taliban expected Khalilzad to visit Qatar for a meeting before the end of 2018.

Trump hinted he may go to Afghanistan, a country he has yet to visit almost two years into his presidency, even though previous US&nbsp;commanders-in-chief have routinely visited troops in active war zones.

Trump told troops in the teleconference that while they were fighting, he was taking tough action to secure the southern borders of the United States from illegal immigration.

"You are doing it over there; we are doing it over here," he said.

"We have a very powerful border now ... We took old broken wall and we wrapped it with barbed wire plus ... nobody is getting through these walls and we're going to make sure they're the right people because that's what you and your family want," he said.

"That's why we're all fighting – you know, we're fighting for borders, we're fighting for our country."

US President Donald Trump said on Thursday the United States was "in very strong" peace negotiations in Afghanistan but he did not known whether they would be successful.

US President Donald Trump said on Thursday the United States was "in very strong" peace negotiations in Afghanistan but he did not known whether they would be successful. "I really think the people of Afghanistan ... are tired of fighting," Trump told reporters after delivering a Thanksgiving holiday message to US troops in Afghanistan, scene of one of America's longest-ever wars. "We are talking about peace and we'll see if that happens ... We have negotiations going on. I don't know that they are going to be successful, probably they're not. Who knows? They might be, they might not be." Trump was speaking after Taliban leaders met with US special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad at their political headquarters in Qatar last week for the second time in the past month. Khalilzad said on Sunday he hoped to reach a peace deal by April 20, a deadline that coincides with the date set for presidential elections in Afghanistan. However, the Taliban said their three-day meeting with Khalilzad to pave the way for peace talks ended with no agreement on any issue and they had not accepted any deadline set by the United States to wrap up talks. Khalilzad's public statement that the Taliban believe they will "not win militarily" apparently angered senior members of the group, who warned US officials against mixed messages that could muddle the peace process. US troops invaded Afghanistan in 2001 as part of a campaign to topple the Taliban following the Sept. 11 attacks in the United States. Some 14,000 US personnel are still there. The Taliban have strengthened their grip over the past three years, with the government in Kabul controlling just 56 per cent of Afghanistan, down from 72 per cent in 2015, a US government report showed this month. Two senior US officials confirmed this week that a second round of peace talks ended last week and the Taliban expected Khalilzad to visit Qatar for a meeting before the end of 2018. Trump hinted he may go to Afghanistan, a country he has yet to visit almost two years into his presidency, even though previous US commanders-in-chief have routinely visited troops in active war zones. Trump told troops in the teleconference that while they were fighting, he was taking tough action to secure the southern borders of the United States from illegal immigration. "You are doing it over there; we are doing it over here," he said. "We have a very powerful border now ... We took old broken wall and we wrapped it with barbed wire plus ... nobody is getting through these walls and we're going to make sure they're the right people because that's what you and your family want," he said. "That's why we're all fighting – you know, we're fighting for borders, we're fighting for our country."

Trump says US in 'very strong' negotiations in Afghanistan

By Tom Engelhardt

Face it: It’s been an abusive time, to use a word he likes to wield. In his telling, of course, it’s he or his people who are always the abused ones, and they — the “fake news media” — are the abusers. But let’s be honest. You’ve been abused, too, and so have I. All of us have and by that same fake news media.

It isn’t complicated, really. Thanks to them, to those cable news talking heads who never stop yammering about him, to the reporters who clamour over his every word or twitch, he’s always there, 24/7. I know that it’s still called covering the news, but it’s a phrase that no longer faintly fits the situation. Yes, a near majority of Americans voted for him as president, but no one voted to make him a living (and living-room) icon, a never-ending presence not just in our world, but in all our private worlds, too.

Never, not ever, has a single human being been so inescapable. You can’t turn on TV news, read a newspaper, listen to the radio, wander on social media or do much of anything else without almost instantly bumping into or tripping over him — attacking them, praising himself, telling you how wonderful or terrible he feels and how much he loves or loathes. Well, whatever happens, to be ever so briefly on his mind that very moment.

And if that isn’t really almost too obvious to write down, then what is? Still, just briefly, let’s try to take in the obvious. Let me put it this way: never, not since Adam or certainly Nebuchadnezzar, not to speak of Eve or Cleopatra, has anyone in history been so unrelentingly focused upon or mercilessly covered, so, in a sense, fawned upon — and, of course, “abused”. In the past, I’ve labelled what we’re living through “the white Ford Bronco presidency” because, for the last nearly three years, the media has covered him as if he were indeed O.J. Simpson in that car fleeing the police over his wife’s murder, as if, that is, there was nothing else on Earth worth gluing our eyeballs to, and not as in O.J.’s case for a relatively few hours, but for what already seems like an eternity.

In a way, this is the simplest piece I’ve ever written, because whoever you are, wherever you live in this country (or possibly on the planet), whatever you think of him, positive or negative, you already know all of this. You’ve already discussed it with your friends. You’ve certainly wondered what would happen if the mainstream media suddenly stopped attending to Donald Trump. Oh yes, I hadn’t mentioned his name until now, because why bother? You never had a doubt, did you?

The Unthinkable

My guess on the effect of such a withdrawal of coverage: He’d shrivel up and die. Your guess may be different, but it doesn’t matter because we’re clearly never going to find out. Even the recent presidential decision to take away CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta’s press pass — with the doctored video of his behavior and all — after a distinctly abusive press conference (“I’ll tell you what: CNN should be ashamed of itself having you working for them. You are a rude, terrible person. You shouldn’t be working for CNN”), was only the cause for yet another deluge of coverage.

None of Acosta’s media compatriots, not even at CNN, decided, for instance, to protest by refusing to cover another White House event until he got that pass back, though CNN is suing the Trump administration. None of them evidently even seriously considered closing the door, shutting the gate, turning their backs on you-know-who. That clearly is 21st-century media version of thinking about the unthinkable.

Honestly, who doesn’t talk about all this in the face of a presidency that’s in your face, all our faces, in a way that no other president, emperor, king, autocrat, dictator, movie star, celebrity or — feel free to fill in whatever I haven’t thought of here — has ever before been. His every phrase, tweet, complaint, bit of praise, parenthetical comment, angry snit, insult, or even policy decision is reported, discussed, gnawed on, considered, reconsidered, yakked about nonstop, hour after hour after endless hour, reshown in clip after repetitive clip. This is, in short, a unique historical experience of ours and ours alone. How could we not talk about it all the time?

Oh wait! Oddly enough, in case you hadn’t noticed, there’s one place where it’s barely talked about at all, where silence largely reigns, and to my mind that couldn’t be stranger. Here’s the only catch in the non-stop coverage of Donald J. Trump (2015 to 2018 and beyond): That same mainstream media that can’t get enough of him, that eats up and gnaws on his every odd phrase, gesture, act or passing thought is essentially silent on only one thing — the coverage itself.

The most obvious subject in the world — not him, but the thing that keeps him going, that keeps the whole ship of state more or less afloat at this point — the unprecedented focus on him just doesn’t seem to be a subject fit for significant coverage, even though it’s a commonplace in our conversations out here in what still passes for the real world. We may regularly roll our eyes, but the mainstream media programmatically never does. Not in public anyway. And as was true from the beginning of the Trump era, from The New York Times and Politico to The Atlantic magazine, media outfits have hired yet more people to cover — well, Donald Trump (and not just from Washington either) and ploughed right on.

But do they cover themselves? Hardly. Media critics inside those mainstream companies have become an ever rarer species. The New York Times, for instance, let go of its “public editor” in May 2017 and left it to perhaps random tweeters to handle how the paper was covering anything. And that’s been typical. Or put another way: There’s really only one media critic left in the mainstream world — and you know just who he is! (A typical tweeted comment of his: “A very big part of the Anger we see today in our society is caused by the purposely false and inaccurate reporting of the Mainstream Media that I refer to as Fake News. It has gotten so bad and hateful that it is beyond description. Mainstream Media must clean up its act, FAST!”)

And sometimes that criticism couldn’t be more personal. (“Loser,” he recently called White House reporter April Ryan. “What a stupid question that is,” he said to CNN’s Abby Phillip. “What a stupid question. But I watch you a lot, you ask a lot of stupid questions.”) I’m referring, of course, to America’s media-critic-in-chief now in residence in Washington, DC, when, of course, he isn’t out in the provinces getting a little love from his adoring “base” in those endless rallies for the midterm elections and, of course, the ones for the 2020 campaign, which began long ago.

And naturally enough, the “fake news” reporters can’t cover those rallies enough or discuss them and what he says at them more often. But again, there’s one catch, one lacuna, in all this. They almost never cover Donald J. Trump’s rally of rallies in that same analytical and dissecting fashion. I’m thinking, of course, of the rallies that truly keep him going, and by that I mean his endless set of interactions with — yep, the media. After all, without being eternally in their glowing spotlight, without that endless coverage of everything him, what would he be?

The Media Critic-in-Chief

In a sense, those hordes of reporters crowding into his world are his most adoring fans (even if many of them may loathe him personally). They may not literally bathe him in love (as his fans in those stadiums do), but they certainly bathe him in what he loves most, what clearly keeps him up and running — attention. And from each of those media “rallies” of his, however small, however impromptu, however angry or insulting, no matter the nature of the words exchanged, he clearly comes away feeling clean as a new born babe (though they perhaps feel dirty as, well, who knows what).

It may not be a love affair, but it certainly is an affair to remember. And despite the fact that his official news conferences may be rare, he manages to meet the press (to use a thoroughly outmoded phrase) constantly and in ways too numerous to mention. I’m sure you won’t be surprised to learn that he’s taken more questions from reporters — even if he’s regularly mangled and shredded them — than all our recent presidents (except that other classic narcissist, Bill Clinton).

Being the canny self-promoter that he is, Donald Trump knows the value of those exchanges, no matter their nature. He knows that the specifics of what the media may write or say about him matter remarkably little, as long as they cover him in this totalistic fashion, as long as they never stop bathing him in his own ultimate form of glory. They are, as he would be the first to tell you, his “earned media.” In fact, just the other day at his post-election news conference, he had this little exchange with a reporter:

“Q: Mr. President, first off, I personally think it’s very good to have you here because a free press and this type of engagement—”

“The President: I do, too. Actually? I do, too.”

“Q: Yes. It’s vital to democracy.”

“The President: It’s called ‘earned media.’ It’s worth billions. Go ahead.”

Let’s be clear: Donald Trump is no fool. He knows that he’s got not just a knack but the knack for accruing “earned media” — that is, unpaid for publicity and advertising. Estimates were that he got a staggering $5.6 billion of it during his 2015-2016 election campaign and, exactly as he implied in that knowing aside, it’s never ended. And yes, it is “vital” to him, if not to “democracy.” Think of him, in fact, as President Earned Media.

Since we are talking about a mutual affair, however, the opposite is also true: Donald Trump is the media’s version of, at the risk of being completely repetitious, earned media. No one’s put it better than former CBS head Leslie Moonves — recently taken down by the #MeToo moment — during the 2016 election campaign. “It may not be good for America,” he said, “but it’s damn good for CBS.” He added, “The money’s rolling in and this is fun. I’ve never seen anything like this, and this [is] going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It’s a terrible thing to say. But bring it on, Donald. Keep going.” And, as we all know, Donald did.

Keep in mind that the media had been thrown into chaos and confusion by the growth of the online world of the internet, as many news businesses faltered and staff cuts were widespread. How convenient, then, to stumble upon such genuine human clickbait, someone on whom you could focus your attention so relatively cheaply and profitably. So much for covering the world, a distinctly expensive proposition. Talk about bargain basement candidacies and presidencies.

From the moment he descended that escalator in Trump Tower in June 2015, Donald Trump became the media equivalent of a freebie — someone viewers and readers just couldn’t help watching, hearing about, reading about. It was like stumbling on a gold mine in the desert. As it turned out, Americans were indeed ready to have the talking heads of CNN (now the president’s eternal punching bag), MSNBC and Fox News yammer on hour after hour, day after day about him and only him. It was, in its own way, a genuine miracle for news companies that had found themselves up against the wall, and it couldn’t have been more real, or — as, at some level, Donald Trump himself grasped — more fake.

Quite A Performance

Put it all together and you can understand how a major Trump rally — oops, I mean that post-election news conference of his — actually worked. But first let me take a moment, in truly Trumpian fashion, to thank myself on your behalf. Like you, I watched clips of that news conference. Then I did all of you a favour and actually read the whole 17,000-plus words of it, one hour and 26 minutes worth of his and their words, so you wouldn’t have to.

And believe me, it was quite a performance as the president called on or ignored reporters desperate to get his attention, insulted them, spoke with them, spoke against them, spoke over them (“We are a hot country. This is a hot White House”), spoke around them, described them (“I come in here as a nice person wanting to answer questions and I have people jumping out of there seats, screaming questions at me”), wandered away from them, wandered away from himself, ignored or didn’t answer their questions, was incoherent for significant stretches of time, or couldn’t even hold onto a thought. And by the way, the reporters there more than matched him (“One, I was tempted to ask you why you like Oprah so much, but I think I’ll go on to the question that”), blow for blowhard (“Based off of that, how would you say, over the last two years, God plays — what kind of a factor He plays in the day-to-day execution of the Office of the Presidency?”).

Read the whole thing and you’d have to be struck — even by the less-than-soaring standards of past presidential news conferences — by how little (with a bow to Gertrude Stein) there there actually was there. The president’s incoherence was remarkably well matched by the dreariness of the generally expectable, largely thought-free questions he was asked on a limited set of topics.

As always, though, there were those Trumpian moments that aren’t likely to leave your head soon thereafter. There was, for instance, the exchange in which the president called on PBS’s Yamiche Alcindor, a relatively rare black reporter in that room. She began her question this way, “On the campaign trail, you called yourself a nationalist. Some people saw that as emboldening white nationalists. Now people are also saying…”

At that point, the president promptly interrupted to respond: “I don’t know why you’d say that. That’s such a racist question.” (Something he’d then repeat twice more.) The pure chutzpah of that response should have taken anyone’s breath away, but it was also a reminder of the strange sense of freedom Trump feels to say anything in the presence of the media, including mocking or insulting three black female reporters at that news conference. And this can only happen again and again and again. It’s hard not to feel that we are all now eternally watching two sets of addicts who simply can’t exist without or get enough of each other.

Toward the end of that news conference, one of the reporters began a question (also focused on white nationalism) this way: “Thank you, sir. And I think we’d all love to have more of these, if you’re willing…”

It tells us so much about our 21st-century Trumpian world that anyone in that press corps would wish for more of the same. I have a feeling that somewhere in all of this someone, maybe Bob Mueller, should indict all of them for fraud. In the meantime, the rest of us remain in a world wallpapered with Donald Trump, a world in which the fake news media, which is his truest “base,” just can’t get enough of him. 
 
(The author is&nbsp;co-founder of the American Empire Project and runs TomDispatch.com)

(This article was originally published on Fair Observer. Read the <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/region/north_america/donald-trump-media-fake-news-cnn-jim-accosta-us-politics-news-10920/">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

By Tom Engelhardt Face it: It’s been an abusive time, to use a word he likes to wield. In his telling, of course, it’s he or his people who are always the abused ones, and they — the “fake news media” — are the abusers.

By Tom Engelhardt Face it: It’s been an abusive time, to use a word he likes to wield. In his telling, of course, it’s he or his people who are always the abused ones, and they — the “fake news media” — are the abusers. But let’s be honest. You’ve been abused, too, and so have I. All of us have and by that same fake news media. It isn’t complicated, really. Thanks to them, to those cable news talking heads who never stop yammering about him, to the reporters who clamour over his every word or twitch, he’s always there, 24/7. I know that it’s still called covering the news, but it’s a phrase that no longer faintly fits the situation. Yes, a near majority of Americans voted for him as president, but no one voted to make him a living (and living-room) icon, a never-ending presence not just in our world, but in all our private worlds, too. Never, not ever, has a single human being been so inescapable. You can’t turn on TV news, read a newspaper, listen to the radio, wander on social media or do much of anything else without almost instantly bumping into or tripping over him — attacking them, praising himself, telling you how wonderful or terrible he feels and how much he loves or loathes. Well, whatever happens, to be ever so briefly on his mind that very moment. And if that isn’t really almost too obvious to write down, then what is? Still, just briefly, let’s try to take in the obvious. Let me put it this way: never, not since Adam or certainly Nebuchadnezzar, not to speak of Eve or Cleopatra, has anyone in history been so unrelentingly focused upon or mercilessly covered, so, in a sense, fawned upon — and, of course, “abused”. In the past, I’ve labelled what we’re living through “the white Ford Bronco presidency” because, for the last nearly three years, the media has covered him as if he were indeed O.J. Simpson in that car fleeing the police over his wife’s murder, as if, that is, there was nothing else on Earth worth gluing our eyeballs to, and not as in O.J.’s case for a relatively few hours, but for what already seems like an eternity. In a way, this is the simplest piece I’ve ever written, because whoever you are, wherever you live in this country (or possibly on the planet), whatever you think of him, positive or negative, you already know all of this. You’ve already discussed it with your friends. You’ve certainly wondered what would happen if the mainstream media suddenly stopped attending to Donald Trump. Oh yes, I hadn’t mentioned his name until now, because why bother? You never had a doubt, did you? The Unthinkable My guess on the effect of such a withdrawal of coverage: He’d shrivel up and die. Your guess may be different, but it doesn’t matter because we’re clearly never going to find out. Even the recent presidential decision to take away CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta’s press pass — with the doctored video of his behavior and all — after a distinctly abusive press conference (“I’ll tell you what: CNN should be ashamed of itself having you working for them. You are a rude, terrible person. You shouldn’t be working for CNN”), was only the cause for yet another deluge of coverage. None of Acosta’s media compatriots, not even at CNN, decided, for instance, to protest by refusing to cover another White House event until he got that pass back, though CNN is suing the Trump administration. None of them evidently even seriously considered closing the door, shutting the gate, turning their backs on you-know-who. That clearly is 21st-century media version of thinking about the unthinkable. Honestly, who doesn’t talk about all this in the face of a presidency that’s in your face, all our faces, in a way that no other president, emperor, king, autocrat, dictator, movie star, celebrity or — feel free to fill in whatever I haven’t thought of here — has ever before been. His every phrase, tweet, complaint, bit of praise, parenthetical comment, angry snit, insult, or even policy decision is reported, discussed, gnawed on, considered, reconsidered, yakked about nonstop, hour after hour after endless hour, reshown in clip after repetitive clip. This is, in short, a unique historical experience of ours and ours alone. How could we not talk about it all the time? Oh wait! Oddly enough, in case you hadn’t noticed, there’s one place where it’s barely talked about at all, where silence largely reigns, and to my mind that couldn’t be stranger. Here’s the only catch in the non-stop coverage of Donald J. Trump (2015 to 2018 and beyond): That same mainstream media that can’t get enough of him, that eats up and gnaws on his every odd phrase, gesture, act or passing thought is essentially silent on only one thing — the coverage itself. The most obvious subject in the world — not him, but the thing that keeps him going, that keeps the whole ship of state more or less afloat at this point — the unprecedented focus on him just doesn’t seem to be a subject fit for significant coverage, even though it’s a commonplace in our conversations out here in what still passes for the real world. We may regularly roll our eyes, but the mainstream media programmatically never does. Not in public anyway. And as was true from the beginning of the Trump era, from The New York Times and Politico to The Atlantic magazine, media outfits have hired yet more people to cover — well, Donald Trump (and not just from Washington either) and ploughed right on. But do they cover themselves? Hardly. Media critics inside those mainstream companies have become an ever rarer species. The New York Times, for instance, let go of its “public editor” in May 2017 and left it to perhaps random tweeters to handle how the paper was covering anything. And that’s been typical. Or put another way: There’s really only one media critic left in the mainstream world — and you know just who he is! (A typical tweeted comment of his: “A very big part of the Anger we see today in our society is caused by the purposely false and inaccurate reporting of the Mainstream Media that I refer to as Fake News. It has gotten so bad and hateful that it is beyond description. Mainstream Media must clean up its act, FAST!”) And sometimes that criticism couldn’t be more personal. (“Loser,” he recently called White House reporter April Ryan. “What a stupid question that is,” he said to CNN’s Abby Phillip. “What a stupid question. But I watch you a lot, you ask a lot of stupid questions.”) I’m referring, of course, to America’s media-critic-in-chief now in residence in Washington, DC, when, of course, he isn’t out in the provinces getting a little love from his adoring “base” in those endless rallies for the midterm elections and, of course, the ones for the 2020 campaign, which began long ago. And naturally enough, the “fake news” reporters can’t cover those rallies enough or discuss them and what he says at them more often. But again, there’s one catch, one lacuna, in all this. They almost never cover Donald J. Trump’s rally of rallies in that same analytical and dissecting fashion. I’m thinking, of course, of the rallies that truly keep him going, and by that I mean his endless set of interactions with — yep, the media. After all, without being eternally in their glowing spotlight, without that endless coverage of everything him, what would he be? The Media Critic-in-Chief In a sense, those hordes of reporters crowding into his world are his most adoring fans (even if many of them may loathe him personally). They may not literally bathe him in love (as his fans in those stadiums do), but they certainly bathe him in what he loves most, what clearly keeps him up and running — attention. And from each of those media “rallies” of his, however small, however impromptu, however angry or insulting, no matter the nature of the words exchanged, he clearly comes away feeling clean as a new born babe (though they perhaps feel dirty as, well, who knows what). It may not be a love affair, but it certainly is an affair to remember. And despite the fact that his official news conferences may be rare, he manages to meet the press (to use a thoroughly outmoded phrase) constantly and in ways too numerous to mention. I’m sure you won’t be surprised to learn that he’s taken more questions from reporters — even if he’s regularly mangled and shredded them — than all our recent presidents (except that other classic narcissist, Bill Clinton). Being the canny self-promoter that he is, Donald Trump knows the value of those exchanges, no matter their nature. He knows that the specifics of what the media may write or say about him matter remarkably little, as long as they cover him in this totalistic fashion, as long as they never stop bathing him in his own ultimate form of glory. They are, as he would be the first to tell you, his “earned media.” In fact, just the other day at his post-election news conference, he had this little exchange with a reporter: “Q: Mr. President, first off, I personally think it’s very good to have you here because a free press and this type of engagement—” “The President: I do, too. Actually? I do, too.” “Q: Yes. It’s vital to democracy.” “The President: It’s called ‘earned media.’ It’s worth billions. Go ahead.” Let’s be clear: Donald Trump is no fool. He knows that he’s got not just a knack but the knack for accruing “earned media” — that is, unpaid for publicity and advertising. Estimates were that he got a staggering $5.6 billion of it during his 2015-2016 election campaign and, exactly as he implied in that knowing aside, it’s never ended. And yes, it is “vital” to him, if not to “democracy.” Think of him, in fact, as President Earned Media. Since we are talking about a mutual affair, however, the opposite is also true: Donald Trump is the media’s version of, at the risk of being completely repetitious, earned media. No one’s put it better than former CBS head Leslie Moonves — recently taken down by the #MeToo moment — during the 2016 election campaign. “It may not be good for America,” he said, “but it’s damn good for CBS.” He added, “The money’s rolling in and this is fun. I’ve never seen anything like this, and this [is] going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It’s a terrible thing to say. But bring it on, Donald. Keep going.” And, as we all know, Donald did. Keep in mind that the media had been thrown into chaos and confusion by the growth of the online world of the internet, as many news businesses faltered and staff cuts were widespread. How convenient, then, to stumble upon such genuine human clickbait, someone on whom you could focus your attention so relatively cheaply and profitably. So much for covering the world, a distinctly expensive proposition. Talk about bargain basement candidacies and presidencies. From the moment he descended that escalator in Trump Tower in June 2015, Donald Trump became the media equivalent of a freebie — someone viewers and readers just couldn’t help watching, hearing about, reading about. It was like stumbling on a gold mine in the desert. As it turned out, Americans were indeed ready to have the talking heads of CNN (now the president’s eternal punching bag), MSNBC and Fox News yammer on hour after hour, day after day about him and only him. It was, in its own way, a genuine miracle for news companies that had found themselves up against the wall, and it couldn’t have been more real, or — as, at some level, Donald Trump himself grasped — more fake. Quite A Performance Put it all together and you can understand how a major Trump rally — oops, I mean that post-election news conference of his — actually worked. But first let me take a moment, in truly Trumpian fashion, to thank myself on your behalf. Like you, I watched clips of that news conference. Then I did all of you a favour and actually read the whole 17,000-plus words of it, one hour and 26 minutes worth of his and their words, so you wouldn’t have to. And believe me, it was quite a performance as the president called on or ignored reporters desperate to get his attention, insulted them, spoke with them, spoke against them, spoke over them (“We are a hot country. This is a hot White House”), spoke around them, described them (“I come in here as a nice person wanting to answer questions and I have people jumping out of there seats, screaming questions at me”), wandered away from them, wandered away from himself, ignored or didn’t answer their questions, was incoherent for significant stretches of time, or couldn’t even hold onto a thought. And by the way, the reporters there more than matched him (“One, I was tempted to ask you why you like Oprah so much, but I think I’ll go on to the question that”), blow for blowhard (“Based off of that, how would you say, over the last two years, God plays — what kind of a factor He plays in the day-to-day execution of the Office of the Presidency?”). Read the whole thing and you’d have to be struck — even by the less-than-soaring standards of past presidential news conferences — by how little (with a bow to Gertrude Stein) there there actually was there. The president’s incoherence was remarkably well matched by the dreariness of the generally expectable, largely thought-free questions he was asked on a limited set of topics. As always, though, there were those Trumpian moments that aren’t likely to leave your head soon thereafter. There was, for instance, the exchange in which the president called on PBS’s Yamiche Alcindor, a relatively rare black reporter in that room. She began her question this way, “On the campaign trail, you called yourself a nationalist. Some people saw that as emboldening white nationalists. Now people are also saying…” At that point, the president promptly interrupted to respond: “I don’t know why you’d say that. That’s such a racist question.” (Something he’d then repeat twice more.) The pure chutzpah of that response should have taken anyone’s breath away, but it was also a reminder of the strange sense of freedom Trump feels to say anything in the presence of the media, including mocking or insulting three black female reporters at that news conference. And this can only happen again and again and again. It’s hard not to feel that we are all now eternally watching two sets of addicts who simply can’t exist without or get enough of each other. Toward the end of that news conference, one of the reporters began a question (also focused on white nationalism) this way: “Thank you, sir. And I think we’d all love to have more of these, if you’re willing…” It tells us so much about our 21st-century Trumpian world that anyone in that press corps would wish for more of the same. I have a feeling that somewhere in all of this someone, maybe Bob Mueller, should indict all of them for fraud. In the meantime, the rest of us remain in a world wallpapered with Donald Trump, a world in which the fake news media, which is his truest “base,” just can’t get enough of him. (The author is co-founder of the American Empire Project and runs TomDispatch.com) (This article was originally published on Fair Observer. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Donald Trump and the Media: A match made in hell?

The World Trade Organization agreed Wednesday to hear complaints from a range of countries over new US steel and aluminium tariffs, as well as complaints from Washington over retaliatory duties.

The WTO's Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) agreed to establish panels to review US President Donald Trump's decision to hit a long line of countries with tariffs of 25 per cent on steel and 10 per cent on aluminium.

The DSB will create separate panels for the complaints by the European Union, China, Canada, Mexico, Norway, Russia and Turkey, after the US said it would not agree to a single panel to hear all of them.

The DSB agreed Wednesday to Washington's request for three panels to rule on the legality of retaliatory tariffs imposed by Canada, China, Mexico and the European Union.

It also agreed to a US call for a panel to be created to review "certain Chinese measures pertaining to the protection of intellectual property rights."&nbsp;

Marking a departure from a decades-long US-led drive for free trade, Trump has justified the steep tariffs with claims that massive flows of imports to the United States threaten national security.

Washington invoked a rarely used WTO exception that allows a country to take "any action which it considers necessary for the protection of its essential security interests."

Speaking at Wednesday's meeting, US Ambassador Dennis Shea warned of the "risks posed to the WTO dispute settlement system when a member challenges measures taken for the protection of essential security interests."

The US delegation also cautioned that any review of measures taken for national security reasons would undermine the "legitimacy" and "even the viability of the WTO as a whole".

The tariff spat has escalated into an all-out trade war between the US and China and growing trade tensions between Washington and many of its traditional allies.

The decision to establish the panels follows rounds of failed consultations between the parties and mark an escalation in an ongoing showdown at the WTO around Trump's controversial trade policies.

The first requests to establish the panels were rejected last month, prompting the sides to file second requests.

Under WTO regulations, parties in a dispute can block a first request for the creation of an arbitration panel, but if the parties make a second request, it is all but guaranteed to go through.

The creation of a DSB panel usually triggers a long and often costly legal battle that sometimes takes years to resolve.

The World Trade Organization agreed Wednesday to hear complaints from a range of countries over new US steel and aluminium tariffs, as well as complaints from Washington over retaliatory duties.

The World Trade Organization agreed Wednesday to hear complaints from a range of countries over new US steel and aluminium tariffs, as well as complaints from Washington over retaliatory duties. The WTO's Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) agreed to establish panels to review US President Donald Trump's decision to hit a long line of countries with tariffs of 25 per cent on steel and 10 per cent on aluminium. The DSB will create separate panels for the complaints by the European Union, China, Canada, Mexico, Norway, Russia and Turkey, after the US said it would not agree to a single panel to hear all of them. The DSB agreed Wednesday to Washington's request for three panels to rule on the legality of retaliatory tariffs imposed by Canada, China, Mexico and the European Union. It also agreed to a US call for a panel to be created to review "certain Chinese measures pertaining to the protection of intellectual property rights." Marking a departure from a decades-long US-led drive for free trade, Trump has justified the steep tariffs with claims that massive flows of imports to the United States threaten national security. Washington invoked a rarely used WTO exception that allows a country to take "any action which it considers necessary for the protection of its essential security interests." Speaking at Wednesday's meeting, US Ambassador Dennis Shea warned of the "risks posed to the WTO dispute settlement system when a member challenges measures taken for the protection of essential security interests." The US delegation also cautioned that any review of measures taken for national security reasons would undermine the "legitimacy" and "even the viability of the WTO as a whole". The tariff spat has escalated into an all-out trade war between the US and China and growing trade tensions between Washington and many of its traditional allies. The decision to establish the panels follows rounds of failed consultations between the parties and mark an escalation in an ongoing showdown at the WTO around Trump's controversial trade policies. The first requests to establish the panels were rejected last month, prompting the sides to file second requests. Under WTO regulations, parties in a dispute can block a first request for the creation of an arbitration panel, but if the parties make a second request, it is all but guaranteed to go through. The creation of a DSB panel usually triggers a long and often costly legal battle that sometimes takes years to resolve.

World Trade Organisation to rule in spat over US tariffs

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/crown-prince-a-red-line-in-khashoggi-murder-probe-saudi-foreign-minister-178668">Crown prince a 'red line' in Khashoggi murder probe: Saudi foreign minister</a>

Calls for Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to be held accountable for the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi are a "red line", Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir said Wednesday.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/china-building-new-structure-on-bombay-reef-in-south-china-sea-us-think-tank-178674">China building </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/china-building-new-structure-on-bombay-reef-in-south-china-sea-us-think-tank-178674">new</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/china-building-new-structure-on-bombay-reef-in-south-china-sea-us-think-tank-178674"> structure on Bombay Reef in </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/china-building-new-structure-on-bombay-reef-in-south-china-sea-us-think-tank-178674">South</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/china-building-new-structure-on-bombay-reef-in-south-china-sea-us-think-tank-178674"> China Sea: US think tank</a>

China has installed a new platform on a remote part of the Paracel Islands in the disputed South China Sea which could be used for military purposes, according to recent satellite images reviewed by a US think tank.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/you-do-indeed-have-obama-judges-donald-trump-hits-back-at-us-supreme-court-justice-178669">'You do indeed have Obama judges', Donald Trump hits back at US Supreme Court Justice</a>

President Donald Trump entered an extraordinary row Wednesday with the chief justice of the Supreme Court, claiming "shocking" bias against his policies in parts of the judiciary.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/amazon-says-some-customer-email-addresses-exposed-178676">Amazon says some customer email addresses exposed</a>

The e-commerce giant, Amazon on Wednesday said that the number of its customers' names and email address has been accidentally exposed due to a glitch on their site.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/president-donald-trump-thanks-saudi-arabia-for-lower-oil-prices-178671">President Donald Trump thanks Saudi Arabia for lower oil prices&nbsp;</a>

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday ignored criticism that he gave Saudi Arabia a free pass on the murder of a dissident journalist, instead praising the Islamic kingdom for keeping oil prices low.

&nbsp;

Crown prince a 'red line' in Khashoggi murder probe: Saudi foreign minister Calls for Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to be held accountable for the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi are a "red line", Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir said Wednesday.

Crown prince a 'red line' in Khashoggi murder probe: Saudi foreign minister Calls for Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to be held accountable for the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi are a "red line", Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir said Wednesday. China building new structure on Bombay Reef in South China Sea: US think tank China has installed a new platform on a remote part of the Paracel Islands in the disputed South China Sea which could be used for military purposes, according to recent satellite images reviewed by a US think tank. 'You do indeed have Obama judges', Donald Trump hits back at US Supreme Court Justice President Donald Trump entered an extraordinary row Wednesday with the chief justice of the Supreme Court, claiming "shocking" bias against his policies in parts of the judiciary. Amazon says some customer email addresses exposed The e-commerce giant, Amazon on Wednesday said that the number of its customers' names and email address has been accidentally exposed due to a glitch on their site. President Donald Trump thanks Saudi Arabia for lower oil prices US President Donald Trump on Wednesday ignored criticism that he gave Saudi Arabia a free pass on the murder of a dissident journalist, instead praising the Islamic kingdom for keeping oil prices low.

US President Donald Trump renewed his attacks on the judiciary Thursday, accusing judges of making the country unsafe as he fanned <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/arrest-detain-and-deport-donald-trump-on-people-entering-us-illegally-171934">a bitter row over asylum seekers</a>.

Trump launched his latest salvo of tweets on the issue a day after clashing publicly with the chief justice of the Supreme Court over the independence of the courts.

"Judges must not Legislate Security ... and Safety at the Border, or anywhere else," Trump tweeted.

"They know nothing about it and are making our Country unsafe."

"Our great Law Enforcement professionals MUST BE ALLOWED TO DO THEIR JOB! If not there will be only bedlam, chaos, injury and death," he added.

Trump, who has attacked judges before after unfavourable court rulings, gave vent to his anger earlier this week after a federal appeals court temporarily blocked a presidential proclamation on asylum.

The proclamation said only people entering the United States at official checkpoints can apply for asylum, automatically rejecting those caught sneaking across the border.

In an extraordinary step, US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts reacted to Trump's calling the federal judge who issued the ruling an "Obama judge."

"We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges," Roberts said in a statement to the Associated Press on Wednesday.

"What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them," Roberts said.

Trump responded on Thursday.

"Justice Roberts can say what he wants, but the 9th Circuit is a complete &amp; total disaster," Trump tweeted Thursday.

"It is out of control, has a horrible reputation, is overturned more than any Circuit in the Country, 79%, &amp; is used to get an almost guaranteed result."

According to US media reports, the Supreme Court did reverse around 79 per cent of 9th Circuit cases reviewed from 2010-2015 -- but the 6th Circuit, in fact, had the highest reversal rate of 87 per cent.&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump renewed his attacks on the judiciary Thursday, accusing judges of making the country unsafe as he fanned a bitter row over asylum seekers.

US President Donald Trump renewed his attacks on the judiciary Thursday, accusing judges of making the country unsafe as he fanned a bitter row over asylum seekers. Trump launched his latest salvo of tweets on the issue a day after clashing publicly with the chief justice of the Supreme Court over the independence of the courts. "Judges must not Legislate Security ... and Safety at the Border, or anywhere else," Trump tweeted. "They know nothing about it and are making our Country unsafe." "Our great Law Enforcement professionals MUST BE ALLOWED TO DO THEIR JOB! If not there will be only bedlam, chaos, injury and death," he added. Trump, who has attacked judges before after unfavourable court rulings, gave vent to his anger earlier this week after a federal appeals court temporarily blocked a presidential proclamation on asylum. The proclamation said only people entering the United States at official checkpoints can apply for asylum, automatically rejecting those caught sneaking across the border. In an extraordinary step, US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts reacted to Trump's calling the federal judge who issued the ruling an "Obama judge." "We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges," Roberts said in a statement to the Associated Press on Wednesday. "What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them," Roberts said. Trump responded on Thursday. "Justice Roberts can say what he wants, but the 9th Circuit is a complete & total disaster," Trump tweeted Thursday. "It is out of control, has a horrible reputation, is overturned more than any Circuit in the Country, 79%, & is used to get an almost guaranteed result." According to US media reports, the Supreme Court did reverse around 79 per cent of 9th Circuit cases reviewed from 2010-2015 -- but the 6th Circuit, in fact, had the highest reversal rate of 87 per cent.

Trump accuses US judges of making country 'unsafe'

The United States and South Korea have scaled down an annual joint military exercise scheduled for the spring of 2019 to facilitate nuclear talks with North Korea, US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Wednesday.&nbsp;

"Foal Eagle is being reorganized a bit to keep it at a level that will not be harmful to diplomacy," Mattis said, adding that it would be "reduced in scope."

Foal Eagle is the biggest of the regular joint exercises held by the allies, and has always infuriated Pyongyang, which condemned it as preparations for invasion.

But the drill -- one of the world's largest field exercises involving 200,000 South Korean and some 30,000 US soldiers -- was delayed and scaled down last year as diplomatic detente took hold on the peninsula.

And following a historic summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Singapore in June, US President Donald Trump announced that the US would stop holding joint exercises with the South, calling them expensive and "very provocative".

Since then the two allies have suspended most of their major joint exercises including the Ulchi Freedom Guardian in August and Vigilant Ace, slated for next month.

But more recently progress in talks with the North has stalled, with the US pushing to maintain sanctions against it until its "final, fully verified denuclearization" and Pyongyang condemning US demands as "gangster-like."

Washington stations 28,500 troops in the South to defend it from its nuclear-armed neighbour, which invaded in 1950.

'Fait accompli'

But differences are beginning to emerge between Seoul and Washington.

The South's dovish president Moon Jae-in has long favoured engagement with the North, which is subject to multiple UN Security Council sanctions over its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes.

He has dangled large investment and joint cross-border projects as incentives for steps towards denuclearization, while the US has been adamant pressure should be maintained on Pyongyang until it fully dismantles its weapons programs.

Seoul's defence ministry said Mattis' comments were in line with their shared view on the need to back diplomacy -- but a spokeswoman added that the question of whether the exercises will take place at all was "still under discussion."

Kim Hyun-wook, a professor at the South's state-run Korea National Diplomatic Academy, said reducing the exercise was largely expected.

"The Trump administration claims Pyongyang's suspension of nuclear and missile tests as the key achievement of its North Korea policy and the joint drills have been postponed as a kind of corresponding measure," Kim told AFP.

"As long as talks continue, postponing or reducing major US-South Korea joint exercises has become a fait accompli," he said.

'No rush'

Earlier this month Pyongyang threatened to "seriously" consider returning to its weapons drive if Washington did not end its tough economic sanctions.

And last month, the North's state media carried a near 1,700-word commentary accusing the US of playing a "double game", implicitly criticizing Trump for comments aimed at barring Seoul from lifting sanctions against Pyongyang.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Wednesday defended Washington's strategy on the peninsula, noting that North Korea had halted missile launches and had not conducted a nuclear test in over a year.

"And I do hope there'll be a summit between the two leaders early in 2019," he said in an interview with KCMO radio.

Pyongyang has declared its nuclear and missile development complete, saying it has no further need for testing.

Trump has also said he hopes to have a second meeting with Kim early next year, but talks between Pompeo and a top North Korean official, partly to prepare for the meeting, were cancelled.

The US said the North axed the talks because they weren't ready, and Trump insisted he was in "no rush."

The United States and South Korea have scaled down an annual joint military exercise scheduled for the spring of 2019 to facilitate nuclear talks with North Korea, US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Wednesday.

The United States and South Korea have scaled down an annual joint military exercise scheduled for the spring of 2019 to facilitate nuclear talks with North Korea, US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Wednesday. "Foal Eagle is being reorganized a bit to keep it at a level that will not be harmful to diplomacy," Mattis said, adding that it would be "reduced in scope." Foal Eagle is the biggest of the regular joint exercises held by the allies, and has always infuriated Pyongyang, which condemned it as preparations for invasion. But the drill -- one of the world's largest field exercises involving 200,000 South Korean and some 30,000 US soldiers -- was delayed and scaled down last year as diplomatic detente took hold on the peninsula. And following a historic summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Singapore in June, US President Donald Trump announced that the US would stop holding joint exercises with the South, calling them expensive and "very provocative". Since then the two allies have suspended most of their major joint exercises including the Ulchi Freedom Guardian in August and Vigilant Ace, slated for next month. But more recently progress in talks with the North has stalled, with the US pushing to maintain sanctions against it until its "final, fully verified denuclearization" and Pyongyang condemning US demands as "gangster-like." Washington stations 28,500 troops in the South to defend it from its nuclear-armed neighbour, which invaded in 1950. 'Fait accompli' But differences are beginning to emerge between Seoul and Washington. The South's dovish president Moon Jae-in has long favoured engagement with the North, which is subject to multiple UN Security Council sanctions over its nuclear and ballistic missile programmes. He has dangled large investment and joint cross-border projects as incentives for steps towards denuclearization, while the US has been adamant pressure should be maintained on Pyongyang until it fully dismantles its weapons programs. Seoul's defence ministry said Mattis' comments were in line with their shared view on the need to back diplomacy -- but a spokeswoman added that the question of whether the exercises will take place at all was "still under discussion." Kim Hyun-wook, a professor at the South's state-run Korea National Diplomatic Academy, said reducing the exercise was largely expected. "The Trump administration claims Pyongyang's suspension of nuclear and missile tests as the key achievement of its North Korea policy and the joint drills have been postponed as a kind of corresponding measure," Kim told AFP. "As long as talks continue, postponing or reducing major US-South Korea joint exercises has become a fait accompli," he said. 'No rush' Earlier this month Pyongyang threatened to "seriously" consider returning to its weapons drive if Washington did not end its tough economic sanctions. And last month, the North's state media carried a near 1,700-word commentary accusing the US of playing a "double game", implicitly criticizing Trump for comments aimed at barring Seoul from lifting sanctions against Pyongyang. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Wednesday defended Washington's strategy on the peninsula, noting that North Korea had halted missile launches and had not conducted a nuclear test in over a year. "And I do hope there'll be a summit between the two leaders early in 2019," he said in an interview with KCMO radio. Pyongyang has declared its nuclear and missile development complete, saying it has no further need for testing. Trump has also said he hopes to have a second meeting with Kim early next year, but talks between Pompeo and a top North Korean official, partly to prepare for the meeting, were cancelled. The US said the North axed the talks because they weren't ready, and Trump insisted he was in "no rush."

US, South Korea scale back military exercise: Jim Mattis

It's busy, as usual, at the Holding Institute migrant shelter in the southwestern Texan border city of Laredo. Young African kids tear around the courtyard as their exhausted parents look on.

The 34 people staying here have made it to the United States after journeys from the Democratic Republic of Congo and Angola.

"It was very dangerous," one man tells AFP in halting French as he outlines his travels from Angola to Cuba, on to Brazil, then up through Central America and towards the US.

The journey took many weeks. "Very hard," he says.

This group says they are fleeing violence and political oppression at home -- but now face an uncertain future in the US where critics accuse the Trump administration of creating an increasingly hostile environment for refugees.

On November 9, Trump issued a proclamation saying only those who enter the US at official checkpoints -- as opposed to sneaking across the border -- can apply for asylum.

A federal judge has temporarily blocked the order, but Trump has vowed to take the matter to the Supreme Court, even though US law states anyone arriving in America may seek asylum regardless of where they entered.

The president believes migrants are exploiting America's asylum laws and using them to emigrate to the US illegally.&nbsp;

He cited a "massive increase in fear-of-persecution or torture claims" among immigrants as leading to a backlog of asylum cases, which can take years to fully adjudicate.

"During that time, many released aliens fail to appear for hearings, do not comply with subsequent orders of removal, or are difficult to locate and remove," Trump said in his proclamation.&nbsp;

'Political gesture'

Though the people at the Holding Institute all claimed asylum at the point of entry at Laredo, Mike Smith, a Methodist pastor who runs the shelter, said he frequently helps asylum seekers who have crossed illegally.

One of the justifications the Trump administration has used for putting up miles of barbed- and concertina-wire fences in places like Laredo is to corral migrants towards legal points of entry.

Hundreds of people try to cross into the area around Laredo each day, and Smith sees no let up in the numbers. If anything, they are increasing.&nbsp;

Trump's order is "purely a political gesture with no real teeth," he told AFP in an interview at the shelter this week.&nbsp;

The fence and Trump's asylum order won't make a difference to the numbers of migrants, Smith said.

They are "more of an emotional red flag to people who would want to cross legally or illegally, asylum seekers, refugees to show that this place is not welcoming."

Human rights campaigners and other critics of the Trump crackdown say that by restricting asylum seekers to border crossing points -- which are already under enormous pressure -- the government is effectively shutting the door on people who may truly be fleeing for their lives.

In 2018, border patrols registered more than 400,000 illegal border crossers, according to the Department of Homeland Security. And in the last five years, the number of those requesting asylum has increased by 2,000 per cent, it said.

Less than 10 per cent of cases result in asylum being granted, the government says.

Donations 
 
​​​​​​​For the asylum seekers from Africa, the Holding Institute offers a welcome resting place, safety, shelter and warmth as cold weather sets in.

The facility relies entirely on donations and, even though it is the only such shelter in the city providing housing, gets no money from the government.

It has three staff workers and six volunteers, with a total annual operating budget of $140,000.&nbsp;

One volunteer could be seen helping a young Angolan man look for a cheap bus fare to Portland, Maine, where he will head for his initial asylum hearing.

Smith says he relies on community support and is always looking for donations of diapers, hygiene products such as soap and shampoo and wipes.&nbsp;

It's busy, as usual, at the Holding Institute migrant shelter in the southwestern Texan border city of Laredo. Young African kids tear around the courtyard as their exhausted parents look on.

It's busy, as usual, at the Holding Institute migrant shelter in the southwestern Texan border city of Laredo. Young African kids tear around the courtyard as their exhausted parents look on. The 34 people staying here have made it to the United States after journeys from the Democratic Republic of Congo and Angola. "It was very dangerous," one man tells AFP in halting French as he outlines his travels from Angola to Cuba, on to Brazil, then up through Central America and towards the US. The journey took many weeks. "Very hard," he says. This group says they are fleeing violence and political oppression at home -- but now face an uncertain future in the US where critics accuse the Trump administration of creating an increasingly hostile environment for refugees. On November 9, Trump issued a proclamation saying only those who enter the US at official checkpoints -- as opposed to sneaking across the border -- can apply for asylum. A federal judge has temporarily blocked the order, but Trump has vowed to take the matter to the Supreme Court, even though US law states anyone arriving in America may seek asylum regardless of where they entered. The president believes migrants are exploiting America's asylum laws and using them to emigrate to the US illegally. He cited a "massive increase in fear-of-persecution or torture claims" among immigrants as leading to a backlog of asylum cases, which can take years to fully adjudicate. "During that time, many released aliens fail to appear for hearings, do not comply with subsequent orders of removal, or are difficult to locate and remove," Trump said in his proclamation. 'Political gesture' Though the people at the Holding Institute all claimed asylum at the point of entry at Laredo, Mike Smith, a Methodist pastor who runs the shelter, said he frequently helps asylum seekers who have crossed illegally. One of the justifications the Trump administration has used for putting up miles of barbed- and concertina-wire fences in places like Laredo is to corral migrants towards legal points of entry. Hundreds of people try to cross into the area around Laredo each day, and Smith sees no let up in the numbers. If anything, they are increasing. Trump's order is "purely a political gesture with no real teeth," he told AFP in an interview at the shelter this week. The fence and Trump's asylum order won't make a difference to the numbers of migrants, Smith said. They are "more of an emotional red flag to people who would want to cross legally or illegally, asylum seekers, refugees to show that this place is not welcoming." Human rights campaigners and other critics of the Trump crackdown say that by restricting asylum seekers to border crossing points -- which are already under enormous pressure -- the government is effectively shutting the door on people who may truly be fleeing for their lives. In 2018, border patrols registered more than 400,000 illegal border crossers, according to the Department of Homeland Security. And in the last five years, the number of those requesting asylum has increased by 2,000 per cent, it said. Less than 10 per cent of cases result in asylum being granted, the government says. Donations For the asylum seekers from Africa, the Holding Institute offers a welcome resting place, safety, shelter and warmth as cold weather sets in. The facility relies entirely on donations and, even though it is the only such shelter in the city providing housing, gets no money from the government. It has three staff workers and six volunteers, with a total annual operating budget of $140,000. One volunteer could be seen helping a young Angolan man look for a cheap bus fare to Portland, Maine, where he will head for his initial asylum hearing. Smith says he relies on community support and is always looking for donations of diapers, hygiene products such as soap and shampoo and wipes.

Texas shelter helps asylum seekers as Trump clamps down

Gravitas:Donald Trump's thanksgiving Turkey Pardoning gets roasted on Social Media

The killers of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi may have gotten more than they bargained for.

The killing has sparked multiple battles that are likely in coming months to shape relationships ranging from that between the United States and Saudi Arabia to those between US President Donald J Trump, his Republican party, the US Congress, and the country’s intelligence community.

The fallout of the killing could also shape Trump’s ability to pursue his policy goals in the Middle East, including forcing Iran to its knees and imposing a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Rather than putting an end to differences over how to respond to &nbsp;Khashoggi’s killing, Trump’s decision to stand by Saudi Arabia and its crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, irrespective of who may have been responsible for the murder, marks the opening of a new round in what prominent journalist Rami Khouri dubbed “a new era in the Khashoggi case.”

The battles are likely to be fought on multiple fronts. One venue will be the Group of 20 (G-20) summit at the end of this month in Argentina with Prince Mohammed, whom the Central Intelligence Agency and many in the US Congress believe to be responsible for the killing, in attendance.

How Prince Mohammed is received at the summit is certain to indicate to what degree the crown prince’s international standing has been tarnished and may constitute a reality check for him of the damage Saudi Arabia has suffered as a result of Khashoggi’s killing.

It will also serve as one indication of how much of a battle Trump may have to fight in seeking to ensure that Prince Mohammed remains insulated from consequences of Khashoggi’s death.

To be sure, Prince Mohammed decided to attend the G-20 summit prior to Trump’s decision to take no further action against Saudi Arabia. Nonetheless, by attending the crown prince, emboldened by Trump’s support, “is daring his international critics to put their rhetoric into action and betting that they won't," said Gulf scholar Kristian Ulrichsen.

The stakes for both Trump and Prince Mohammed are high.

In leaking its conclusion that Prince Mohammed was responsible for the killing, the CIA was sending two messages: its willingness to take on Trump against the backdrop of a long-strained relationship between the president and the intelligence community and the suggestion that the agency does not believe that Prince Mohammed’s survival as king-in-waiting is crucial to US national security or the stability of the kingdom.

Both messages feed into what potentially constitutes the first major policy confrontation between Trump, the Republican party and Congress. The anti-Saudi sentiment was mounting in Congress already before Khashoggi’s killing because of Saudi conduct of its war in Yemen that has created the worst humanitarian crisis since World War Two. The killing appears to be propelling the Congress into action.

The CIA’s implicit challenging of Trump’s assessment of the importance of Prince Mohammed was followed by a report &nbsp;by the Washington-based Center for International Policy that concluded that US arms sales to the kingdom accounted for fewer than 20,000 US jobs a year – a far cry from the hundreds of thousands of jobs asserted by the president.

Prince Mohammed’s reception at the G-20 summit coupled with the outcome of the potential battle between Trump, the CIA and Congress could also shape developments in Saudi Arabia.

The kingdom has so far dug in its heels with King Salman relying on concepts of prestige and honour as well as patronage to signal full support for his son while Prince Mohammed appears to be trying to show that Saudi Arabia is not wholly dependent on the United States.

Bolstering the Center for International Policy report, Reuters reported this week seeing a letter pre-dating the Khashoggi killing in which Prince Mohammed instructs the defence ministry to “focus on purchasing weapon systems and equipment in the most pressing fields” and get training on them, including the Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile system.

The letter takes on added significance with Germany this week imposing an arms embargo on Saudi Arabia and the US Congress potentially adopting similar measures.

The letter goes to the heart of the debate in Washington that beyond issues of values is about the importance of the US-Saudi relationship. Members of Congress, and the intelligence and foreign policy community question the relationship’s significance despite Trump’s insistence on the value of Saudi arms purchases as well as the kingdom’s importance in managing oil prices and supporting US policy in the Middle East.

“The real facts are: 1) the Saudis need US weapons and equipment more than we need to sell them, in part because they demonstrate the US security commitment to the kingdom; and 2) it would be very difficult and expensive for the Saudis to make good on their periodic threats to ‘buy foreign’ if they can't get what they want from the United States,” said former US Middle East negotiator Aaron David Miller in an article for CNN co-authored by Richard Sokolsky.

Messrs. Miller and Sokolsky went on to question Saudi Arabia’s importance in countering Iran and forging an Israeli-Palestinian peace settlement. “Saudi Arabia has proven to be too weak and incompetent to be a bulwark against Iran; on the contrary, it has been an enabler of Tehran's influence,” the two men said.

They cautioned that “direct and under-the-table (Saudi) contacts (with Israel) are a far cry from open meetings or support for a US peace plan that on issues like Jerusalem and borders violates the Arab consensus and could hand Iran and Sunni Muslims a propaganda windfall.”

Despite mounting criticism of the kingdom, most analysts argue that Prince Mohammed is likely to weather the Khashoggi crisis.

Saudi Arabia is, nevertheless, already feeling the fallout of the crisis not only internationally but also in terms of the prospects for Prince Mohammed’s plans to reform and diversify the kingdom’s economy.

The crisis was one reason why Aramco, the kingdom’s giant national oil company, shelved plans to embark on a massive corporate-bond sale to fund a $70 billion stake in national petrochemical firm SABIC. The sale was considered after Saudi Arabia earlier suspended plans to take Aramco public in a move that Prince Mohammed had hoped would raise $100 billion.

Close ties with the United States have long been at the core of the ruling Al Saud family’s survival strategy. They were also at the heart of the approach of Prince Mohammed who appeared determined to ensure at whatever cost US reengagement in the Middle East in alliance with the kingdom following former President Barak Obama’s perceived pivot towards Asia and determination to bring Iran back into the international fold.

The rise of Trump appears to hold out that promise. Trump’s decision to stand by Saudi Arabia and its rulers no matter what positions the president as the kind of friend the kingdom can rely on. The coming weeks and months are likely to be a litmus test of Trump’s ability to keep his end of the bargain.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp;

&nbsp;

The killers of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi may have gotten more than they bargained for. The killing has sparked multiple battles that are likely in coming months to shape relationships ranging from that between the United States and Saudi Arabia to those between US President Donald J Trump, his Republican party, the US Congress, and the country’s intelligence community.

The killers of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi may have gotten more than they bargained for. The killing has sparked multiple battles that are likely in coming months to shape relationships ranging from that between the United States and Saudi Arabia to those between US President Donald J Trump, his Republican party, the US Congress, and the country’s intelligence community. The fallout of the killing could also shape Trump’s ability to pursue his policy goals in the Middle East, including forcing Iran to its knees and imposing a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Rather than putting an end to differences over how to respond to Khashoggi’s killing, Trump’s decision to stand by Saudi Arabia and its crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, irrespective of who may have been responsible for the murder, marks the opening of a new round in what prominent journalist Rami Khouri dubbed “a new era in the Khashoggi case.” The battles are likely to be fought on multiple fronts. One venue will be the Group of 20 (G-20) summit at the end of this month in Argentina with Prince Mohammed, whom the Central Intelligence Agency and many in the US Congress believe to be responsible for the killing, in attendance. How Prince Mohammed is received at the summit is certain to indicate to what degree the crown prince’s international standing has been tarnished and may constitute a reality check for him of the damage Saudi Arabia has suffered as a result of Khashoggi’s killing. It will also serve as one indication of how much of a battle Trump may have to fight in seeking to ensure that Prince Mohammed remains insulated from consequences of Khashoggi’s death. To be sure, Prince Mohammed decided to attend the G-20 summit prior to Trump’s decision to take no further action against Saudi Arabia. Nonetheless, by attending the crown prince, emboldened by Trump’s support, “is daring his international critics to put their rhetoric into action and betting that they won't," said Gulf scholar Kristian Ulrichsen. The stakes for both Trump and Prince Mohammed are high. In leaking its conclusion that Prince Mohammed was responsible for the killing, the CIA was sending two messages: its willingness to take on Trump against the backdrop of a long-strained relationship between the president and the intelligence community and the suggestion that the agency does not believe that Prince Mohammed’s survival as king-in-waiting is crucial to US national security or the stability of the kingdom. Both messages feed into what potentially constitutes the first major policy confrontation between Trump, the Republican party and Congress. The anti-Saudi sentiment was mounting in Congress already before Khashoggi’s killing because of Saudi conduct of its war in Yemen that has created the worst humanitarian crisis since World War Two. The killing appears to be propelling the Congress into action. The CIA’s implicit challenging of Trump’s assessment of the importance of Prince Mohammed was followed by a report by the Washington-based Center for International Policy that concluded that US arms sales to the kingdom accounted for fewer than 20,000 US jobs a year – a far cry from the hundreds of thousands of jobs asserted by the president. Prince Mohammed’s reception at the G-20 summit coupled with the outcome of the potential battle between Trump, the CIA and Congress could also shape developments in Saudi Arabia. The kingdom has so far dug in its heels with King Salman relying on concepts of prestige and honour as well as patronage to signal full support for his son while Prince Mohammed appears to be trying to show that Saudi Arabia is not wholly dependent on the United States. Bolstering the Center for International Policy report, Reuters reported this week seeing a letter pre-dating the Khashoggi killing in which Prince Mohammed instructs the defence ministry to “focus on purchasing weapon systems and equipment in the most pressing fields” and get training on them, including the Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile system. The letter takes on added significance with Germany this week imposing an arms embargo on Saudi Arabia and the US Congress potentially adopting similar measures. The letter goes to the heart of the debate in Washington that beyond issues of values is about the importance of the US-Saudi relationship. Members of Congress, and the intelligence and foreign policy community question the relationship’s significance despite Trump’s insistence on the value of Saudi arms purchases as well as the kingdom’s importance in managing oil prices and supporting US policy in the Middle East. “The real facts are: 1) the Saudis need US weapons and equipment more than we need to sell them, in part because they demonstrate the US security commitment to the kingdom; and 2) it would be very difficult and expensive for the Saudis to make good on their periodic threats to ‘buy foreign’ if they can't get what they want from the United States,” said former US Middle East negotiator Aaron David Miller in an article for CNN co-authored by Richard Sokolsky. Messrs. Miller and Sokolsky went on to question Saudi Arabia’s importance in countering Iran and forging an Israeli-Palestinian peace settlement. “Saudi Arabia has proven to be too weak and incompetent to be a bulwark against Iran; on the contrary, it has been an enabler of Tehran's influence,” the two men said. They cautioned that “direct and under-the-table (Saudi) contacts (with Israel) are a far cry from open meetings or support for a US peace plan that on issues like Jerusalem and borders violates the Arab consensus and could hand Iran and Sunni Muslims a propaganda windfall.” Despite mounting criticism of the kingdom, most analysts argue that Prince Mohammed is likely to weather the Khashoggi crisis. Saudi Arabia is, nevertheless, already feeling the fallout of the crisis not only internationally but also in terms of the prospects for Prince Mohammed’s plans to reform and diversify the kingdom’s economy. The crisis was one reason why Aramco, the kingdom’s giant national oil company, shelved plans to embark on a massive corporate-bond sale to fund a $70 billion stake in national petrochemical firm SABIC. The sale was considered after Saudi Arabia earlier suspended plans to take Aramco public in a move that Prince Mohammed had hoped would raise $100 billion. Close ties with the United States have long been at the core of the ruling Al Saud family’s survival strategy. They were also at the heart of the approach of Prince Mohammed who appeared determined to ensure at whatever cost US reengagement in the Middle East in alliance with the kingdom following former President Barak Obama’s perceived pivot towards Asia and determination to bring Iran back into the international fold. The rise of Trump appears to hold out that promise. Trump’s decision to stand by Saudi Arabia and its rulers no matter what positions the president as the kind of friend the kingdom can rely on. The coming weeks and months are likely to be a litmus test of Trump’s ability to keep his end of the bargain. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Khashoggi crisis: Reshaping US politics and relations with Saudi Arabia

A Congressional committee <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/white-house-adviser-ivanka-trump-used-personal-email-for-government-work-178335">will investigate Ivanka Trump</a>, US&nbsp;President Donald Trump's daughter and a White House adviser, following reports that she repeatedly used a personal email account for government work, a House Democrat said on Tuesday.

A White House review of Ivanka Trump's email found that she used her personal account up to 100 times last year to contact other Trump administration officials, the Washington Post reported on Monday, citing people familiar with the review.

Use of a personal account for government business potentially violates a law requiring preservation of all presidential records.

President Trump, a Republican, repeatedly criticised his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election campaign over her use of personal email and a private server while she was U.S. secretary of state.

Representatives for U.S. Representative Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, said the panel will investigate White House communications when Democrats take over the U.S. House of Representatives in January.

"We plan to continue our investigation of the presidential records act and federal records act, and we want to know if Ivanka complied with the law," his office said in a statement.

Cummings, in a separate statement, said the White House has not complied with previous document requests.

The current House Oversight committee chairman, Republican Trey Gowdy, also asked the White House for documents and information related to Ivanka Trump's use of private email in a letter on Tuesday.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment, but Trump said his daughter's use of her personal email account was different from Clinton's.

"For a little period of time, Ivanka did some emails. They weren't classified like Hillary Clinton. They weren't deleted like Hillary Clinton ... She wasn't doing anything to hide her emails," Trump told reporters. His daughter did not have a private server as Clinton did, Trump said.

Peter Mirijanian, a spokesman for Ivanka Trump's ethics lawyer, Abbe Lowell, told the Post the emails occurred before she was aware of government record-keeping regulations.

Since then, she has turned over all her government-related emails to be stored with other White House records, the Post reported.

Ivanka Trump's emails came to light when White House officials began reviewing them in response to a lawsuit from watchdog group American Oversight, according to the Post. The paper said she used the personal account for official business fewer than 100 times in 2017.

The New York Times also reported on Ivanka Trump's email use.

Clinton's email practices as secretary of state prompted a Federal Bureau of Investigation probe in the run-up to the 2016 election that still draws ire from Trump and calls from some of his supporters to "lock her up."

The FBI concluded Clinton's actions were extremely careless but did not recommend any charges be filed. Clinton expressed regret for her decision to use a private server but said she violated no rules.

U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat on the Senate Judiciary panel, said there was "no way" Ivanka Trump did not know the rules after the 2016 campaign. There were also larger questions about the Trump family's mixing of private enterprise and government duties, Blumenthal said.

"It raises the issue of whether there has been anything improper. There should be some kind of investigation" either by Congress or the White House ethics office, Blumenthal told CNN.

The White House began reviewing senior aides' email use last year after reports that Ivanka Trump's husband Jared Kushner, also a top White House adviser, used private email for government work.

A Congressional committee will investigate Ivanka Trump, US President Donald Trump's daughter and a White House adviser, following reports that she repeatedly used a personal email account for government work, a House Democrat said on Tuesday.

A Congressional committee will investigate Ivanka Trump, US President Donald Trump's daughter and a White House adviser, following reports that she repeatedly used a personal email account for government work, a House Democrat said on Tuesday. A White House review of Ivanka Trump's email found that she used her personal account up to 100 times last year to contact other Trump administration officials, the Washington Post reported on Monday, citing people familiar with the review. Use of a personal account for government business potentially violates a law requiring preservation of all presidential records. President Trump, a Republican, repeatedly criticised his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election campaign over her use of personal email and a private server while she was U.S. secretary of state. Representatives for U.S. Representative Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, said the panel will investigate White House communications when Democrats take over the U.S. House of Representatives in January. "We plan to continue our investigation of the presidential records act and federal records act, and we want to know if Ivanka complied with the law," his office said in a statement. Cummings, in a separate statement, said the White House has not complied with previous document requests. The current House Oversight committee chairman, Republican Trey Gowdy, also asked the White House for documents and information related to Ivanka Trump's use of private email in a letter on Tuesday. The White House did not respond to a request for comment, but Trump said his daughter's use of her personal email account was different from Clinton's. "For a little period of time, Ivanka did some emails. They weren't classified like Hillary Clinton. They weren't deleted like Hillary Clinton ... She wasn't doing anything to hide her emails," Trump told reporters. His daughter did not have a private server as Clinton did, Trump said. Peter Mirijanian, a spokesman for Ivanka Trump's ethics lawyer, Abbe Lowell, told the Post the emails occurred before she was aware of government record-keeping regulations. Since then, she has turned over all her government-related emails to be stored with other White House records, the Post reported. Ivanka Trump's emails came to light when White House officials began reviewing them in response to a lawsuit from watchdog group American Oversight, according to the Post. The paper said she used the personal account for official business fewer than 100 times in 2017. The New York Times also reported on Ivanka Trump's email use. Clinton's email practices as secretary of state prompted a Federal Bureau of Investigation probe in the run-up to the 2016 election that still draws ire from Trump and calls from some of his supporters to "lock her up." The FBI concluded Clinton's actions were extremely careless but did not recommend any charges be filed. Clinton expressed regret for her decision to use a private server but said she violated no rules. U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat on the Senate Judiciary panel, said there was "no way" Ivanka Trump did not know the rules after the 2016 campaign. There were also larger questions about the Trump family's mixing of private enterprise and government duties, Blumenthal said. "It raises the issue of whether there has been anything improper. There should be some kind of investigation" either by Congress or the White House ethics office, Blumenthal told CNN. The White House began reviewing senior aides' email use last year after reports that Ivanka Trump's husband Jared Kushner, also a top White House adviser, used private email for government work.

Congressional committee to investigate Ivanka Trump's private email use for work

President Donald Trump vowed on Tuesday to remain a "steadfast partner" of Saudi Arabia despite saying that <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/we-do-not-know-where-jamal-khashoggis-body-is-saudi-arabia-172683">Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman</a> may have known about the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/im-suffocating-take-this-bag-off-my-head-jamal-khashoggis-last-words-176839">plan to murder </a>dissident journalist <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-says-us-to-report-who-killed-jamal-khashoggi-in-next-two-days-177935">Jamal Khashoggi</a> last month.

Defying intense pressure from US lawmakers to impose tougher sanctions on Saudi Arabia, Trump also said he would not cancel military contracts with the kingdom, claiming it would be a "foolish" move that would only benefit Russia and China.

Trump said US intelligence agencies were still studying the evidence around Khashoggi`s murder inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on Oct. 2 and who planned it. Since the murder, Trump has taken varying positions on how to react, including possible sanctions.

"It could very well be that the Crown Prince had knowledge of this tragic event – maybe he did and maybe he didn`t!" Trump said in a statement issued by the White House.

His comments contradicted the Central Intelligence Agency, (CIA), which believes Khashoggi`s death was ordered directly by the crown prince, Saudi Arabia`s de facto ruler widely known by his initials MbS.

Trump was quickly accused by Democratic lawmakers of undermining his own intelligence agencies and failing to confront Saudi Arabia over a human rights atrocity.

"Human rights are more than just a phrase, it has to mean something. And that means standing up and condemning a brazen murder by a foreign government. Everyone who played a role in this killing must be held accountable," Senator Dianne Feinstein said.

Democratic and Republican lawmakers have urged Trump to drop his support for MbS over the Khashoggi case, but the president has been reluctant.

Trump said on Tuesday that both Saudi Arabia`s King Salman and MbS "vigorously deny any knowledge of the planning or execution of the murder," and that the truth may never be known.

He also stressed that Saudi Arabia, a major oil producer, is an important business partner and a "great ally" in the fight against Iranian power in the Middle East.

"The United States intends to remain a steadfast partner of Saudi Arabia to ensure the interests of our country, Israel and all other partners in the region," Trump said.

On Twitter, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said of the statement: "Mr Trump bizarrely devotes the FIRST paragraph of his shameful statement on Saudi atrocities to accuse IRAN of every sort of malfeasance he can think of."

Congressman Adam Schiff, who is expected to become the leader of the House of Representatives` Intelligence Committee in January, said the United States should immediately end support for Saudi Arabia in the Yemen war, suspend arms sales to the kingdom, and reduce its reliance on Riyadh in the Middle East.

"The president adds to his track record of ignoring his own intelligence agencies and undermining American values at home and abroad, by giving Saudi Arabia a pass for the brutal and premeditated murder of a US resident and journalist. Outrageous," Democratic Senator Dick Durbin said.

REPUBLICANS' CRITICISM

Some of Trump`s fellow Republicans have also vowed to break with him and push for firmer U.S. action against Saudi Arabia.

Representative Francis Rooney, a Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said Washington should apply the so-called Magnitsky Act to those responsible for Khashoggi`s death.

The legislation hits human rights violators with freezes on U.S. assets, U.S. travel bans, and prohibitions on Americans doing business with them. 
Trump has placed the alliance with Saudi Arabia at the heart of his Middle East policy, and it was the first country he visited after becoming president in 2017.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a sometime Trump ally, said there will be bipartisan support for sanctions against Saudi Arabia, "including appropriate members of the royal family, for this barbaric act which defied all civilized norms."

"While Saudi Arabia is a strategic ally, the behaviour of the crown prince – in multiple ways – has shown disrespect for the relationship and made him, in my view, beyond toxic," Graham said.

Trump`s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, has developed a close relationship with MbS, and both he and Trump have tried to maintain the alliance. 
Trump said on Tuesday he would not suspend arms sales to Riyadh.

"If we foolishly cancel these contracts, Russia and China would be the enormous beneficiaries - and very happy to acquire all of this newfound business. It would be a wonderful gift to them directly from the United States!" Trump said.

Representative Eliot Engel, who has the power to block arms deals as the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said the United States should use its ability to sell weapons to the Saudis as leverage to influence Riyadh`s behaviour.

"The reality is that the Saudis couldn’t simply buy their weapons somewhere else," Engel said in a statement. "It would take years for the Saudi military to re-equip with Russian or Chinese weapons."

When Trump mentions the $110 billion package with Riyadh last year, he often adds that "it's 500,000 jobs."

But arms manufacturer Lockheed Martin Corp predicts the deal could create nearly 10,000 new jobs in Saudi Arabia while keeping up to 18,000 existing US workers busy if the whole package comes together - an outcome industry experts say is unlikely.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo defended Trump's support for Saudi Arabia. The United States was obligated to adopt policies that furthered US national security interests, Pompeo told a news conference following a meeting with Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu in Washington.

Cavusoglu said that Turkey is not entirely satisfied with the level of cooperation it is receiving from Saudi Arabia over Khashoggi's murder and may seek a formal United Nations inquiry.

President Donald Trump vowed on Tuesday to remain a "steadfast partner" of Saudi Arabia despite saying that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman may have known about the plan to murder dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi last month.

President Donald Trump vowed on Tuesday to remain a "steadfast partner" of Saudi Arabia despite saying that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman may have known about the plan to murder dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi last month. Defying intense pressure from US lawmakers to impose tougher sanctions on Saudi Arabia, Trump also said he would not cancel military contracts with the kingdom, claiming it would be a "foolish" move that would only benefit Russia and China. Trump said US intelligence agencies were still studying the evidence around Khashoggi`s murder inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on Oct. 2 and who planned it. Since the murder, Trump has taken varying positions on how to react, including possible sanctions. "It could very well be that the Crown Prince had knowledge of this tragic event – maybe he did and maybe he didn`t!" Trump said in a statement issued by the White House. His comments contradicted the Central Intelligence Agency, (CIA), which believes Khashoggi`s death was ordered directly by the crown prince, Saudi Arabia`s de facto ruler widely known by his initials MbS. Trump was quickly accused by Democratic lawmakers of undermining his own intelligence agencies and failing to confront Saudi Arabia over a human rights atrocity. "Human rights are more than just a phrase, it has to mean something. And that means standing up and condemning a brazen murder by a foreign government. Everyone who played a role in this killing must be held accountable," Senator Dianne Feinstein said. Democratic and Republican lawmakers have urged Trump to drop his support for MbS over the Khashoggi case, but the president has been reluctant. Trump said on Tuesday that both Saudi Arabia`s King Salman and MbS "vigorously deny any knowledge of the planning or execution of the murder," and that the truth may never be known. He also stressed that Saudi Arabia, a major oil producer, is an important business partner and a "great ally" in the fight against Iranian power in the Middle East. "The United States intends to remain a steadfast partner of Saudi Arabia to ensure the interests of our country, Israel and all other partners in the region," Trump said. On Twitter, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said of the statement: "Mr Trump bizarrely devotes the FIRST paragraph of his shameful statement on Saudi atrocities to accuse IRAN of every sort of malfeasance he can think of." Congressman Adam Schiff, who is expected to become the leader of the House of Representatives` Intelligence Committee in January, said the United States should immediately end support for Saudi Arabia in the Yemen war, suspend arms sales to the kingdom, and reduce its reliance on Riyadh in the Middle East. "The president adds to his track record of ignoring his own intelligence agencies and undermining American values at home and abroad, by giving Saudi Arabia a pass for the brutal and premeditated murder of a US resident and journalist. Outrageous," Democratic Senator Dick Durbin said. REPUBLICANS' CRITICISM Some of Trump`s fellow Republicans have also vowed to break with him and push for firmer U.S. action against Saudi Arabia. Representative Francis Rooney, a Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said Washington should apply the so-called Magnitsky Act to those responsible for Khashoggi`s death. The legislation hits human rights violators with freezes on U.S. assets, U.S. travel bans, and prohibitions on Americans doing business with them. Trump has placed the alliance with Saudi Arabia at the heart of his Middle East policy, and it was the first country he visited after becoming president in 2017. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a sometime Trump ally, said there will be bipartisan support for sanctions against Saudi Arabia, "including appropriate members of the royal family, for this barbaric act which defied all civilized norms." "While Saudi Arabia is a strategic ally, the behaviour of the crown prince – in multiple ways – has shown disrespect for the relationship and made him, in my view, beyond toxic," Graham said. Trump`s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, has developed a close relationship with MbS, and both he and Trump have tried to maintain the alliance. Trump said on Tuesday he would not suspend arms sales to Riyadh. "If we foolishly cancel these contracts, Russia and China would be the enormous beneficiaries - and very happy to acquire all of this newfound business. It would be a wonderful gift to them directly from the United States!" Trump said. Representative Eliot Engel, who has the power to block arms deals as the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said the United States should use its ability to sell weapons to the Saudis as leverage to influence Riyadh`s behaviour. "The reality is that the Saudis couldn’t simply buy their weapons somewhere else," Engel said in a statement. "It would take years for the Saudi military to re-equip with Russian or Chinese weapons." When Trump mentions the $110 billion package with Riyadh last year, he often adds that "it's 500,000 jobs." But arms manufacturer Lockheed Martin Corp predicts the deal could create nearly 10,000 new jobs in Saudi Arabia while keeping up to 18,000 existing US workers busy if the whole package comes together - an outcome industry experts say is unlikely. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo defended Trump's support for Saudi Arabia. The United States was obligated to adopt policies that furthered US national security interests, Pompeo told a news conference following a meeting with Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu in Washington. Cavusoglu said that Turkey is not entirely satisfied with the level of cooperation it is receiving from Saudi Arabia over Khashoggi's murder and may seek a formal United Nations inquiry.

Donald Trump stands by Saudi prince despite journalist Khashoggi's murder

White House advisor and <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-judge-questions-trump-administration-on-asylum-policy-178283">US President Donald Trump</a>'s daughter Ivanka Trump sent hundreds of work-related emails using her personal account last year, The Washington Post reported on Monday.

Ivanka violated public records rules, the report said. The White House did not immediately respond to the questions regarding the&nbsp;matter.

The Post, citing anonymous sources,&nbsp;said the discovery was made by White House officials reviewing emails in response to a public records lawsuit.

When asked about it, Trump said she was unfamiliar with details of the rules, the Post said.

A spokesman for&nbsp;&nbsp;Trump's attorney confirmed that she did use a private email account before she was informed of the rules, and said that all her government-related emails had been turned over months ago, the newspaper reported.

The emails were sent to her assistants, White House aides and cabinet members, the US newspaper said in its report.

Then FBI director James Comey -- fired by the president last year -- announced that the bureau would reopen an investigation into Clinton's use of the private email server just 11 days before the 2016 presidential vote, a move that some say may have helped cost her the election.

Trump supporters still chant "Lock her up!" at rallies, mimicking one of Trump's battle cries during the election campaign, indicating they believe Clinton should be jailed.

Earlier, during&nbsp;the election&nbsp;campaign in 2016 Trump had accused his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton of using a private email during her time as secretary of state, also labelled her as ''Crooked Hillary'' and said she belonged in jail.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

White House advisor and US President Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka Trump sent hundreds of work-related emails using her personal account last year, The Washington Post reported on Monday.

White House advisor and US President Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka Trump sent hundreds of work-related emails using her personal account last year, The Washington Post reported on Monday. Ivanka violated public records rules, the report said. The White House did not immediately respond to the questions regarding the matter. The Post, citing anonymous sources, said the discovery was made by White House officials reviewing emails in response to a public records lawsuit. When asked about it, Trump said she was unfamiliar with details of the rules, the Post said. A spokesman for Trump's attorney confirmed that she did use a private email account before she was informed of the rules, and said that all her government-related emails had been turned over months ago, the newspaper reported. The emails were sent to her assistants, White House aides and cabinet members, the US newspaper said in its report. Then FBI director James Comey -- fired by the president last year -- announced that the bureau would reopen an investigation into Clinton's use of the private email server just 11 days before the 2016 presidential vote, a move that some say may have helped cost her the election. Trump supporters still chant "Lock her up!" at rallies, mimicking one of Trump's battle cries during the election campaign, indicating they believe Clinton should be jailed. Earlier, during the election campaign in 2016 Trump had accused his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton of using a private email during her time as secretary of state, also labelled her as ''Crooked Hillary'' and said she belonged in jail.

Like Hillary, Ivanka Trump used personal email for government work: Report

The Trump administration has suspended <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-remains-a-critical-partner-to-us-south-asia-strategy-pentagon-178292">security assistance to Pakistan</a>&nbsp;because it failed to address the problem of militant safe havens inside its territory, the White House has said.

"The (Trump) Administration has been clear to Pakistani leaders that it expects them to constructively address the problem of militant safe havens in Pakistan," an official from the National Security Council, the White House, told PTI.

"Because Pakistan failed to address the problem, the Administration suspended security assistance," the official said, requesting anonymity.

"We remain hopeful that Pakistan will realize it is in its own interest to cooperate with the US strategy in Afghanistan," said the official responding to Pakistani <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pak-lost-over-123-billion-by-joining-us-war-on-terror-aid-received-was-minuscule-20-bn-imran-khan-on-trumps-tirade-178222">Prime Minister Imran Khan</a> accusing President Donald Trump of false assertion in his country's fight against terror.

First in an interview to Fox News on Sunday and then in two tweets on Monday, Trump had accused Pakistan of not doing "a damn thing" for the United States.&nbsp;

He alleged that Pakistan knew that Osama bin Laden, the al Qaida leader, was living in a mansion on the outskirts of its garrison city of Abbottabad and all the aid being given to Pakistan, which is $1.3 billion per annum, was a waste.

As a result, Trump defended his decision to cut all security assistance to Pakistan.

The Pakistani prime minister responded with a tweet saying that his country had suffered enough by fighting terrorism on behalf of the United States.&nbsp;

"Now we will do what is best for our people &amp; our interests," the cricketer-turned-politician said on Twitter.&nbsp;

Trump's latest interview and tweets, which were a statement of fact being said and felt by top US officials for long, has furthered deteriorated US-Pak relationship.&nbsp;

Senator Rand Paul, who has for the last several years, sought to cut all assistance to Pakistan, supported Trump's decision.&nbsp;

"I agree completely. That's why we should push hard on Pakistan to let persecuted Christian Asia Bibi find asylum in America," he said retweeting Trump's posts.

Paul has urged Trump to grant political asylum and refugee status to Asia Bibi.

"Until Asia Bibi is freed, Pakistan should not receive a penny of US&nbsp;Aid! Not one penny should go to any nation that persecutes or kills Christians!" Paul wrote in an op-ed in Breitbart News.

"During my time in Congress, I have introduced legislation to directly go after Pakistan's foreign aid and turn up the pressure on them to release Asia Bibi and stop persecuting religious minorities," he said.

In fact, over the past few years, a consensus seems to have emerged in the US Congress, think-tank and the administration that Pakistan has not been doing enough in the fight against terrorism and that it is playing a double game.

"Because they enjoy safe haven in Pakistan. Next question," Jeff M Smith of The Heritage Foundation think-tank said responding to a tweet from Imran Khan in which he said that "Instead of making Pakistan a scapegoat for their failures, the US should do a serious assessment of why, despite 140000 NATO troops plus 250,000 Afghan troops &amp; reportedly $1 trillion spent on war in Afghanistan, the Taliban today are stronger than before."&nbsp;

The Trump administration has suspended security assistance to Pakistan because it failed to address the problem of militant safe havens inside its territory, the White House has said.

The Trump administration has suspended security assistance to Pakistan because it failed to address the problem of militant safe havens inside its territory, the White House has said. "The (Trump) Administration has been clear to Pakistani leaders that it expects them to constructively address the problem of militant safe havens in Pakistan," an official from the National Security Council, the White House, told PTI. "Because Pakistan failed to address the problem, the Administration suspended security assistance," the official said, requesting anonymity. "We remain hopeful that Pakistan will realize it is in its own interest to cooperate with the US strategy in Afghanistan," said the official responding to Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan accusing President Donald Trump of false assertion in his country's fight against terror. First in an interview to Fox News on Sunday and then in two tweets on Monday, Trump had accused Pakistan of not doing "a damn thing" for the United States. He alleged that Pakistan knew that Osama bin Laden, the al Qaida leader, was living in a mansion on the outskirts of its garrison city of Abbottabad and all the aid being given to Pakistan, which is $1.3 billion per annum, was a waste. As a result, Trump defended his decision to cut all security assistance to Pakistan. The Pakistani prime minister responded with a tweet saying that his country had suffered enough by fighting terrorism on behalf of the United States. "Now we will do what is best for our people & our interests," the cricketer-turned-politician said on Twitter. Trump's latest interview and tweets, which were a statement of fact being said and felt by top US officials for long, has furthered deteriorated US-Pak relationship. Senator Rand Paul, who has for the last several years, sought to cut all assistance to Pakistan, supported Trump's decision. "I agree completely. That's why we should push hard on Pakistan to let persecuted Christian Asia Bibi find asylum in America," he said retweeting Trump's posts. Paul has urged Trump to grant political asylum and refugee status to Asia Bibi. "Until Asia Bibi is freed, Pakistan should not receive a penny of US Aid! Not one penny should go to any nation that persecutes or kills Christians!" Paul wrote in an op-ed in Breitbart News. "During my time in Congress, I have introduced legislation to directly go after Pakistan's foreign aid and turn up the pressure on them to release Asia Bibi and stop persecuting religious minorities," he said. In fact, over the past few years, a consensus seems to have emerged in the US Congress, think-tank and the administration that Pakistan has not been doing enough in the fight against terrorism and that it is playing a double game. "Because they enjoy safe haven in Pakistan. Next question," Jeff M Smith of The Heritage Foundation think-tank said responding to a tweet from Imran Khan in which he said that "Instead of making Pakistan a scapegoat for their failures, the US should do a serious assessment of why, despite 140000 NATO troops plus 250,000 Afghan troops & reportedly $1 trillion spent on war in Afghanistan, the Taliban today are stronger than before."

Suspended security assistance to Pak for failure to address militant safe havens: US

The year 2018 has been an exceptional year for India-US economic relations. Trade tensions triggered by protectionist measures taken by the US Administration following the show of aggressive intent by President Donald Trump against the major economies, has left India in a piquant situation.

While several of those targeted have either adopted retaliatory measures or have decided to concede ground to the largest economic power, India seems to have been caught between the imperatives of maintaining a policy of non-confrontation with its strategic partner, on the one hand, and to protect the interests of domestic manufacturing industry, especially when the industry is facing some of the most serious challenges.

In March, President Trump announced his decision to block imports by imposing “reciprocal tax” against countries using tariffs on American products. The objective was to trigger the revival of the American manufacturing sector. Through a Presidential Proclamation, import tariffs of 25 per cent and 10 per cent were imposed on steel and aluminium, by invoking the provisions of Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. This provision allows the Administration to take measures to protect domestic industries for “national defence” and “national security”.

India was among the countries adversely affected by increased import tariffs on steel and aluminium. Indian exporters faced an additional burden of $241 million arising from the proposed import duties, which was nearly 20 per cent of their export realisations in calendar year 2017.

Until 2015-16, the United States was one of the largest markets for the Indian industry, with an export share of above 8 per cent. In the subsequent years, exports declined precipitously, and the export share dipped to less than half in the subsequent years.

With its exports to one of the world’s largest steel markets already on a down-hill, Indian steel industry, thus faced an uncertain future.

Like most affected countries, India tried to initiate negotiations with the US government by announcing retaliatory measures. In May, India submitted a notification in the WTO, indicating that tariffs on 20 products imported from the US would be increased.

Included in this list were agricultural products like soya beans and palmolein, and the American icon, Harley Davidson motorcycles. In a later notification in June, India increased the list to 30 products, but subsequently, Harley Davidson was taken off the list.

Although the increase in import duties were to take effect from August 4, this action was deferred, presumably because of the two-by-two dialogue between India and the US, which was held in the third week of August.

While India’s position has been to find a negotiated solution to the trade frictions, the US Administration has adopted an aggressive stance towards India and other trade partners, which was underlined by President Trump.

Yet another evidence of this stance was the increase in anti-dumping actions against India in 2018. Until mid-November, the US Customs and Border Protection had taken anti-dumping actions against 27 products exported by India, the highest in recent years.

Interestingly, a majority of these products included those from the iron and steel industry. This shows that the injury to the Indian industry that began with the tariff hikes in March, was heightened by the anti-dumping action.

The most recent of US actions against India was the Presidential Proclamation of October 30 (Proclamation 9813) “To Modify the List of Products Eligible for Duty-Free Treatment Under the Generalized System of Preferences”.

This Proclamation gave a list of products from the developing countries, which would not receive duty-free access into the United States market from November 1, 2018, that they had hitherto enjoyed under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP).

The GSP was introduced in 1971 after the second session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) had unanimously adopted it in 1968. Under the GSP, developing countries’ exports were granted duty-free access by the developed countries. Developed countries thus granted unilateral trade concessions to the developing countries for increasing their exports.

The US Trade Administration annually reviews the GSP preferences, examining whether exports from developing countries conform to Competitive Need Limitations (CNL).

A developing country can lose its GSP benefits on any product if the CNLs are exceeded. Two measures are adopted for assessing CNLs: import of a product from a beneficiary developing country accounts for 50 per cent or more of the total imports of the product; or imports exceed a certain dollar value, which was set at $180 million in 2017.

Enforcement of CNLs is subject to waivers, the main being the de minimis waiver. This waiver sets a floor for the value of imported products below which CNLs cannot be enforced. In 2017, the floor was set at $23.5 million.

In its current year’s review, the US identified 94 products from 16 countries, which would lose GSP benefits from November 1, 2018. This list included 50 products imported from India, by far the largest number for any GSP beneficiary.

The list of products targeting imports from India are all relatively low-value products; more than half of the 50 products had import values of less than $1 million in 2017.

The product with the highest import value in 2017, hand-loomed carpet and other textile floor coverings, was just $10.3 million, way below the CNL threshold of $180 million. The Indian products for which US has withdrawn GSP benefits, clearly qualify for de minimis waiver, since their import values were below the threshold of $23.5 million in 2017.

It is time that the government of India protects the interests of the domestic manufacturing industry from the increasingly protectionist American Administration.

(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-battling-against-us-protectionism-2687311">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The year 2018 has been an exceptional year for India-US economic relations. Trade tensions triggered by protectionist measures taken by the US Administration following the show of aggressive intent by President Donald Trump against the major economies, has left India in a piquant situation.

The year 2018 has been an exceptional year for India-US economic relations. Trade tensions triggered by protectionist measures taken by the US Administration following the show of aggressive intent by President Donald Trump against the major economies, has left India in a piquant situation. While several of those targeted have either adopted retaliatory measures or have decided to concede ground to the largest economic power, India seems to have been caught between the imperatives of maintaining a policy of non-confrontation with its strategic partner, on the one hand, and to protect the interests of domestic manufacturing industry, especially when the industry is facing some of the most serious challenges. In March, President Trump announced his decision to block imports by imposing “reciprocal tax” against countries using tariffs on American products. The objective was to trigger the revival of the American manufacturing sector. Through a Presidential Proclamation, import tariffs of 25 per cent and 10 per cent were imposed on steel and aluminium, by invoking the provisions of Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. This provision allows the Administration to take measures to protect domestic industries for “national defence” and “national security”. India was among the countries adversely affected by increased import tariffs on steel and aluminium. Indian exporters faced an additional burden of $241 million arising from the proposed import duties, which was nearly 20 per cent of their export realisations in calendar year 2017. Until 2015-16, the United States was one of the largest markets for the Indian industry, with an export share of above 8 per cent. In the subsequent years, exports declined precipitously, and the export share dipped to less than half in the subsequent years. With its exports to one of the world’s largest steel markets already on a down-hill, Indian steel industry, thus faced an uncertain future. Like most affected countries, India tried to initiate negotiations with the US government by announcing retaliatory measures. In May, India submitted a notification in the WTO, indicating that tariffs on 20 products imported from the US would be increased. Included in this list were agricultural products like soya beans and palmolein, and the American icon, Harley Davidson motorcycles. In a later notification in June, India increased the list to 30 products, but subsequently, Harley Davidson was taken off the list. Although the increase in import duties were to take effect from August 4, this action was deferred, presumably because of the two-by-two dialogue between India and the US, which was held in the third week of August. While India’s position has been to find a negotiated solution to the trade frictions, the US Administration has adopted an aggressive stance towards India and other trade partners, which was underlined by President Trump. Yet another evidence of this stance was the increase in anti-dumping actions against India in 2018. Until mid-November, the US Customs and Border Protection had taken anti-dumping actions against 27 products exported by India, the highest in recent years. Interestingly, a majority of these products included those from the iron and steel industry. This shows that the injury to the Indian industry that began with the tariff hikes in March, was heightened by the anti-dumping action. The most recent of US actions against India was the Presidential Proclamation of October 30 (Proclamation 9813) “To Modify the List of Products Eligible for Duty-Free Treatment Under the Generalized System of Preferences”. This Proclamation gave a list of products from the developing countries, which would not receive duty-free access into the United States market from November 1, 2018, that they had hitherto enjoyed under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP). The GSP was introduced in 1971 after the second session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) had unanimously adopted it in 1968. Under the GSP, developing countries’ exports were granted duty-free access by the developed countries. Developed countries thus granted unilateral trade concessions to the developing countries for increasing their exports. The US Trade Administration annually reviews the GSP preferences, examining whether exports from developing countries conform to Competitive Need Limitations (CNL). A developing country can lose its GSP benefits on any product if the CNLs are exceeded. Two measures are adopted for assessing CNLs: import of a product from a beneficiary developing country accounts for 50 per cent or more of the total imports of the product; or imports exceed a certain dollar value, which was set at $180 million in 2017. Enforcement of CNLs is subject to waivers, the main being the de minimis waiver. This waiver sets a floor for the value of imported products below which CNLs cannot be enforced. In 2017, the floor was set at $23.5 million. In its current year’s review, the US identified 94 products from 16 countries, which would lose GSP benefits from November 1, 2018. This list included 50 products imported from India, by far the largest number for any GSP beneficiary. The list of products targeting imports from India are all relatively low-value products; more than half of the 50 products had import values of less than $1 million in 2017. The product with the highest import value in 2017, hand-loomed carpet and other textile floor coverings, was just $10.3 million, way below the CNL threshold of $180 million. The Indian products for which US has withdrawn GSP benefits, clearly qualify for de minimis waiver, since their import values were below the threshold of $23.5 million in 2017. It is time that the government of India protects the interests of the domestic manufacturing industry from the increasingly protectionist American Administration. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Battling against US protectionism

President Donald Trump is likely to give US troops authority to protect immigration agents stationed along the US border with Mexico if they come under threat from migrants seeking to cross into the United States, a US official said on Monday.

Ahead of US congressional elections earlier this month, Trump denounced the approach of a caravan of migrants as an “invasion” that threatened American national security, and he sent thousands of US troops to the border to help secure it.

Currently, the troops do not have authority to protect US Customs and Border Patrol personnel. The new authority could be announced on Tuesday, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

US officials briefly closed the busiest border crossing from Mexico early on Monday to add concrete barricades and razor wire amid concerns some of the thousands of Central American migrants at the border could try to rush the crossing.

Northbound lanes at the San Ysidro crossing from Tijuana to San Diego, California, were temporarily closed “to position additional port hardening materials,” a US CBP spokesperson said.

A Department of Homeland Security official, who requested anonymity, told reporters on a conference call that US officials had heard reports some migrants were intending to run through border crossings into California.

The closing was rare for the station, which is one of the busiest border crossings in the world with tens of thousands of Mexicans heading every day into the United States to work or study.

“Today was a lost day of work. I already called my boss to tell her that everything was closed and I did not know what time I would be able to get in,” said Maria Gomez, a Mexican woman who crosses the border every day for work. “I cannot believe this is happening.”

Trump had remained mostly silent about the caravan since the November 6 vote, but on Monday he posted a photo on Twitter showing a fence that runs from the beach in Tijuana into the ocean now covered with razor wire.

Critics charged that his talk of a migrant “invasion” was an effort to rouse his political base ahead of the elections.

Officials have stressed that the 5,900 active-duty US troops on the border are not there in a law enforcement capacity and that there are no plans for them to interact with migrants.

Instead, their mission is to lend support to the CBP, and they have been stringing up concertina wire and erecting temporary housing.

The commander of the mission told Reuters last week that the number of troops may have peaked, and he would soon look at whether to begin sending forces home or shifting some to new border positions.

About 6,000 Central Americans have reached the border cities of Tijuana and Mexicali, according to local officials. More bands of migrants are making their way toward Tijuana, with around 10,000 expected.

Hundreds of local residents on Sunday massed at a monument in a wealthy neighbourhood of Tijuana to protest the arrival of the migrants, with some carrying signs that said “Mexico first” and “No more migrants.”

Last month, thousands of Central American migrants began a long journey from Honduras through Mexico toward the United States to seek asylum.

Other bands of mostly Salvadorans followed, with a small group setting off on Sunday from San Salvador.

President Donald Trump is likely to give US troops authority to protect immigration agents stationed along the US border with Mexico if they come under threat from migrants seeking to cross into the United States, a US official said on Monday.

President Donald Trump is likely to give US troops authority to protect immigration agents stationed along the US border with Mexico if they come under threat from migrants seeking to cross into the United States, a US official said on Monday. Ahead of US congressional elections earlier this month, Trump denounced the approach of a caravan of migrants as an “invasion” that threatened American national security, and he sent thousands of US troops to the border to help secure it. Currently, the troops do not have authority to protect US Customs and Border Patrol personnel. The new authority could be announced on Tuesday, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. US officials briefly closed the busiest border crossing from Mexico early on Monday to add concrete barricades and razor wire amid concerns some of the thousands of Central American migrants at the border could try to rush the crossing. Northbound lanes at the San Ysidro crossing from Tijuana to San Diego, California, were temporarily closed “to position additional port hardening materials,” a US CBP spokesperson said. A Department of Homeland Security official, who requested anonymity, told reporters on a conference call that US officials had heard reports some migrants were intending to run through border crossings into California. The closing was rare for the station, which is one of the busiest border crossings in the world with tens of thousands of Mexicans heading every day into the United States to work or study. “Today was a lost day of work. I already called my boss to tell her that everything was closed and I did not know what time I would be able to get in,” said Maria Gomez, a Mexican woman who crosses the border every day for work. “I cannot believe this is happening.” Trump had remained mostly silent about the caravan since the November 6 vote, but on Monday he posted a photo on Twitter showing a fence that runs from the beach in Tijuana into the ocean now covered with razor wire. Critics charged that his talk of a migrant “invasion” was an effort to rouse his political base ahead of the elections. Officials have stressed that the 5,900 active-duty US troops on the border are not there in a law enforcement capacity and that there are no plans for them to interact with migrants. Instead, their mission is to lend support to the CBP, and they have been stringing up concertina wire and erecting temporary housing. The commander of the mission told Reuters last week that the number of troops may have peaked, and he would soon look at whether to begin sending forces home or shifting some to new border positions. About 6,000 Central Americans have reached the border cities of Tijuana and Mexicali, according to local officials. More bands of migrants are making their way toward Tijuana, with around 10,000 expected. Hundreds of local residents on Sunday massed at a monument in a wealthy neighbourhood of Tijuana to protest the arrival of the migrants, with some carrying signs that said “Mexico first” and “No more migrants.” Last month, thousands of Central American migrants began a long journey from Honduras through Mexico toward the United States to seek asylum. Other bands of mostly Salvadorans followed, with a small group setting off on Sunday from San Salvador.

Trump to give US troops authority to protect immigration agents

The Trump administration is preparing to add Venezuela to a US list of state sponsors of terrorism, a move that would escalate Washington's diplomatic struggle with the government of President Nicolas Maduro, The Washington Post said on Monday.

The Post said the US State Department had been asking for feedback on the proposed move from various agencies in recent days, but it said US officials declined to say whether a final decision had been made about the designation.

Earlier, Maduro accused the Trump administration of seeking to assassinate him, as relations strain between the ideologically opposed nations. Asked about the remarks, the White House did not immediately provide a comment.

Almost 2 million Venezuelans have fled the ailing oil-rich nation since 2015, driven out by brutal food and medicine shortages, hyperinflation, and violent crime. Washington has imposed sanctions on Venezuela, denouncing Maduro as a dictator who has quashed human rights and triggered an economic meltdown.

(With inputs from Reuters)

The Trump administration is preparing to add Venezuela to a US list of state sponsors of terrorism, a move that would escalate Washington's diplomatic struggle with the government of President Nicolas Maduro, The Washington Post said on Monday.

The Trump administration is preparing to add Venezuela to a US list of state sponsors of terrorism, a move that would escalate Washington's diplomatic struggle with the government of President Nicolas Maduro, The Washington Post said on Monday. The Post said the US State Department had been asking for feedback on the proposed move from various agencies in recent days, but it said US officials declined to say whether a final decision had been made about the designation. Earlier, Maduro accused the Trump administration of seeking to assassinate him, as relations strain between the ideologically opposed nations. Asked about the remarks, the White House did not immediately provide a comment. Almost 2 million Venezuelans have fled the ailing oil-rich nation since 2015, driven out by brutal food and medicine shortages, hyperinflation, and violent crime. Washington has imposed sanctions on Venezuela, denouncing Maduro as a dictator who has quashed human rights and triggered an economic meltdown. (With inputs from Reuters)

US preparing to add Venezuela to terrorism sponsors list: Report

Pakistan remains a critical partner to America's South Asia strategy, the Pentagon said on Monday, a day after President Donald Trump said that Islamabad was not doing "a damn thing" for the US.

In an interview to a television news channel on Sunday, Trump had defended his administration's decision to stop hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to Pakistan for not doing enough to curb terrorism and criticised Islamabad for offering a hideout to Al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden in the garrison city of Abbottabad.

"The US and Pakistan have a strong mutual interest in the region. As you know, they are critical (and) vital to the South Asia strategy and including the facilitation of a peace process that would lead to a stable and peaceful Afghanistan," Col Rob Manning, Director of Defense Press Operations, told reporters during an off-camera news conference.

"They remain a critical partner in our South Asia strategy and there's been no change to our military-to-military relationship with Pakistan,? Manning said, responding to question about the series of tweets by President Trump and his interview to Fox News that Pakistan has done nothing for the United States.

"I do not have any announcement on any change to the military to military relationship we have with Pakistan," Manning said, when asked that his answers reflects that the Pentagon differs with the views of President Trump on Pakistan.&nbsp;

Pakistan remains a critical partner to America's South Asia strategy, the Pentagon said on Monday, a day after President Donald Trump said that Islamabad was not doing "a damn thing" for the US.

Pakistan remains a critical partner to America's South Asia strategy, the Pentagon said on Monday, a day after President Donald Trump said that Islamabad was not doing "a damn thing" for the US. In an interview to a television news channel on Sunday, Trump had defended his administration's decision to stop hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to Pakistan for not doing enough to curb terrorism and criticised Islamabad for offering a hideout to Al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden in the garrison city of Abbottabad. "The US and Pakistan have a strong mutual interest in the region. As you know, they are critical (and) vital to the South Asia strategy and including the facilitation of a peace process that would lead to a stable and peaceful Afghanistan," Col Rob Manning, Director of Defense Press Operations, told reporters during an off-camera news conference. "They remain a critical partner in our South Asia strategy and there's been no change to our military-to-military relationship with Pakistan,? Manning said, responding to question about the series of tweets by President Trump and his interview to Fox News that Pakistan has done nothing for the United States. "I do not have any announcement on any change to the military to military relationship we have with Pakistan," Manning said, when asked that his answers reflects that the Pentagon differs with the views of President Trump on Pakistan.

Pakistan remains a critical partner to US' South Asia strategy: Pentagon

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

US visas – a call to action

Migrants rush border, US guards beat them back with tear gas

Indian teen trolls US president Donald Trump over climate change

US looking at tools at its disposal to convince Pakistan to crack down on terrorist groups

Migrants at US border say they will cross over despite Trump stance

Climate change to cost US billions

News brief: Big stories of the day

All migrants at border to be held in Mexico while they're assessed: Trump

G20, forged in crisis, faces major test next week: Donald Trump

Climate change could cost US 'hundreds of billions' a year: Study

Trump hints at visiting Afghanistan during Thanksgiving message to US general

News brief: Big stories of the day

US report to detail costs of climate change as Trump downplays threat

US president Donald Trump may visit Afghanistan

Trump says US in 'very strong' negotiations in Afghanistan

Donald Trump and the Media: A match made in hell?

World Trade Organisation to rule in spat over US tariffs

News brief: Big stories of the day

Trump accuses US judges of making country 'unsafe'

US, South Korea scale back military exercise: Jim Mattis

Texas shelter helps asylum seekers as Trump clamps down

Gravitas:Donald Trump's thanksgiving Turkey Pardoning gets roasted on Social Media

Khashoggi crisis: Reshaping US politics and relations with Saudi Arabia

Congressional committee to investigate Ivanka Trump's private email use for work

Donald Trump stands by Saudi prince despite journalist Khashoggi's murder

Like Hillary, Ivanka Trump used personal email for government work: Report