High-Pitch Brexit Drama continues as Brexit Bill on pause after Parliament rejects timetable. To know more watch the video

Brexit Chaos Continue: Lawmakers reject fast-track timetable

Kim Kardashian says she wants to meet Greta Thunberg

Lawmaker Kim Kardashian soon?

Ukraine's parliament has approved a much-anticipated bill to scrap immunity from prosecution for lawmakers. Watch this video to know more.

Ukraine strips legislators' immunity

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson urged lawmakers to support an October 31 <a href="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/food-sector-is-absolutely-clear-that-a-no-deal-exit-is-a-disastrous-outcometrade-body-241342&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjD-bqNmvPjAhWY7HMBHSNwChMQFjADegQIDxAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw1B8F75BnlgyJjJ0HjnYsHo">Brexit</a>, saying they had promised to honour the result of the country's 2016 decision to leave the European Union.

"I think that MPs (Members of Parliament) should get on and deliver on what they have promised over and over and over again to the people of this country: they will deliver on the mandate of 2016 and leave the EU on Oct. 31," Johnson told reporters.

Asked about the prospect of losing a confidence vote in parliament and whether he would then delay an election until after Brexit he said: "We are going to leave the European Union on October 31, which is what the people of this country voted for."

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson urged lawmakers to support an October 31 Brexit, saying they had promised to honour the result of the country's 2016 decision to leave the European Union.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson urged lawmakers to support an October 31 Brexit, saying they had promised to honour the result of the country's 2016 decision to leave the European Union. "I think that MPs (Members of Parliament) should get on and deliver on what they have promised over and over and over again to the people of this country: they will deliver on the mandate of 2016 and leave the EU on Oct. 31," Johnson told reporters. Asked about the prospect of losing a confidence vote in parliament and whether he would then delay an election until after Brexit he said: "We are going to leave the European Union on October 31, which is what the people of this country voted for."

British Prime Minister Johnson urges lawmakers to back October 31 Brexit

BJP will hold an intense training programme of&nbsp;two days for all its Members of Parliament in Delhi to train and sensitise them on the issues related to parliamentary practice, ideology and party.&nbsp;

The importance of this meeting lies in the fact that the training session would give clarity to MPs on crucial ideological issues which are important to BJP. Prime Minister Narendra Modi will also attend Abhyas Varg on both days and is expected to speak at the event as well.

Sources also said that speakers from outside may also address the party MPs. Strict instructions have been sent from the organization that it should not be given a miss at all.&nbsp;

The programme is expected to start at 9 am and would finish at 9 pm.&nbsp;MPs will have breakfast, lunch and dinner at the venue of the training session itself.&nbsp;

Though details of the programme have not been officially released by the party the exercise is to ensure that certain basics of being a Member of Parliament, minister and organizational position holder are made clear to everyone in the party.

This is in contrast to all the major Opposition parties who hold a great public commitment to a certain ideology in public domain do very little to train their MPs when it comes to ideological commitment and responsibility towards parliament and the party.&nbsp;

In this case, BJP has charted a different course and has continued with a vigorous training programme for its elected representatives. Abhyas Varg will be organized in the Parliament for the BJP MPs.

BJP will hold an intense training programme of two days for all its Members of Parliament in Delhi to train and sensitise them on the issues related to parliamentary practice, ideology and party.

BJP will hold an intense training programme of two days for all its Members of Parliament in Delhi to train and sensitise them on the issues related to parliamentary practice, ideology and party. The importance of this meeting lies in the fact that the training session would give clarity to MPs on crucial ideological issues which are important to BJP. Prime Minister Narendra Modi will also attend Abhyas Varg on both days and is expected to speak at the event as well. Sources also said that speakers from outside may also address the party MPs. Strict instructions have been sent from the organization that it should not be given a miss at all. The programme is expected to start at 9 am and would finish at 9 pm. MPs will have breakfast, lunch and dinner at the venue of the training session itself. Though details of the programme have not been officially released by the party the exercise is to ensure that certain basics of being a Member of Parliament, minister and organizational position holder are made clear to everyone in the party. This is in contrast to all the major Opposition parties who hold a great public commitment to a certain ideology in public domain do very little to train their MPs when it comes to ideological commitment and responsibility towards parliament and the party. In this case, BJP has charted a different course and has continued with a vigorous training programme for its elected representatives. Abhyas Varg will be organized in the Parliament for the BJP MPs.

Now a training camp for lawmakers: BJP to conduct 'Abhyaas Varg' for its MPs

British MPs on Thursday backed a measure that would frustrate any attempt to force through a no-deal Brexit by suspending parliament, helped by several rebel members of the governing Conservatives.

The measure, which passed by 315 votes to 274, is a major setback for former London mayor Boris Johnson, who is expected to be named prime minister next Wednesday and has said he would be prepared to lead Britain into a no-deal Brexit.

The government had called for MPs to vote against the measure, but 17 Conservative legislators supported it and dozens more abstained, including finance minister Philip Hammond.

"The prime minister is obviously disappointed that a number of ministers failed to vote," a spokesman for PM Theresa May's Downing Street office said.

"No doubt her successor will take this into account when forming their government," he said.

Margot James, a junior government minister for the digital economy, resigned to vote in favour of the law.

The scale of the rebellion within the Conservative Party demonstrates the challenge that Johnson would face if he pursues a hardline Brexit agenda once in power.

Catherine Haddon, from the Institute for Government think-tank, said the vote was "a big show of intent" that did not clearly rule out a suspension of parliament.

Sky News television earlier cited sources close to Johnson saying he could call a new session of parliament, which would require its temporary suspension, in order to prevent MPs from attempting to block a no-deal Brexit.

The vote was on an amendment to legislation relating to Northern Ireland and requires parliament to meet on a regular basis to discuss the progress of talks on restoring the Northern Ireland Assembly, which collapsed in 2017.

The legislation now needs to go to the upper House of Lords for approval.

Hilary Benn, an MP from the main opposition Labour Party who put forward the amendment, said it was important that parliament should be sitting at a "crucial time for our country".

"I don't think we could accept circumstances, if I may coin the phrase, in which we were sent missing in action."

Britain is currently scheduled to leave the European Union on October 31 unless an extension is agreed.

Johnson has said he will push for a new deal with Brussels but would be prepared to lead Britain out of the bloc with no overall agreement in place if not.

Business leaders have warned about the prospect of serious economic disruption in the case of a no-deal Brexit and the government's official forecaster on Thursday warned it could trigger a year-long recession.

British MPs on Thursday backed a measure that would frustrate any attempt to force through a no-deal Brexit by suspending parliament, helped by several rebel members of the governing Conservatives.

British MPs on Thursday backed a measure that would frustrate any attempt to force through a no-deal Brexit by suspending parliament, helped by several rebel members of the governing Conservatives. The measure, which passed by 315 votes to 274, is a major setback for former London mayor Boris Johnson, who is expected to be named prime minister next Wednesday and has said he would be prepared to lead Britain into a no-deal Brexit. The government had called for MPs to vote against the measure, but 17 Conservative legislators supported it and dozens more abstained, including finance minister Philip Hammond. "The prime minister is obviously disappointed that a number of ministers failed to vote," a spokesman for PM Theresa May's Downing Street office said. "No doubt her successor will take this into account when forming their government," he said. Margot James, a junior government minister for the digital economy, resigned to vote in favour of the law. The scale of the rebellion within the Conservative Party demonstrates the challenge that Johnson would face if he pursues a hardline Brexit agenda once in power. Catherine Haddon, from the Institute for Government think-tank, said the vote was "a big show of intent" that did not clearly rule out a suspension of parliament. Sky News television earlier cited sources close to Johnson saying he could call a new session of parliament, which would require its temporary suspension, in order to prevent MPs from attempting to block a no-deal Brexit. The vote was on an amendment to legislation relating to Northern Ireland and requires parliament to meet on a regular basis to discuss the progress of talks on restoring the Northern Ireland Assembly, which collapsed in 2017. The legislation now needs to go to the upper House of Lords for approval. Hilary Benn, an MP from the main opposition Labour Party who put forward the amendment, said it was important that parliament should be sitting at a "crucial time for our country". "I don't think we could accept circumstances, if I may coin the phrase, in which we were sent missing in action." Britain is currently scheduled to leave the European Union on October 31 unless an extension is agreed. Johnson has said he will push for a new deal with Brussels but would be prepared to lead Britain out of the bloc with no overall agreement in place if not. Business leaders have warned about the prospect of serious economic disruption in the case of a no-deal Brexit and the government's official forecaster on Thursday warned it could trigger a year-long recession.

UK lawmakers vote in bid to frustrate no-deal Brexit

President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-defiant-as-lawmakers-blast-his-racist-attacks-on-four-congresswomen-236257">Donald Trump</a> intensified his vilification of four liberal lawmakers as un-American at a raucous rally on Wednesday, underscoring that the attacks will be a key part of his strategy for winning re-election in 2020.&nbsp;

Despite criticism from Democrats that his comments about the four minority congresswomen are racist, Trump went on a 20-minute diatribe about them, saying they were welcome to leave the country if they do not like his policies on issues such as immigration and defending Israel.

“So these congresswomen, their comments are helping to fuel the rise of a dangerous, militant hard left,” Trump said to roars from the crowd in North Carolina, a state seen as key to his re-election.

Trump tweeted on the weekend that the four progressive representatives, known as “the squad” - Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ayanna Pressley of Ohio - should “go back” where they came from, even though all are U.S. citizens and three are U.S.-born.

The aim, one source close to Trump said, was to make Democrats look as far left as possible to moderate voters as he girds for a tough re-election battle in November 2020.

“He is trying to make them the face of the Democratic Party as we move closer into the 2020 cycle and he’s trying to highlight them as a fringe crowd as much as possible so it turns off your middle-of-the-road voters,” the source said.

As Trump recounted past comments made by Omar - who was born in Somalia and emigrated to the United States as a child - the crowd began chanting: “Send her back!”

“Tonight I have a suggestion for the hate-filled extremists who are constantly trying to tear our country down. They never have anything good to say. That’s why I say: ‘Hey, if they don’t like it, let them leave. Let them leave,’” Trump said.&nbsp;

Winning tactic?

The Twitter attacks over the weekend initially caused some heartburn for Trump advisers who felt he had gone too far. But two advisers said Trump’s subsequent tweets had since offered a contrasting view, that the political views of the four lawmakers - known as the “squad” - were socialist, out of the mainstream and hateful to their home country, compared with that of the president and his flag-waving rhetoric.

“If the American people have to choose between the squad and the president, then that’s an easy decision for voters to make,” said one adviser.

Trump, who during his 2016 campaign voiced harsh assessments of the state of the country, tweeted a video ahead of the rally that featured patriotic scenes of the president meeting Americans, with frequent images of the American flag. It ended with the slogan: “America - One Squad Under God.”&nbsp;

The tactic follows a well-worn path for Trump, who called for a ban on Muslims entering the United States during his 2016 campaign. His proposal drew widespread criticism at the time, but Republicans overwhelmingly supported it, and it was a factor in his victory that year.

Over the weekend, Trump inserted himself into what had been an internecine Democratic Party fight that pitted Omar, Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib and Pressley against House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who publicly doubted their level of influence among fellow House Democrats.

Traditionally, politicians feel they gain most when they remain silent as their opponents fight among themselves. But Trump, never one to resist stirring up a firestorm, weighed in like a charging bull.

He first defended Pelosi, then attacked the four. That prompted Pelosi to switch tactics and defend her flock, prompting Trump and other Republicans to argue the squad’s attempts to push the Democratic Party to the left were working.

The Democratic-controlled House voted on Tuesday largely along party lines to formally condemn Trump’s remarks as “racist.”

His attacks had a spur-of-the-moment quality to them that the Republican Party later built a strategy around.&nbsp;

Barry Bennett, who advised Trump’s 2016 campaign, said the tactic had worked. “The Democratic Party last week was trying to distance itself from the squad, and this week they’re hugging them, and that is a massive win for Trump,” he said.&nbsp;

But not all Republicans were comfortable with the approach.

“I’m disappointed in the tweets,” said Steve Duprey, a member of the Republican National Committee from New Hampshire.

“I know the president is subject to lots of attacks, but he should always try to turn the other cheek and take the high road in my view,” Duprey said.&nbsp;

President Donald Trump intensified his vilification of four liberal lawmakers as un-American at a raucous rally on Wednesday, underscoring that the attacks will be a key part of his strategy for winning re-election in 2020.

President Donald Trump intensified his vilification of four liberal lawmakers as un-American at a raucous rally on Wednesday, underscoring that the attacks will be a key part of his strategy for winning re-election in 2020. Despite criticism from Democrats that his comments about the four minority congresswomen are racist, Trump went on a 20-minute diatribe about them, saying they were welcome to leave the country if they do not like his policies on issues such as immigration and defending Israel. “So these congresswomen, their comments are helping to fuel the rise of a dangerous, militant hard left,” Trump said to roars from the crowd in North Carolina, a state seen as key to his re-election. Trump tweeted on the weekend that the four progressive representatives, known as “the squad” - Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ayanna Pressley of Ohio - should “go back” where they came from, even though all are U.S. citizens and three are U.S.-born. The aim, one source close to Trump said, was to make Democrats look as far left as possible to moderate voters as he girds for a tough re-election battle in November 2020. “He is trying to make them the face of the Democratic Party as we move closer into the 2020 cycle and he’s trying to highlight them as a fringe crowd as much as possible so it turns off your middle-of-the-road voters,” the source said. As Trump recounted past comments made by Omar - who was born in Somalia and emigrated to the United States as a child - the crowd began chanting: “Send her back!” “Tonight I have a suggestion for the hate-filled extremists who are constantly trying to tear our country down. They never have anything good to say. That’s why I say: ‘Hey, if they don’t like it, let them leave. Let them leave,’” Trump said. Winning tactic? The Twitter attacks over the weekend initially caused some heartburn for Trump advisers who felt he had gone too far. But two advisers said Trump’s subsequent tweets had since offered a contrasting view, that the political views of the four lawmakers - known as the “squad” - were socialist, out of the mainstream and hateful to their home country, compared with that of the president and his flag-waving rhetoric. “If the American people have to choose between the squad and the president, then that’s an easy decision for voters to make,” said one adviser. Trump, who during his 2016 campaign voiced harsh assessments of the state of the country, tweeted a video ahead of the rally that featured patriotic scenes of the president meeting Americans, with frequent images of the American flag. It ended with the slogan: “America - One Squad Under God.” The tactic follows a well-worn path for Trump, who called for a ban on Muslims entering the United States during his 2016 campaign. His proposal drew widespread criticism at the time, but Republicans overwhelmingly supported it, and it was a factor in his victory that year. Over the weekend, Trump inserted himself into what had been an internecine Democratic Party fight that pitted Omar, Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib and Pressley against House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who publicly doubted their level of influence among fellow House Democrats. Traditionally, politicians feel they gain most when they remain silent as their opponents fight among themselves. But Trump, never one to resist stirring up a firestorm, weighed in like a charging bull. He first defended Pelosi, then attacked the four. That prompted Pelosi to switch tactics and defend her flock, prompting Trump and other Republicans to argue the squad’s attempts to push the Democratic Party to the left were working. The Democratic-controlled House voted on Tuesday largely along party lines to formally condemn Trump’s remarks as “racist.” His attacks had a spur-of-the-moment quality to them that the Republican Party later built a strategy around. Barry Bennett, who advised Trump’s 2016 campaign, said the tactic had worked. “The Democratic Party last week was trying to distance itself from the squad, and this week they’re hugging them, and that is a massive win for Trump,” he said. But not all Republicans were comfortable with the approach. “I’m disappointed in the tweets,” said Steve Duprey, a member of the Republican National Committee from New Hampshire. “I know the president is subject to lots of attacks, but he should always try to turn the other cheek and take the high road in my view,” Duprey said.

Unbowed, Trump intensifies attacks on four Democratic congresswomen

President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-tells-democratic-congresswomen-to-go-back-to-fix-countries-they-came-from-235979">Donald Trump</a> doubled down on his attacks against four minority US congresswomen on Monday and dismissed concerns that his comments were racist, prompting outrage from Democrats, who moved to condemn him in the House of Representatives.

Speaking at the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-administration-moves-to-block-asylum-for-migrants-entering-us-from-mexico-236236">White House, Trump</a> said people he described as critical of the United States should leave the country.

Those remarks followed his Twitter messages on Sunday that said the four left-wing lawmakers, known in Congress as "the squad," should go back to "the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came."

All four of the first-term House members are US&nbsp;citizens and all but one were born in the United States.

"If you're not happy in the US, if you're complaining all the time, very simply: You can leave," he said, drawing scattered applause from a crowd of businesspeople.

Asked if he was concerned that some viewed his remarks as racist and that white supremacists found common cause with him, Trump said he was not. "It doesn`t concern me because many people agree with me," Trump said.

<img alt="Washington" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="0bf240dd-2a3c-4ae3-a211-f21d0bb5ba98" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design%20%283%29_17.jpg" />

US Representatives Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) hold a news conference after Democrats in the US Congress moved to formally condemn President Donald Trump's attacks on the four minority congresswomen on Capitol Hill in Washington, US, July 15, 2019. &nbsp;(Reuters Photo)

The president`s remarks were widely derided and some, though not many, of his fellow Republicans spoke out against them.

Trump did not identify the lawmakers by name in his Sunday tweets, but he appeared to refer to representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan.

All four have been critical of Trump, as well as of the current Democratic leaders of the House, straining party unity in that chamber.

At a press conference on Capitol Hill, the four lawmakers said Trump was trying to sow division and distract attention from what they characterized as failed policies on immigration, healthcare and taxation.

"Weak minds and leaders challenge loyalty to our country in order to avoid challenging and debating the policy," Ocasio-Cortez said.

Tlaib and Omar repeated their calls for Trump to be impeached.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has been criticized by members of "the squad," said her party would introduce a resolution condemning Trump`s "xenophobic tweets."

A draft of the resolution, seen by Reuters late on Monday, said the House "strongly condemns President Donald Trump`s racist comments that have legitimised and increased fear and hatred of new Americans and people of colour ..."

Representative Steny Hoyer, the No. 2 Democrat in the House, told reporters the resolution could be on the House floor for debate as soon as Tuesday.

Such a resolution could put Trump`s fellow Republicans in Congress in an awkward position, forcing them either to vote against their party`s leader, who has strong support among conservatives, or effectively to defend his statements.

Trump's attacks elevated the profiles of the four progressive Democrats, who have helped push the party`s agenda to the left, causing concern among Democratic moderates who are eager to hold onto their seats in the 2020 election.

A few Republicans speak out

Trump has a history of what critics consider race-baiting. He led a movement that falsely claimed former President Barack Obama was not born in the United States, and he said after a deadly, white supremacist-led rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, that "both sides" were to blame for violence there.

"This is the agenda of white nationalists, whether it is happening in chat rooms, or it's happening on national TV, and now it`s reached the White House garden," Omar said.

Although most Republicans stayed silent on Trump`s divisive rhetoric, several began expressing concern late on Monday.

Texas Representative Will Hurd, the only African-American Republican in the House, called the attacks "racist" on CNN.

Tim Scott, the Senate's only black Republican, called them "racially offensive" on Twitter.

Others did not go that far. Senator Mitt Romney, the party`s 2012 presidential nominee, and Senator Marco Rubio, who ran in 2016, both condemned the remarks but declined to characterize them as racist.

House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy said the four lawmakers belonged in the United States, but did not criticise Trump. "The president is not a racist," he told reporters.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell did not comment on the controversy.

Trump regularly used racially charged language during his campaign and continued in his presidency. His latest remarks came as some of his efforts to deal with immigration - a major issue for his conservative base - have faltered.

Trump promised as a candidate to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and that Mexico would pay for it. As president, very little has happened on wall construction and Mexico has resolutely refused to pay for a wall.

'Racism, division'

In his Sunday tweets, Trump said of the four congresswomen, "Why don`t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came ... Then come back and show us how ... it is done."

Ocasio-Cortez, Pressley and Tlaib were born in the United States while Omar, a Somali refugee, arrived in 1992.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a sometime Trump golf partner and adviser, called the four congresswomen "communist" and "anti-Semitic" on Fox News on Monday, but he also called on Trump to stop making such personal attacks.

"Aim higher ... Take on their policies. The bottom line here is this is a diverse country," he said, adding that he had spoken to Trump.

President Donald Trump doubled down on his attacks against four minority US congresswomen on Monday and dismissed concerns that his comments were racist, prompting outrage from Democrats, who moved to condemn him in the House of Representatives.

President Donald Trump doubled down on his attacks against four minority US congresswomen on Monday and dismissed concerns that his comments were racist, prompting outrage from Democrats, who moved to condemn him in the House of Representatives. Speaking at the White House, Trump said people he described as critical of the United States should leave the country. Those remarks followed his Twitter messages on Sunday that said the four left-wing lawmakers, known in Congress as "the squad," should go back to "the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came." All four of the first-term House members are US citizens and all but one were born in the United States. "If you're not happy in the US, if you're complaining all the time, very simply: You can leave," he said, drawing scattered applause from a crowd of businesspeople. Asked if he was concerned that some viewed his remarks as racist and that white supremacists found common cause with him, Trump said he was not. "It doesn`t concern me because many people agree with me," Trump said. US Representatives Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) hold a news conference after Democrats in the US Congress moved to formally condemn President Donald Trump's attacks on the four minority congresswomen on Capitol Hill in Washington, US, July 15, 2019. (Reuters Photo) The president`s remarks were widely derided and some, though not many, of his fellow Republicans spoke out against them. Trump did not identify the lawmakers by name in his Sunday tweets, but he appeared to refer to representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan. All four have been critical of Trump, as well as of the current Democratic leaders of the House, straining party unity in that chamber. At a press conference on Capitol Hill, the four lawmakers said Trump was trying to sow division and distract attention from what they characterized as failed policies on immigration, healthcare and taxation. "Weak minds and leaders challenge loyalty to our country in order to avoid challenging and debating the policy," Ocasio-Cortez said. Tlaib and Omar repeated their calls for Trump to be impeached. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has been criticized by members of "the squad," said her party would introduce a resolution condemning Trump`s "xenophobic tweets." A draft of the resolution, seen by Reuters late on Monday, said the House "strongly condemns President Donald Trump`s racist comments that have legitimised and increased fear and hatred of new Americans and people of colour ..." Representative Steny Hoyer, the No. 2 Democrat in the House, told reporters the resolution could be on the House floor for debate as soon as Tuesday. Such a resolution could put Trump`s fellow Republicans in Congress in an awkward position, forcing them either to vote against their party`s leader, who has strong support among conservatives, or effectively to defend his statements. Trump's attacks elevated the profiles of the four progressive Democrats, who have helped push the party`s agenda to the left, causing concern among Democratic moderates who are eager to hold onto their seats in the 2020 election. A few Republicans speak out Trump has a history of what critics consider race-baiting. He led a movement that falsely claimed former President Barack Obama was not born in the United States, and he said after a deadly, white supremacist-led rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, that "both sides" were to blame for violence there. "This is the agenda of white nationalists, whether it is happening in chat rooms, or it's happening on national TV, and now it`s reached the White House garden," Omar said. Although most Republicans stayed silent on Trump`s divisive rhetoric, several began expressing concern late on Monday. Texas Representative Will Hurd, the only African-American Republican in the House, called the attacks "racist" on CNN. Tim Scott, the Senate's only black Republican, called them "racially offensive" on Twitter. Others did not go that far. Senator Mitt Romney, the party`s 2012 presidential nominee, and Senator Marco Rubio, who ran in 2016, both condemned the remarks but declined to characterize them as racist. House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy said the four lawmakers belonged in the United States, but did not criticise Trump. "The president is not a racist," he told reporters. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell did not comment on the controversy. Trump regularly used racially charged language during his campaign and continued in his presidency. His latest remarks came as some of his efforts to deal with immigration - a major issue for his conservative base - have faltered. Trump promised as a candidate to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and that Mexico would pay for it. As president, very little has happened on wall construction and Mexico has resolutely refused to pay for a wall. 'Racism, division' In his Sunday tweets, Trump said of the four congresswomen, "Why don`t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came ... Then come back and show us how ... it is done." Ocasio-Cortez, Pressley and Tlaib were born in the United States while Omar, a Somali refugee, arrived in 1992. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a sometime Trump golf partner and adviser, called the four congresswomen "communist" and "anti-Semitic" on Fox News on Monday, but he also called on Trump to stop making such personal attacks. "Aim higher ... Take on their policies. The bottom line here is this is a diverse country," he said, adding that he had spoken to Trump.

Donald Trump defiant as lawmakers blast his 'racist' attacks on four congresswomen

A draft land bill is at the centre of a row in Sri Lanka. The draft bill at the centre of the controversy is the State Land (Special Provision) Bill which will enable Sri Lankan citizens to sell land. Watch this video to know more.

Draft land bill stirs a row in Sri Lanka

Bill was tabled in the legislature last month. Lawmakers have moved court against the bill. Government says that land reforms are necessary. A draft land bill is at the centre of a row. Watch this video to know more.

Land bill stirs a row in Sri Lanka

Protests Over The Controversial Extradition Bill Bring Hong Kong To A Standstill. What Does It Mean When Lawmakers Couldn't Reach The Parliament To Vote On A Controversial Bill? That's The Extent Of Chaos In Hong Kong. The Government Says That The Extradition Bill Will Prevent Hong Kong From Becoming A Safe Haven For Criminals. But The Backlash From People Has Intensified.

Gravitas: Hong Kong Descends Into Violent Chaos

WION Gravitas: 7 Lawmakers resign from Labour Party over Brexit

Egyptian lawmakers on Sunday tabled proposed constitutional changes that would allow President <a href="http://wionews.com/world/watch-putin-gives-president-sisi-a-ride-around-f-1-circuit-in-sochi-172062">Abdel Fattah al-Sisi </a>to extend his rule beyond 2022, legislators said.

The bill submitted to speaker Ali Abdel Aal calls for several amendments to the constitution, including on the duration of presidential mandates currently limited to two four-year terms.

The lawmakers who put forward the amendments hope to extend the length of mandates to two six-year terms, which they say would allow Sisi to run for the presidency two more times after his second term expires in 2022.

That could see the former military chief ruling over Egypt until 2034.&nbsp;

The parliament's website said speaker Abdel Aal had received a "request from a fifth of the elected representatives (120 deputies out of the total 596) to amend certain articles of the constitution".&nbsp;

That number fulfils the quorum required for such a request.

A statement published later on the parliament's website outlined seven amendments that it said would address "severe deficiencies in determining the presidency term".

Terms would become six years instead of four years since the current term length "isn't quite reasonable given the reality and the country's and region's circumstances", it said.

The revisions were aimed at supporting the parliamentary representation of women, youths, Christians, people with special needs and Egyptians in the diaspora, it added.

They would include "the establishment of the second chamber of parliament... and the creation of the post of vice president to assist the president in his duties," said the statement.

The bill was submitted by the majority pro-government Support Egypt coalition along with some independents, said Mustafa Bakri, one of the lawmakers who favour the change.

Jean Talaat, another Sisi backer said, "the amendments concern fewer than 10 articles of the constitution, including on the duration of the presidential term for its extension to six years".

The establishment of a lower house would see a return to a bicameral parliamentary system.&nbsp;

That chamber was removed in the 2012 constitution, a year after the uprising that toppled long-time president Hosni Mubarak.

Another amendment would see the reinstatement of an information ministry, a portfolio that was abolished in 2014.

Sisi was elected for the first time in 2014, after ousting his predecessor, the Islamist Mohamed Morsi. The former army head was re-elected in 2018 with an official 97 per cent of the vote.

The vast majority of the current parliament supports the Sisi government, with only around 10 lawmakers making up the opposition. 
&nbsp;

Egyptian lawmakers on Sunday tabled proposed constitutional changes that would allow President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi to extend his rule beyond 2022, legislators said.

Egyptian lawmakers on Sunday tabled proposed constitutional changes that would allow President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi to extend his rule beyond 2022, legislators said. The bill submitted to speaker Ali Abdel Aal calls for several amendments to the constitution, including on the duration of presidential mandates currently limited to two four-year terms. The lawmakers who put forward the amendments hope to extend the length of mandates to two six-year terms, which they say would allow Sisi to run for the presidency two more times after his second term expires in 2022. That could see the former military chief ruling over Egypt until 2034. The parliament's website said speaker Abdel Aal had received a "request from a fifth of the elected representatives (120 deputies out of the total 596) to amend certain articles of the constitution". That number fulfils the quorum required for such a request. A statement published later on the parliament's website outlined seven amendments that it said would address "severe deficiencies in determining the presidency term". Terms would become six years instead of four years since the current term length "isn't quite reasonable given the reality and the country's and region's circumstances", it said. The revisions were aimed at supporting the parliamentary representation of women, youths, Christians, people with special needs and Egyptians in the diaspora, it added. They would include "the establishment of the second chamber of parliament... and the creation of the post of vice president to assist the president in his duties," said the statement. The bill was submitted by the majority pro-government Support Egypt coalition along with some independents, said Mustafa Bakri, one of the lawmakers who favour the change. Jean Talaat, another Sisi backer said, "the amendments concern fewer than 10 articles of the constitution, including on the duration of the presidential term for its extension to six years". The establishment of a lower house would see a return to a bicameral parliamentary system. That chamber was removed in the 2012 constitution, a year after the uprising that toppled long-time president Hosni Mubarak. Another amendment would see the reinstatement of an information ministry, a portfolio that was abolished in 2014. Sisi was elected for the first time in 2014, after ousting his predecessor, the Islamist Mohamed Morsi. The former army head was re-elected in 2018 with an official 97 per cent of the vote. The vast majority of the current parliament supports the Sisi government, with only around 10 lawmakers making up the opposition.

Egypt MPs table law amendment to extend President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi rule

President Donald Trump expressed skepticism on Sunday that US lawmakers seeking to avoid another <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/how-us-shutdown-over-border-wall-fight-might-play-out-192604">government shutdown </a>could reach a deal on<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-shutdown-sends-economy-into-uncharted-waters-189942"> border security</a> that he would accept, as he renewed his vow to build a wall on the southern border with Mexico.

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Trump said chances were low that Congress could craft an agreement and avoid another closure of part of the US government in three weeks' time when funding will expire.

"I personally think it's less than 50-50, but you have a lot of very good people on that board," the president said, referring to the committee of lawmakers appointed to work out a compromise on border security funding.

Another shutdown, Trump told the Wall Street Journal, was "certainly an option."

The president has also said he might declare a national emergency in order to build his border wall. Democrats would likely challenge that in court.

"Does anybody really think I won’t build the WALL? Done more in the first two years than any President!" Trump wrote on Twitter on Sunday evening.

Democratic resistance to Republican Trump's demand for $5.7 billion for a border wall resulted in a 35-day shutdown of about a fourth of the US government, a closure that just ended on Friday.

The five-week standoff damaged the US economy, left many federal workers scrambling to make ends meet and tested Americans' patience with delays to air travel, closures of national parks and other disruptions.

After opinion polls showed Americans increasingly blamed Trump for the situation, the president signed a measure on Friday to fund the government for three weeks as congressional negotiators try to work out a bill to fully fund the agencies through September 30.

But Trump also threatened to resume the shutdown on February 15 if he does not get what he wants.

In his interview with the Wall Street Journal, Trump also sounded doubtful about a possible deal involving both wall money and a broader overhaul of US immigration laws.

"I doubt it," he said when asked if he would agree to citizenship for a group of immigrants known as "Dreamers," who were brought to the United States illegally as children - in exchange for border wall funding.

"That’s a separate subject to be taken up at a separate time," Trump said.

'SHUTDOWNS NOT GOOD LEVERAGE'

Earlier on Sunday, some lawmakers criticized using the closure of federal agencies as a tool in policy disputes. Senior legislators from both parties said the latest shutdown, the 19th since the mid-1970s, was as ineffective as previous ones but much more disruptive as it was the longest in US history.

"Shutdowns are not good leverage in any negotiation," Republican Senator Marco Rubio said on NBC's "Meet the Press," urging congressional negotiators to tackle border security in the three-week talks launched by last week's shutdown-ending deal.

Hakeem Jeffries, chairman of the Democratic caucus in the House of Representatives, said on the same television show that shutdowns were "not legitimate negotiating tactics" in public policy disagreements between two branches of government.

About 800,000 federal workers were furloughed or worked without pay during the shutdown, missing at least two paychecks that officials are now working to make up for.

"We hope that by the end of this week, all the back pay will be made up," acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney said on CBS' "Face the Nation."

Federal workers are owed about $6 billion in back pay, according to a study released last week.

As a candidate, Trump pledged to build the wall, with Mexico paying for it.

Mexico refused and now Trump wants US taxpayers to pay for the barrier, which he sees as key to curbing illegal immigration and illegal drug flows into the country.

Democrats say a wall would be too costly and ineffective.

It remained unclear when Trump would deliver his State of the Union address, which was postponed during the shutdown. One administration official, who asked not to be named, said on Saturday the speech would likely not occur until February.

President Donald Trump expressed skepticism on Sunday that US lawmakers seeking to avoid another government shutdown could reach a deal on border security that he would accept, as he renewed his vow to build a wall on the southern border with Mexico.

President Donald Trump expressed skepticism on Sunday that US lawmakers seeking to avoid another government shutdown could reach a deal on border security that he would accept, as he renewed his vow to build a wall on the southern border with Mexico. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Trump said chances were low that Congress could craft an agreement and avoid another closure of part of the US government in three weeks' time when funding will expire. "I personally think it's less than 50-50, but you have a lot of very good people on that board," the president said, referring to the committee of lawmakers appointed to work out a compromise on border security funding. Another shutdown, Trump told the Wall Street Journal, was "certainly an option." The president has also said he might declare a national emergency in order to build his border wall. Democrats would likely challenge that in court. "Does anybody really think I won’t build the WALL? Done more in the first two years than any President!" Trump wrote on Twitter on Sunday evening. Democratic resistance to Republican Trump's demand for $5.7 billion for a border wall resulted in a 35-day shutdown of about a fourth of the US government, a closure that just ended on Friday. The five-week standoff damaged the US economy, left many federal workers scrambling to make ends meet and tested Americans' patience with delays to air travel, closures of national parks and other disruptions. After opinion polls showed Americans increasingly blamed Trump for the situation, the president signed a measure on Friday to fund the government for three weeks as congressional negotiators try to work out a bill to fully fund the agencies through September 30. But Trump also threatened to resume the shutdown on February 15 if he does not get what he wants. In his interview with the Wall Street Journal, Trump also sounded doubtful about a possible deal involving both wall money and a broader overhaul of US immigration laws. "I doubt it," he said when asked if he would agree to citizenship for a group of immigrants known as "Dreamers," who were brought to the United States illegally as children - in exchange for border wall funding. "That’s a separate subject to be taken up at a separate time," Trump said. 'SHUTDOWNS NOT GOOD LEVERAGE' Earlier on Sunday, some lawmakers criticized using the closure of federal agencies as a tool in policy disputes. Senior legislators from both parties said the latest shutdown, the 19th since the mid-1970s, was as ineffective as previous ones but much more disruptive as it was the longest in US history. "Shutdowns are not good leverage in any negotiation," Republican Senator Marco Rubio said on NBC's "Meet the Press," urging congressional negotiators to tackle border security in the three-week talks launched by last week's shutdown-ending deal. Hakeem Jeffries, chairman of the Democratic caucus in the House of Representatives, said on the same television show that shutdowns were "not legitimate negotiating tactics" in public policy disagreements between two branches of government. About 800,000 federal workers were furloughed or worked without pay during the shutdown, missing at least two paychecks that officials are now working to make up for. "We hope that by the end of this week, all the back pay will be made up," acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney said on CBS' "Face the Nation." Federal workers are owed about $6 billion in back pay, according to a study released last week. As a candidate, Trump pledged to build the wall, with Mexico paying for it. Mexico refused and now Trump wants US taxpayers to pay for the barrier, which he sees as key to curbing illegal immigration and illegal drug flows into the country. Democrats say a wall would be too costly and ineffective. It remained unclear when Trump would deliver his State of the Union address, which was postponed during the shutdown. One administration official, who asked not to be named, said on Saturday the speech would likely not occur until February.

Trump doubts lawmakers can reach acceptable border security deal

The date Britain leaves the EU could be pushed back by a couple of weeks to give time for legislation to be approved by lawmakers, the leader of Britain's lower house of parliament said, the most senior figure to make such a suggestion.

Britain, the world's fifth largest economy, is due to leave the European Union on March 29 but <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/attempts-to-delay-brexit-do-not-solve-the-issue-says-uk-pm-theresa-may-19231">Prime Minister Theresa May</a>'s negotiated exit deal was rejected by lawmakers, leaving open the possibility of a disorderly <a href="http://www.wionews.com/opinions/why-a-no-deal-brexit-would-be-less-costly-for-the-eu-than-the-uk-192654">Brexit</a>.

Parliament will now vote on a series of amendments on Tuesday with the United Kingdom facing its deepest political crisis in half a century as it grapples with how, or even whether, to exit the European project it joined in 1973.

"We can get the legislation through and I think we do, in spite of everything, have a very strong relationship with our EU friends and neighbours and I am absolutely certain that if we needed a couple of extra weeks or something then that would be feasible," Andrea Leadsom told the BBC.

Responding to the idea that this would mean extending the two-year Article 50 negotiation period, Leadsom, who is the organiser of government business in the lower house of parliament, told the BBC:

"It doesn't necessarily mean that. I think we would want to think carefully about it. But as things stand I do feel that we can get, with the support of both Houses - the House of Commons and the House of Lords - with goodwill and a determination we can still get the legislation through in good time."

A spokeswoman at May's No. 10 Downing Street office said the government's position had not changed.

"We are not considering an extension to article 50 and are committed to doing whatever it takes to have the statute books ready for when we leave the EU on March 29th this year."

The uncertainty has prompted several businesses to warn of the threat to jobs and investment if Britain were to crash out of the EU, potentially disrupting food and medicine supplies, manufacturers and transportation.

The date Britain leaves the EU could be pushed back by a couple of weeks to give time for legislation to be approved by lawmakers, the leader of Britain's lower house of parliament said, the most senior figure to make such a suggestion.

The date Britain leaves the EU could be pushed back by a couple of weeks to give time for legislation to be approved by lawmakers, the leader of Britain's lower house of parliament said, the most senior figure to make such a suggestion. Britain, the world's fifth largest economy, is due to leave the European Union on March 29 but Prime Minister Theresa May's negotiated exit deal was rejected by lawmakers, leaving open the possibility of a disorderly Brexit. Parliament will now vote on a series of amendments on Tuesday with the United Kingdom facing its deepest political crisis in half a century as it grapples with how, or even whether, to exit the European project it joined in 1973. "We can get the legislation through and I think we do, in spite of everything, have a very strong relationship with our EU friends and neighbours and I am absolutely certain that if we needed a couple of extra weeks or something then that would be feasible," Andrea Leadsom told the BBC. Responding to the idea that this would mean extending the two-year Article 50 negotiation period, Leadsom, who is the organiser of government business in the lower house of parliament, told the BBC: "It doesn't necessarily mean that. I think we would want to think carefully about it. But as things stand I do feel that we can get, with the support of both Houses - the House of Commons and the House of Lords - with goodwill and a determination we can still get the legislation through in good time." A spokeswoman at May's No. 10 Downing Street office said the government's position had not changed. "We are not considering an extension to article 50 and are committed to doing whatever it takes to have the statute books ready for when we leave the EU on March 29th this year." The uncertainty has prompted several businesses to warn of the threat to jobs and investment if Britain were to crash out of the EU, potentially disrupting food and medicine supplies, manufacturers and transportation.

Brexit date could be pushed back by a 'couple of extra weeks': Energy minister Leadsom

Greek police fired teargas to disperse crowds gathered outside parliament on Thursday to protest against a deal over the name of neighbouring Macedonia, as an at times angry parliamentary debate spilled into a third day.

Several thousand people massed outside the Greek legislature, some of them chanting "traitors" as lawmakers debated ratification of an agreement reached with the neighbouring ex-Yugoslav state last year.

The Greek parliament delayed the expected approval of the UN-brokered deal by a day due to an increased number of lawmakers who wanted to have a say over it.

The so-called Prespes Agreement between Athens and Skopje changes the tiny Balkan nation's name to Republic of North Macedonia, ending a 28-year-old row between the two countries.

"We are one step before a historic event," Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras said, calling on lawmakers to approve the deal.

Although Tsipras appears to have secured the support of at least 151 deputies in the 300-seat house to get the deal approved, opinion polls have shown most Greeks oppose the term "Macedonia" being used in any agreement. They fear it could lead to territorial claims over Greece's largest northern province of Macedonia and an appropriation of Greek cultural heritage.

"We feel betrayed," Zografos Stathakopoulos, a 47-year-old protester, said on Thursday. "Most Greeks don't want this deal, but politicians are betraying us."

The deal could unblock Macedonia's bids to join NATO and the European Union, long blocked by Greece. The accord has already been ratified by Macedonia's parliament, but still needs Greek parliamentary endorsement.

Members of the Greek Communist Party (KKE) unfurled banners on the walls of the ancient Acropolis to protest against the deal on Thursday. The conservative New Democracy party called the deal a "national defeat."

Outside parliament, protesters chanted "Long live Macedonia, long live Greece!" referring to the Greek province of Macedonia. Police chased protesters on Syntagma Square, the same area of large, violent protests in Athens on Sunday.

They later detained dozens of them and a group of people who sprayed "Macedonia-Greek land" on a wall near the US&nbsp;ambassador's residence in Athens, a police official said.

There were also protests in the northern Greek city of Thessaloniki and other cities.

Parliamentary speaker Nikos Voutsis said close to 230 MPs had wanted to have their say. Most are given six minutes to speak, a rule which has been routinely broken in the highly charged session, which opened on Wednesday.

Protesters were planning new rallies for Friday, before the vote takes place around 1230 GMT.

Greek police fired teargas to disperse crowds gathered outside parliament on Thursday to protest against a deal over the name of neighbouring Macedonia, as an at times angry parliamentary debate spilled into a third day.

Greek police fired teargas to disperse crowds gathered outside parliament on Thursday to protest against a deal over the name of neighbouring Macedonia, as an at times angry parliamentary debate spilled into a third day. Several thousand people massed outside the Greek legislature, some of them chanting "traitors" as lawmakers debated ratification of an agreement reached with the neighbouring ex-Yugoslav state last year. The Greek parliament delayed the expected approval of the UN-brokered deal by a day due to an increased number of lawmakers who wanted to have a say over it. The so-called Prespes Agreement between Athens and Skopje changes the tiny Balkan nation's name to Republic of North Macedonia, ending a 28-year-old row between the two countries. "We are one step before a historic event," Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras said, calling on lawmakers to approve the deal. Although Tsipras appears to have secured the support of at least 151 deputies in the 300-seat house to get the deal approved, opinion polls have shown most Greeks oppose the term "Macedonia" being used in any agreement. They fear it could lead to territorial claims over Greece's largest northern province of Macedonia and an appropriation of Greek cultural heritage. "We feel betrayed," Zografos Stathakopoulos, a 47-year-old protester, said on Thursday. "Most Greeks don't want this deal, but politicians are betraying us." The deal could unblock Macedonia's bids to join NATO and the European Union, long blocked by Greece. The accord has already been ratified by Macedonia's parliament, but still needs Greek parliamentary endorsement. Members of the Greek Communist Party (KKE) unfurled banners on the walls of the ancient Acropolis to protest against the deal on Thursday. The conservative New Democracy party called the deal a "national defeat." Outside parliament, protesters chanted "Long live Macedonia, long live Greece!" referring to the Greek province of Macedonia. Police chased protesters on Syntagma Square, the same area of large, violent protests in Athens on Sunday. They later detained dozens of them and a group of people who sprayed "Macedonia-Greek land" on a wall near the US ambassador's residence in Athens, a police official said. There were also protests in the northern Greek city of Thessaloniki and other cities. Parliamentary speaker Nikos Voutsis said close to 230 MPs had wanted to have their say. Most are given six minutes to speak, a rule which has been routinely broken in the highly charged session, which opened on Wednesday. Protesters were planning new rallies for Friday, before the vote takes place around 1230 GMT.

Greek police fire teargas at Macedonia name protesters

In an ugly turn in the ongoing power game in Karnataka, a Congress MLA was injured in an alleged brawl with a colleague lawmaker at a resort even as the party issued notices to its four legislators who skipped a crucial CLP meeting amid BJP's alleged poaching attempt.

Anand Singh was hospitalised after he and JN Ganesh, both from Ballari district, had a heated argument and came to blows late last night at the resort where the party MLAs are herded together, Congress sources said Sunday.

In its notices to four MLAs on Sunday, the party sought to know why action should not be taken against them under the anti-defection law for not attending the Friday's Congress Legislature Party Meeting that was a show of strength against BJP's alleged bid to dislodge the ruling coalition.

Singh has "a black eye and suffered blunt injuries," according to sources at the private hospital where he is undergoing treatment. He had also complained of uneasiness in the chest but was now in the ward and "fine", they added.

Ganesh is among the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/four-congress-mlas-skip-clp-meeting-govt-faces-no-imminent-threat-191291">disgruntled Congress MLAs</a> who was reportedly in touch with other dissidents in the party and on the BJP's radar in its alleged toppling game.

State BJP president B S Yeddyurappa urged Governor Vajubhai Vala and Assembly Speaker K R Ramesh Kumar to seek a report on the incident involving the two <a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/karnataka-two-independent-mlas-withdraw-support-from-congress-jds-govt-190475">MLAs</a>.

Congress spokesperson and former Nizamabad MP Madhu Goud Yakshi said the scuffle was related to some business issue had nothing to do with politics.

"It was personal district related. They are all together in business. The scuffle has nothing to do with politics. They come from the same district and have business relations. It (the fight) is something related to that. It has nothing to do with politics," he said.

The two MLAs had the dinner together in his presence and everything was cordial but after he left the fight broke out, Yakshi told PTI.

Bidadi police under whose jurisdiction the Eagleton resort is located, said they have not received any complaint so far.

A posse of policemen have been deployed in front of the hospital with no visitor being allowed.

"We have not been allowed inside the hospital," Raghunath, a Congress MLA, said.

In a dig at the Congress, BJP tweeted, "It's unfortunate that @KPCCPresident was unable to stop the fight in Eagleton resort. We hope Anand Singh is being treated &amp; we pray for his speedy recovery. Unfortunately @dineshgrao can't even blame BJP now, MLA's were locked up under his watch at Eagleton. Whats ur excuse now?"

Yeddyurappa said Siddaramaiah was answerable for the incident and demanded that police record Singh's statement.

"The brawl between Congress MLAs in a resort and resultant hospitalisation of Anand Singh, has made all 224 legislators hang their heads in shame.

Both the Governor and Speaker must intervene and seek a report on the incident for taking suitable action," he told reporters here.

Senior BJP leader and former Deputy chief minister R Ashok asked the Congress to produce Singh before the media and said police should initiate legal action in the case.

Senior minister D K Shivakumar, however, brushed aside reports that Singh had been assaulted and claimed all the Congress MLAs were united.

"Someone has misled. There was no fracas. There was no incident of smashing of bottle (on Singh's head). It is all fake news. Everyone is together. The entire Congress is united," he said.

As it struggled to keep its MLAs on leash, the Congress Sunday issued notices to Ramesh Jarkiholi, who was dropped as minister in the recent cabinet rejig and is said to be miffed over it, B Nagendra, Umesh Jadhav and Mahesh Kumatahalli, Congress sources said.

Exposing fissures in the party, the four lawmakers had skipped the CLP meet, held amid the political turmoil that broke out on Monday last with BJP MLAs ensconced in a luxury hotel in Gurugram.

The BJP MLAs flew back home last night after Yeddyurappa asked them to return and said the party would not destabilise the Kumaraswamy government.

The absence of four at the CLP meet posed no imminent threat to the seven-month-old Congress-JDS government in the numbers game but suggested the crisis for it was far from over.

In the notice to Jarkiholi, CLP leader Siddaramaiah besides seeking response from him for not attending the MLAs' meeting also asked him to provide an explanation about media reports that he was joining BJP and about his visit to Delhi and Mumbai to meet saffron party leaders.

Asking as to why he has not issued any statement so far rejecting the media reports, Siddaramaiah said "your conduct suggests that you will voluntarily quit from the membership of the Indian National Congress. You have got elected as a legislator on Congress symbol and cannot quit as party member under the Constitution."

Seventy-six of the 80 Congress MLAs had attended the CLP meet.

Ahead of the meet, Siddaramaiah had issued notices to all the party MLAs warning that their absence would be viewed "seriously" and action initiated uner the anti-defection law.

Top Congress sources had said Friday that at least eight party MLAs have "committed" themselves to BJP, an apprehension that caused jitters in the party and made it to shift the legislators to the resort.

As for the BJP camp, party MLC Lehar Singh said all 104 MLAs flew back to the state late Saturday night after Yeddyurappa asked them to return.

Former deputy chief minister K S Eshwarappa said the Congress-JD(S) coalition government in the state would fall due to internal bickering and his party would form the government.

In an ugly turn in the ongoing power game in Karnataka, a Congress MLA was injured in an alleged brawl with a colleague lawmaker at a resort even as the party issued notices to its four legislators who skipped a crucial CLP meeting amid BJP's alleged poaching attempt.

In an ugly turn in the ongoing power game in Karnataka, a Congress MLA was injured in an alleged brawl with a colleague lawmaker at a resort even as the party issued notices to its four legislators who skipped a crucial CLP meeting amid BJP's alleged poaching attempt. Anand Singh was hospitalised after he and JN Ganesh, both from Ballari district, had a heated argument and came to blows late last night at the resort where the party MLAs are herded together, Congress sources said Sunday. In its notices to four MLAs on Sunday, the party sought to know why action should not be taken against them under the anti-defection law for not attending the Friday's Congress Legislature Party Meeting that was a show of strength against BJP's alleged bid to dislodge the ruling coalition. Singh has "a black eye and suffered blunt injuries," according to sources at the private hospital where he is undergoing treatment. He had also complained of uneasiness in the chest but was now in the ward and "fine", they added. Ganesh is among the disgruntled Congress MLAs who was reportedly in touch with other dissidents in the party and on the BJP's radar in its alleged toppling game. State BJP president B S Yeddyurappa urged Governor Vajubhai Vala and Assembly Speaker K R Ramesh Kumar to seek a report on the incident involving the two MLAs. Congress spokesperson and former Nizamabad MP Madhu Goud Yakshi said the scuffle was related to some business issue had nothing to do with politics. "It was personal district related. They are all together in business. The scuffle has nothing to do with politics. They come from the same district and have business relations. It (the fight) is something related to that. It has nothing to do with politics," he said. The two MLAs had the dinner together in his presence and everything was cordial but after he left the fight broke out, Yakshi told PTI. Bidadi police under whose jurisdiction the Eagleton resort is located, said they have not received any complaint so far. A posse of policemen have been deployed in front of the hospital with no visitor being allowed. "We have not been allowed inside the hospital," Raghunath, a Congress MLA, said. In a dig at the Congress, BJP tweeted, "It's unfortunate that @KPCCPresident was unable to stop the fight in Eagleton resort. We hope Anand Singh is being treated & we pray for his speedy recovery. Unfortunately @dineshgrao can't even blame BJP now, MLA's were locked up under his watch at Eagleton. Whats ur excuse now?" Yeddyurappa said Siddaramaiah was answerable for the incident and demanded that police record Singh's statement. "The brawl between Congress MLAs in a resort and resultant hospitalisation of Anand Singh, has made all 224 legislators hang their heads in shame. Both the Governor and Speaker must intervene and seek a report on the incident for taking suitable action," he told reporters here. Senior BJP leader and former Deputy chief minister R Ashok asked the Congress to produce Singh before the media and said police should initiate legal action in the case. Senior minister D K Shivakumar, however, brushed aside reports that Singh had been assaulted and claimed all the Congress MLAs were united. "Someone has misled. There was no fracas. There was no incident of smashing of bottle (on Singh's head). It is all fake news. Everyone is together. The entire Congress is united," he said. As it struggled to keep its MLAs on leash, the Congress Sunday issued notices to Ramesh Jarkiholi, who was dropped as minister in the recent cabinet rejig and is said to be miffed over it, B Nagendra, Umesh Jadhav and Mahesh Kumatahalli, Congress sources said. Exposing fissures in the party, the four lawmakers had skipped the CLP meet, held amid the political turmoil that broke out on Monday last with BJP MLAs ensconced in a luxury hotel in Gurugram. The BJP MLAs flew back home last night after Yeddyurappa asked them to return and said the party would not destabilise the Kumaraswamy government. The absence of four at the CLP meet posed no imminent threat to the seven-month-old Congress-JDS government in the numbers game but suggested the crisis for it was far from over. In the notice to Jarkiholi, CLP leader Siddaramaiah besides seeking response from him for not attending the MLAs' meeting also asked him to provide an explanation about media reports that he was joining BJP and about his visit to Delhi and Mumbai to meet saffron party leaders. Asking as to why he has not issued any statement so far rejecting the media reports, Siddaramaiah said "your conduct suggests that you will voluntarily quit from the membership of the Indian National Congress. You have got elected as a legislator on Congress symbol and cannot quit as party member under the Constitution." Seventy-six of the 80 Congress MLAs had attended the CLP meet. Ahead of the meet, Siddaramaiah had issued notices to all the party MLAs warning that their absence would be viewed "seriously" and action initiated uner the anti-defection law. Top Congress sources had said Friday that at least eight party MLAs have "committed" themselves to BJP, an apprehension that caused jitters in the party and made it to shift the legislators to the resort. As for the BJP camp, party MLC Lehar Singh said all 104 MLAs flew back to the state late Saturday night after Yeddyurappa asked them to return. Former deputy chief minister K S Eshwarappa said the Congress-JD(S) coalition government in the state would fall due to internal bickering and his party would form the government.

Karnataka turmoil: MLA hurt in alleged brawl with fellow Congress lawmaker

The membership of 332 Pakistani lawmakers, including that of the country's high-profile Information Minister Fawad Chaudhry, was suspended on Wednesday after they failed to submit details of their properties and assets to the poll body, according to media reports.

Out of the 1,174 lawmakers, 839 submitted the details of their properties and assets, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) said while suspending the membership of the remaining 332.

Those who were suspended include 72 members of National Assembly, 20 members of Senate, 115 members of Punjab Assembly, 52 members of Sindh Assembly, 54 members of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and 19 members of Balochistan assembly, Dunya News reported.

Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting Fawad Chaudhry, Minister for Health Aamir Kiyani, Raheela Magsi, National Assembly Deputy Speaker Qasim Soori, PML-N leaders Ahsan Iqbal, Musadiq Malik and Anwaarul Haq Kakar are among those whose memberships have been suspended, the report said.&nbsp;

The suspended parliamentarians cannot participate in legislative process.

The ECP has issued a notification, stating that these members will remain suspended till they file details of their assets and liabilities.

The membership of 332 Pakistani lawmakers, including that of the country's high-profile Information Minister Fawad Chaudhry, was suspended on Wednesday after they failed to submit details of their properties and assets to the poll body, according to media reports.

The membership of 332 Pakistani lawmakers, including that of the country's high-profile Information Minister Fawad Chaudhry, was suspended on Wednesday after they failed to submit details of their properties and assets to the poll body, according to media reports. Out of the 1,174 lawmakers, 839 submitted the details of their properties and assets, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) said while suspending the membership of the remaining 332. Those who were suspended include 72 members of National Assembly, 20 members of Senate, 115 members of Punjab Assembly, 52 members of Sindh Assembly, 54 members of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and 19 members of Balochistan assembly, Dunya News reported. Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting Fawad Chaudhry, Minister for Health Aamir Kiyani, Raheela Magsi, National Assembly Deputy Speaker Qasim Soori, PML-N leaders Ahsan Iqbal, Musadiq Malik and Anwaarul Haq Kakar are among those whose memberships have been suspended, the report said. The suspended parliamentarians cannot participate in legislative process. The ECP has issued a notification, stating that these members will remain suspended till they file details of their assets and liabilities.

332 Pak lawmakers suspended over non-disclosure of assets

France is speeding up preparations for a "no deal" <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.wionews.com/world/still-time-to-negotiate-germanys-merkel-says-after-may-loses-brexit-vote-190761&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwjdrPXdpfLfAhWMpI8KHRLkC4oQFggEMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw3hfJzJRyiyJ3b6QcVj3ydU">Brexit </a>after the British parliament overwhelmingly rejected the agreement on the table, a French presidential source said Wednesday.

"The scenario we don't want is a no deal and the risks multiplied yesterday," the source said.

"The prime minister will meet tomorrow with the key ministers concerned to take stock of the preparations and accelerate them," the source added.

Ministers had already scheduled a meeting to decide on <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.wionews.com/world/scepticism-in-france-as-macron-launches-great-national-debate-190262&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwiB_7OBpvLfAhVFJHIKHddpClsQFggFMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw2hNYHiC1qoa1S--JMnWWu6">France</a>'s response to the result of the British parliamentary vote.

France has like other European nations been preparing for a scenario in which Britain crashes out of the EU with no divorce deal, and has already been recruiting extra customs agents to be deployed in Channel ports.

French employers' group MEDEF meanwhile called on the country's businesses to prepare for "the worst".

"Yesterday's vote piled uncertainty upon uncertainty," its chief Geoffroy Roux de Bezieux said.

Some 30,000 French companies export to Britain, according to the French finance ministry, with goods worth some 31 billion euros ($35.4 billion) in 2017.

French lawmakers have since November been debating a bill dealing with the Brexit fallout, which would potentially empower the government to issue emergency decrees if needed.

France's Europe Minister Nathalie Loiseau said Wednesday that the EU could extend the deadline for Brexit beyond March 29 if Britain made such a request.

But she stressed that other EU nations considered the deal already on the table to be "the only one possible".&nbsp;

President Emmanuel Macron late Tuesday indicated there was a small chance of only very minor tweaks being made to the agreement.

"Maybe we'll make improvements on one or two things, but I don't really think so because we've reached the maximum of what we could do with the deal," he said.

France is speeding up preparations for a "no deal" Brexit after the British parliament overwhelmingly rejected the agreement on the table, a French presidential source said Wednesday.

France is speeding up preparations for a "no deal" Brexit after the British parliament overwhelmingly rejected the agreement on the table, a French presidential source said Wednesday. "The scenario we don't want is a no deal and the risks multiplied yesterday," the source said. "The prime minister will meet tomorrow with the key ministers concerned to take stock of the preparations and accelerate them," the source added. Ministers had already scheduled a meeting to decide on France's response to the result of the British parliamentary vote. France has like other European nations been preparing for a scenario in which Britain crashes out of the EU with no divorce deal, and has already been recruiting extra customs agents to be deployed in Channel ports. French employers' group MEDEF meanwhile called on the country's businesses to prepare for "the worst". "Yesterday's vote piled uncertainty upon uncertainty," its chief Geoffroy Roux de Bezieux said. Some 30,000 French companies export to Britain, according to the French finance ministry, with goods worth some 31 billion euros ($35.4 billion) in 2017. French lawmakers have since November been debating a bill dealing with the Brexit fallout, which would potentially empower the government to issue emergency decrees if needed. France's Europe Minister Nathalie Loiseau said Wednesday that the EU could extend the deadline for Brexit beyond March 29 if Britain made such a request. But she stressed that other EU nations considered the deal already on the table to be "the only one possible". President Emmanuel Macron late Tuesday indicated there was a small chance of only very minor tweaks being made to the agreement. "Maybe we'll make improvements on one or two things, but I don't really think so because we've reached the maximum of what we could do with the deal," he said.

France to accelerate preparations for no-deal Brexit: Presidential source

<a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.wionews.com/opinions/why-donald-trump-will-likely-lose-the-government-shutdown-189325&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwjNjOvf1_HfAhUCS48KHfMzDnsQFggFMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw1QOVAe4CI7zGrW3ttH8eDB">President Donald Trump</a>'s nominee for US attorney general, William Barr, told lawmakers on Tuesday he would protect a federal probe into Russian election meddling from political pressure, stressing he would bring independence to the job and not shy away from breaking ranks with the administration.

"I will not be bullied into doing anything that I think is wrong - by anybody, whether it be editorial boards or Congress or the president," Barr said at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. "I'm going to do what I think is right."&nbsp;

Barr is expected to win confirmation in the Republican-controlled Senate to serve as the nation's top law enforcement officer, which would put him in charge of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election and any possible collusion between Moscow and Trump's campaign.

"On my watch, Bob will be allowed to complete his work," Barr said.&nbsp;

Democrats worry that Trump's administration may try to undercut the investigation, which has clouded Trump's two years in office and has been a frequent target of the president and his allies.

Barr, who was attorney general under Republican President George H.W. Bush in the 1990s, said his primary loyalty would be to the rule of law, not Trump. He said he did not seek out the job and was reluctant to accept when Trump offered it to him.

While he staked out a position of independence, Barr spoke broadly in favour of many of the tough immigration policies that have been pushed by Trump. He said he believed in the use of border walls, and criticized "sanctuary cities" that shield from deportation immigrants who are in the country without authorization.

"We need money right now for border security, including walls and barriers," he said.&nbsp;

Much of the questioning centred on the Mueller probe, which Trump frequently criticizes as a "witch hunt" while denying any collusion with Russia or obstruction of justice. Russia has denied US intelligence agencies findings that it interfered in the 2016 election.

Barr said he agreed with Mueller's charge that Russian entities interfered in the election, or at least tried to do so. He said he described Mueller, a longtime friend, as a "straight shooter" when Trump asked about him.

"I don't believe Mr Mueller would be involved in a witch hunt," Barr said.

If Trump asked him to fire Mueller without good cause, "I would refuse to carry out that instruction," he said.&nbsp;

FATALLY MISCONCEIVED

White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders described Barr as an "honourable man" in a statement. "President Trump thinks he will be a great attorney general," she said.

Mueller has secured indictments against or guilty pleas from 33 people and three Russian companies, including former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

He is due to submit a confidential report containing his findings to the attorney general, prompting concern from some Democrats that the Trump administration will try to quash it. Barr said he would not let Trump modify the report and would make public as many of Mueller's findings as possible.

"My objective and goal are to get as much as I can of the information to Congress and the public," he said.

Barr faced questions from Democrats about an unsolicited memo he wrote last year that called Mueller's probe "fatally misconceived" for examining whether Trump obstructed justice by firing FBI Director James Comey in 2017.

Barr said his memo did not question the legitimacy of the probe as a whole, but only expressed concerns that the special counsel might be improperly interpreting one aspect of the law.

RECUSAL DECISION

Barr also drew objections from some Democrats for saying he would not necessarily recuse himself from oversight of the Mueller probe if ethics officials recommended he do so.

"In this context, just asking us to trust you is not enough," Democratic Senator Mazie Hirono told him.

Barr said it would be improper to automatically defer to people who report to him.&nbsp;

"I am not going to surrender the responsibilities of the attorney general," he said.

Barr's insistence that he should have the last word was in contrast to former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who said he would defer to the recommendation of ethics officials after it emerged he had met with Russian officials while working on Trump's election campaign.

Sessions faced repeated attacks from the president after he recused himself from the Russia probe.&nbsp;

Barr said Sessions "did the right thing" by leaving the recusal decision in the hands of career ethics officials because he faced a conflict due to his political activities.

The man who currently holds the job, Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker, has not recused himself from oversight of the Mueller probe, despite a recommendation he does so.

President Donald Trump's nominee for US attorney general, William Barr, told lawmakers on Tuesday he would protect a federal probe into Russian election meddling from political pressure, stressing he would bring independence to the job and not shy away from breaking ranks with the administration.

President Donald Trump's nominee for US attorney general, William Barr, told lawmakers on Tuesday he would protect a federal probe into Russian election meddling from political pressure, stressing he would bring independence to the job and not shy away from breaking ranks with the administration. "I will not be bullied into doing anything that I think is wrong - by anybody, whether it be editorial boards or Congress or the president," Barr said at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. "I'm going to do what I think is right." Barr is expected to win confirmation in the Republican-controlled Senate to serve as the nation's top law enforcement officer, which would put him in charge of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election and any possible collusion between Moscow and Trump's campaign. "On my watch, Bob will be allowed to complete his work," Barr said. Democrats worry that Trump's administration may try to undercut the investigation, which has clouded Trump's two years in office and has been a frequent target of the president and his allies. Barr, who was attorney general under Republican President George H.W. Bush in the 1990s, said his primary loyalty would be to the rule of law, not Trump. He said he did not seek out the job and was reluctant to accept when Trump offered it to him. While he staked out a position of independence, Barr spoke broadly in favour of many of the tough immigration policies that have been pushed by Trump. He said he believed in the use of border walls, and criticized "sanctuary cities" that shield from deportation immigrants who are in the country without authorization. "We need money right now for border security, including walls and barriers," he said. Much of the questioning centred on the Mueller probe, which Trump frequently criticizes as a "witch hunt" while denying any collusion with Russia or obstruction of justice. Russia has denied US intelligence agencies findings that it interfered in the 2016 election. Barr said he agreed with Mueller's charge that Russian entities interfered in the election, or at least tried to do so. He said he described Mueller, a longtime friend, as a "straight shooter" when Trump asked about him. "I don't believe Mr Mueller would be involved in a witch hunt," Barr said. If Trump asked him to fire Mueller without good cause, "I would refuse to carry out that instruction," he said. FATALLY MISCONCEIVED White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders described Barr as an "honourable man" in a statement. "President Trump thinks he will be a great attorney general," she said. Mueller has secured indictments against or guilty pleas from 33 people and three Russian companies, including former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort. He is due to submit a confidential report containing his findings to the attorney general, prompting concern from some Democrats that the Trump administration will try to quash it. Barr said he would not let Trump modify the report and would make public as many of Mueller's findings as possible. "My objective and goal are to get as much as I can of the information to Congress and the public," he said. Barr faced questions from Democrats about an unsolicited memo he wrote last year that called Mueller's probe "fatally misconceived" for examining whether Trump obstructed justice by firing FBI Director James Comey in 2017. Barr said his memo did not question the legitimacy of the probe as a whole, but only expressed concerns that the special counsel might be improperly interpreting one aspect of the law. RECUSAL DECISION Barr also drew objections from some Democrats for saying he would not necessarily recuse himself from oversight of the Mueller probe if ethics officials recommended he do so. "In this context, just asking us to trust you is not enough," Democratic Senator Mazie Hirono told him. Barr said it would be improper to automatically defer to people who report to him. "I am not going to surrender the responsibilities of the attorney general," he said. Barr's insistence that he should have the last word was in contrast to former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who said he would defer to the recommendation of ethics officials after it emerged he had met with Russian officials while working on Trump's election campaign. Sessions faced repeated attacks from the president after he recused himself from the Russia probe. Barr said Sessions "did the right thing" by leaving the recusal decision in the hands of career ethics officials because he faced a conflict due to his political activities. The man who currently holds the job, Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker, has not recused himself from oversight of the Mueller probe, despite a recommendation he does so.

Trump's pick for US attorney general says he will not 'be bullied' by anybody

<a href="Voting down Brexit deal could lead to breakup of United Kingdom ...">Prime Minister Theresa May</a> faced the prospect of defeat in a historic vote on her Brexit deal in parliament on Tuesday, potentially leaving Britain in limbo about the biggest political and economic change for the country in decades.

A day after May urged lawmakers to take a second look at her plan, parliament looked set to reject it in a voting session due to start at 1900 GMT.

Two-and-a-half months before Britain is due to leave the EU, May's hopes of keeping her plan alive will hinge on the scale of her expected loss.

Avoiding a heavy defeat could give her the chance to ask Brussels for more concessions before attempting to get the plan through parliament in another vote.

But a humiliating outcome could pressure her to delay Britain's scheduled March 29 departure from the EU and potentially open up other options, ranging from a second referendum to leaving the EU with no deal.

One of May's senior ministers, Environment Secretary Michael Gove, called on lawmakers to respect the outcome of the 2016 Brexit referendum decision, or risk undermining democracy.

"The British people have placed responsibility on us," Gove told BBC radio. "Are we going to live up to that responsibility and vote to leave the European Union or are we going to disappoint them and damage our democracy by not voting to leave the EU?"

But many Brexit-supporting lawmakers from May's Conservative Party reject the deal's "backstop" requirement that Northern Ireland stays closely aligned to EU rules to avoid the return of a hard border with EU member Ireland if a broader trade deal cannot be struck.

Dominic Raab, who resigned as for May's Brexit minister in November in protest at her plans, said the government should not lose its nerve over the possibility of a no-deal Brexit, something many employers fear would mean chaos for business.

"It's time for us, through this vote, to make clear not just that the current terms are unacceptable, but that we are not just throwing our hands up in the air," he said.

"We are going to leave on March 29."

But investors sense the possibility of a no-deal Brexit is receding, given the concerns of many lawmakers about the upheaval it could bring. Sterling hit a two-month high against the U.S. dollar on Monday and held near that level on Tuesday.

CRISIS

In Britain's deepest political crisis for at least half a century, May and EU leaders swapped assurances on the withdrawal deal on Monday, but there was little sign of a change of heart among rebel lawmakers.

The EU told May that it stood by commitments to find ways to avoid triggering the Irish "backstop".

That failed to reassure the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party, which props up May's minority government and said it will still not back the deal.

May has warned lawmakers that if her plan is rejected, no Brexit at all would be more likely that Britain leaving the EU without a deal, a result she called "catastrophic" for democracy after parliament promised to honour the 2016 vote to leave.

She has also said that a break-up of the United Kingdom could be the result of parliament voting against the agreement and warned her Conservative Party against allowing the left-wing opposition Labour Party to seize the initiative.

Labour is formally committed to Brexit but opposes May's deal. Polls of party activists show that most of them want the party to back a new referendum, although it has not done so.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, hoping to force a national election, is expected to call for a parliamentary vote of no confidence in May if she loses Tuesday's vote.

May has refused to budge over her deal despite criticism from all quarters. The agreement, which envisages close economic ties with the EU, has united the opposing sides of the debate —pro-EU lawmakers who see it as the worst of all worlds and Brexit supporters who say it will make Britain a vassal state.

With a 'no deal' Brexit the default option if May's deal is defeated, some lawmakers are planning to try to pull control of Brexit from the government.

But through May is weakened, the executive has significant powers, especially during times of crisis, so it has not been clear how parliament would be able to take control of Brexit.

Prime Minister Theresa May faced the prospect of defeat in a historic vote on her Brexit deal in parliament on Tuesday, potentially leaving Britain in limbo about the biggest political and economic change for the country in decades.

Prime Minister Theresa May faced the prospect of defeat in a historic vote on her Brexit deal in parliament on Tuesday, potentially leaving Britain in limbo about the biggest political and economic change for the country in decades. A day after May urged lawmakers to take a second look at her plan, parliament looked set to reject it in a voting session due to start at 1900 GMT. Two-and-a-half months before Britain is due to leave the EU, May's hopes of keeping her plan alive will hinge on the scale of her expected loss. Avoiding a heavy defeat could give her the chance to ask Brussels for more concessions before attempting to get the plan through parliament in another vote. But a humiliating outcome could pressure her to delay Britain's scheduled March 29 departure from the EU and potentially open up other options, ranging from a second referendum to leaving the EU with no deal. One of May's senior ministers, Environment Secretary Michael Gove, called on lawmakers to respect the outcome of the 2016 Brexit referendum decision, or risk undermining democracy. "The British people have placed responsibility on us," Gove told BBC radio. "Are we going to live up to that responsibility and vote to leave the European Union or are we going to disappoint them and damage our democracy by not voting to leave the EU?" But many Brexit-supporting lawmakers from May's Conservative Party reject the deal's "backstop" requirement that Northern Ireland stays closely aligned to EU rules to avoid the return of a hard border with EU member Ireland if a broader trade deal cannot be struck. Dominic Raab, who resigned as for May's Brexit minister in November in protest at her plans, said the government should not lose its nerve over the possibility of a no-deal Brexit, something many employers fear would mean chaos for business. "It's time for us, through this vote, to make clear not just that the current terms are unacceptable, but that we are not just throwing our hands up in the air," he said. "We are going to leave on March 29." But investors sense the possibility of a no-deal Brexit is receding, given the concerns of many lawmakers about the upheaval it could bring. Sterling hit a two-month high against the U.S. dollar on Monday and held near that level on Tuesday. CRISIS In Britain's deepest political crisis for at least half a century, May and EU leaders swapped assurances on the withdrawal deal on Monday, but there was little sign of a change of heart among rebel lawmakers. The EU told May that it stood by commitments to find ways to avoid triggering the Irish "backstop". That failed to reassure the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party, which props up May's minority government and said it will still not back the deal. May has warned lawmakers that if her plan is rejected, no Brexit at all would be more likely that Britain leaving the EU without a deal, a result she called "catastrophic" for democracy after parliament promised to honour the 2016 vote to leave. She has also said that a break-up of the United Kingdom could be the result of parliament voting against the agreement and warned her Conservative Party against allowing the left-wing opposition Labour Party to seize the initiative. Labour is formally committed to Brexit but opposes May's deal. Polls of party activists show that most of them want the party to back a new referendum, although it has not done so. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, hoping to force a national election, is expected to call for a parliamentary vote of no confidence in May if she loses Tuesday's vote. May has refused to budge over her deal despite criticism from all quarters. The agreement, which envisages close economic ties with the EU, has united the opposing sides of the debate —pro-EU lawmakers who see it as the worst of all worlds and Brexit supporters who say it will make Britain a vassal state. With a 'no deal' Brexit the default option if May's deal is defeated, some lawmakers are planning to try to pull control of Brexit from the government. But through May is weakened, the executive has significant powers, especially during times of crisis, so it has not been clear how parliament would be able to take control of Brexit.

UK parliament looks set to reject PM May's Brexit deal

A partial shutdown of the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/white-house-calls-democrats-plan-to-end-shutdown-non-starter-187935">US government </a>entered a 12th day Wednesday as President Donald Trump prepared to meet top Democratic and Republican lawmakers in a bid to break the impasse over his demand for funding for a border wall with Mexico.

One day before Democrats take over control of the House of Representatives, Trump showed no signs of backing away from his insistence on $5 billion for his "beautiful" southern wall.

"President Trump wants an agreement that reopens the government AND keeps Americans safe," the White House tweeted.

It said senior officials from the Department of Homeland Security would provide a "border security briefing" at the White House later in the day to top Democratic lawmakers Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. Earlier Wednesday, Trump was to meet with his cabinet.

It will be Trump's first meeting with Pelosi, who will take over as speaker of the House on Thursday, and Schumer, the Senate minority leader, since an acrimonious Oval Office meeting with the pair on December 11.

Amid the stalemate over the wall, Trump shelved his annual Christmas vacation in Florida, choosing to remain in Washington and fire off a stream of angry -- and often misleading -- tweets.

"Much of the Wall has already been renovated or built," he asserted on Wednesday along with the dubious claim that Mexico would pay for the wall through the new trade deal negotiated between the two countries.

White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders accused Democrats of refusing to compromise.

"President Trump made a serious, good faith offer to Democrats to open the government, address the crisis at our border, and protect all Americans," Sanders said.

She described a plan put forward by Pelosi as a "non-starter because it does not fund our homeland security or keep American families safe from human trafficking, drugs, and crime."

Romney criticizes Trump 

Democrats say the border wall, one of Trump's key campaign promises, is a distraction from more complicated immigration problems and a tool for Trump to whip up support among his conservative base.

The standoff resulted in swaths of the federal government being shut down over the Christmas and New Year holidays -- and for the foreseeable future until a deal is reached.

Pelosi is proposing a budget that would fund most government agencies through September 30 with the exception of the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees border security and would only receive funding through February 8.

Republicans lost 40 seats and their majority in the House in the November midterm elections but they retained control of the Senate.

Sixty votes, however, are needed to advance legislation in the Senate, requiring Democratic support.

Republican Representative Steve Scalise called on Democrats on Wednesday to come to an agreement and accused them of "playing games with the safety of our country."

"The time for political games is over," Scalise said in an opinion piece for Fox News. "Lives are at stake."&nbsp;

Republican Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, has said he will only schedule a vote on a deal that has the support of both the House and Trump.

Adding to the uncertainty in Washington, an incoming senator, former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, lashed out at Trump on Tuesday in an opinion piece in The Washington Post.

"Trump's words and actions have caused dismay around the world," wrote Romney, who was elected to the Senate in November from his home state of Utah.

"I do not intend to comment on every tweet or fault," Romney said. "But I will speak out against significant statements or actions that are divisive, racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, dishonest or destructive to democratic institutions." 
&nbsp;

A partial shutdown of the US government entered a 12th day Wednesday as President Donald Trump prepared to meet top Democratic and Republican lawmakers in a bid to break the impasse over his demand for funding for a border wall with Mexico.

A partial shutdown of the US government entered a 12th day Wednesday as President Donald Trump prepared to meet top Democratic and Republican lawmakers in a bid to break the impasse over his demand for funding for a border wall with Mexico. One day before Democrats take over control of the House of Representatives, Trump showed no signs of backing away from his insistence on $5 billion for his "beautiful" southern wall. "President Trump wants an agreement that reopens the government AND keeps Americans safe," the White House tweeted. It said senior officials from the Department of Homeland Security would provide a "border security briefing" at the White House later in the day to top Democratic lawmakers Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. Earlier Wednesday, Trump was to meet with his cabinet. It will be Trump's first meeting with Pelosi, who will take over as speaker of the House on Thursday, and Schumer, the Senate minority leader, since an acrimonious Oval Office meeting with the pair on December 11. Amid the stalemate over the wall, Trump shelved his annual Christmas vacation in Florida, choosing to remain in Washington and fire off a stream of angry -- and often misleading -- tweets. "Much of the Wall has already been renovated or built," he asserted on Wednesday along with the dubious claim that Mexico would pay for the wall through the new trade deal negotiated between the two countries. White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders accused Democrats of refusing to compromise. "President Trump made a serious, good faith offer to Democrats to open the government, address the crisis at our border, and protect all Americans," Sanders said. She described a plan put forward by Pelosi as a "non-starter because it does not fund our homeland security or keep American families safe from human trafficking, drugs, and crime." Romney criticizes Trump Democrats say the border wall, one of Trump's key campaign promises, is a distraction from more complicated immigration problems and a tool for Trump to whip up support among his conservative base. The standoff resulted in swaths of the federal government being shut down over the Christmas and New Year holidays -- and for the foreseeable future until a deal is reached. Pelosi is proposing a budget that would fund most government agencies through September 30 with the exception of the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees border security and would only receive funding through February 8. Republicans lost 40 seats and their majority in the House in the November midterm elections but they retained control of the Senate. Sixty votes, however, are needed to advance legislation in the Senate, requiring Democratic support. Republican Representative Steve Scalise called on Democrats on Wednesday to come to an agreement and accused them of "playing games with the safety of our country." "The time for political games is over," Scalise said in an opinion piece for Fox News. "Lives are at stake." Republican Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, has said he will only schedule a vote on a deal that has the support of both the House and Trump. Adding to the uncertainty in Washington, an incoming senator, former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, lashed out at Trump on Tuesday in an opinion piece in The Washington Post. "Trump's words and actions have caused dismay around the world," wrote Romney, who was elected to the Senate in November from his home state of Utah. "I do not intend to comment on every tweet or fault," Romney said. "But I will speak out against significant statements or actions that are divisive, racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, dishonest or destructive to democratic institutions."

Trump ready to meet lawmakers in a bid to end shutdown 

The <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/jatiya-oikya-front-lost-due-to-criminal-activities-sheikh-hasina-187627">newly elected Bangladesh lawmakers</a> will be sworn in on January 3 at the Jatiya Sangsad here.

The Parliament Secretariat confirmed the news on Tuesday, reports The Daily Star. The exact time of the swearing-in has not been announced yet.

The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), whose alliance secured only seven seats during Sunday's Presidential elections, has refused to take part in the oath-taking.

The 11th parliamentary elections were held in Bangladesh on December 30, amid violence that claimed the lives of 19 people across the nation.

The Awami League-led Grand Alliance secured a landslide victory, winning a massive 288 seats. The President of the Bangladesh Awami League party, Sheikh Hasina, is also the current Prime Minister of Bangladesh and it will be her third term in office when sworn-in.

The new government will be formed by January 28, which is also the day that the current government`s term ends.&nbsp;

The newly elected Bangladesh lawmakers will be sworn in on January 3 at the Jatiya Sangsad here. The Parliament Secretariat confirmed the news on Tuesday, reports The Daily Star.

The newly elected Bangladesh lawmakers will be sworn in on January 3 at the Jatiya Sangsad here. The Parliament Secretariat confirmed the news on Tuesday, reports The Daily Star. The exact time of the swearing-in has not been announced yet. The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), whose alliance secured only seven seats during Sunday's Presidential elections, has refused to take part in the oath-taking. The 11th parliamentary elections were held in Bangladesh on December 30, amid violence that claimed the lives of 19 people across the nation. The Awami League-led Grand Alliance secured a landslide victory, winning a massive 288 seats. The President of the Bangladesh Awami League party, Sheikh Hasina, is also the current Prime Minister of Bangladesh and it will be her third term in office when sworn-in. The new government will be formed by January 28, which is also the day that the current government`s term ends.

Bangladesh: Lawmakers to be sworn in on January 3

Lok Sabha passed <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/rajnath-singh-targets-congress-for-opposing-triple-talaq-bill-in-lok-sabha-186906">triple talaq bill</a> on Friday amid huge uproar by some opposition parties.

BJP had issued a whip to all it's Lok Sabha MP's, two days before tabling the bill mentioning that everyone needs to be present while the Triple Talaq Bill will be taken up for discussion.

However, 30 party lawmakers did not show up for the discussion.

“I am aware, some MPs told me and took prior permission, about others we will look into the matter. The remaining MPs will be asked for reasons for their absence,” Anurag Thakur, BJP Chief Whip said.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Anurag Thakur, BJP Chief Whip in Lok Sabha on reports of 30 BJP MPs absent during <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TripleTalaqBill?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TripleTalaqBill</a> voting: I am aware, some MPs told me and took prior permission, about others we will look into the matter <a href="https://t.co/4jLXgIDvMF">pic.twitter.com/4jLXgIDvMF</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1078506002360733697?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 28, 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 bill passed in Lok Sabha proposes to make the practice of instant triple talaq a punishable offence under the Indian Penal Code with the provision of a three-year jail term for the erring husband.

During the proceedings in Lok Sabha regarding the bill, some Opposition parties kept insisting on sending the bill to a Joint Select Committee and walked out of the House just before the bill was put to vote as their demand was not accepted.

The Bill was taken up in the Parliament in August last year after a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court termed unconstitutional the law that allowed Muslim men to divorce their wives simply by uttering the word "talaq" three times in quick succession.

Lok Sabha passed triple talaq bill on Friday amid huge uproar by some opposition parties. BJP had issued a whip to all it's Lok Sabha MP's, two days before tabling the bill mentioning that everyone needs to be present while the Triple Talaq Bill will be taken up for discussion.

Lok Sabha passed triple talaq bill on Friday amid huge uproar by some opposition parties. BJP had issued a whip to all it's Lok Sabha MP's, two days before tabling the bill mentioning that everyone needs to be present while the Triple Talaq Bill will be taken up for discussion. However, 30 party lawmakers did not show up for the discussion. “I am aware, some MPs told me and took prior permission, about others we will look into the matter. The remaining MPs will be asked for reasons for their absence,” Anurag Thakur, BJP Chief Whip said. Anurag Thakur, BJP Chief Whip in Lok Sabha on reports of 30 BJP MPs absent during #TripleTalaqBill voting: I am aware, some MPs told me and took prior permission, about others we will look into the matter pic.twitter.com/4jLXgIDvMF — ANI (@ANI) December 28, 2018 × The bill passed in Lok Sabha proposes to make the practice of instant triple talaq a punishable offence under the Indian Penal Code with the provision of a three-year jail term for the erring husband. During the proceedings in Lok Sabha regarding the bill, some Opposition parties kept insisting on sending the bill to a Joint Select Committee and walked out of the House just before the bill was put to vote as their demand was not accepted. The Bill was taken up in the Parliament in August last year after a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court termed unconstitutional the law that allowed Muslim men to divorce their wives simply by uttering the word "talaq" three times in quick succession.

30 BJP lawmakers fails to show up at Triple Talaq Bill discussion

The Supreme Court Monday refused to entertain a fresh plea seeking imposition of a lifetime ban on lawmakers following their conviction in criminal cases.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi dismissed the petition filed by NGO ‘Lok Prahari’ through its General Secretary S N Shukla, saying that it was already seized of a similar petition on the same issue.

“We are already examining the same thing in a petition filed by Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay,” said the bench, also comprising Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph.

The apex court dismissed the petition as it was already scheduled to hear a similar PIL filed by lawyer and BJP leader Upadhyay tomorrow, who in his plea has sought to bar of convicted politicians for life.

“Why have you filed a separate petition when the court is seized of the same issue in another pending petition. We don’t think we need to hear it. Dismissed,” the bench said.

The bench while listing Upadhyay’s plea for hearing on December 4 had said that it could not lose sight of the fact that the PIL was seeking a lifetime ban on politicians convicted in the criminal case, besides setting up of special courts to expeditiously try criminal cases involving elected representatives.

“We should not lose sight of the fact that the main prayer in the PIL is to impose the lifetime ban on convicted elected representative,” the bench said, adding that the government servants and judicial officers cannot come back after their convictions.

At present, a legislator, when convicted is debarred for six years from contesting elections.

The apex court has been approached with several pleas seeking a lifetime ban on lawmakers as the provision stood for the judiciary and the executive, where one could not hold office post-conviction.

The Centre during the last hearing in the matter had submitted that it had no objection in setting up of special courts for exclusively trying the criminal cases involving elected representatives. However, it has not been in favour of banning the convicted lawmakers for life.

The apex court was earlier informed that 12 special courts set up to try lawmakers exclusively have not been constituted on a uniform pattern, and their number needs to be raised to 19 for trying cases at the sessions level.

It was also suggested to the top court that another 51 such courts are required for magisterial trial cases.

The amicus had further said that special courts were constituted to exclusively deal with all cases including complaint cases against MPs, MLAs including the former ones, irrespective of the fact as to whether the same was committed when the concerned lawmaker was holding the said office

The Supreme Court Monday refused to entertain a fresh plea seeking imposition of a lifetime ban on lawmakers following their conviction in criminal cases. A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi dismissed the petition filed by NGO ‘Lok Prahari’ through its General Secretary S N Shukla, saying that it was already seized of a similar petition on the same issue.

The Supreme Court Monday refused to entertain a fresh plea seeking imposition of a lifetime ban on lawmakers following their conviction in criminal cases. A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi dismissed the petition filed by NGO ‘Lok Prahari’ through its General Secretary S N Shukla, saying that it was already seized of a similar petition on the same issue. “We are already examining the same thing in a petition filed by Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay,” said the bench, also comprising Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph. The apex court dismissed the petition as it was already scheduled to hear a similar PIL filed by lawyer and BJP leader Upadhyay tomorrow, who in his plea has sought to bar of convicted politicians for life. “Why have you filed a separate petition when the court is seized of the same issue in another pending petition. We don’t think we need to hear it. Dismissed,” the bench said. The bench while listing Upadhyay’s plea for hearing on December 4 had said that it could not lose sight of the fact that the PIL was seeking a lifetime ban on politicians convicted in the criminal case, besides setting up of special courts to expeditiously try criminal cases involving elected representatives. “We should not lose sight of the fact that the main prayer in the PIL is to impose the lifetime ban on convicted elected representative,” the bench said, adding that the government servants and judicial officers cannot come back after their convictions. At present, a legislator, when convicted is debarred for six years from contesting elections. The apex court has been approached with several pleas seeking a lifetime ban on lawmakers as the provision stood for the judiciary and the executive, where one could not hold office post-conviction. The Centre during the last hearing in the matter had submitted that it had no objection in setting up of special courts for exclusively trying the criminal cases involving elected representatives. However, it has not been in favour of banning the convicted lawmakers for life. The apex court was earlier informed that 12 special courts set up to try lawmakers exclusively have not been constituted on a uniform pattern, and their number needs to be raised to 19 for trying cases at the sessions level. It was also suggested to the top court that another 51 such courts are required for magisterial trial cases. The amicus had further said that special courts were constituted to exclusively deal with all cases including complaint cases against MPs, MLAs including the former ones, irrespective of the fact as to whether the same was committed when the concerned lawmaker was holding the said office

SC refuses to hear fresh plea seeking life ban on lawmakers after conviction in criminal cases

The Supreme Court Tuesday dismissed a plea seeking to ban lawmakers from practising as advocates.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said that the Bar Council of India Rules do not prohibit legislators from practising as lawyers.

The court was hearing a PIL filed by BJP leader and advocate Ashwini Upadhyay seeking to bar lawyer-lawmakers (MPs, MLAs, MLCs) from practising in courts during their tenure in legislature.

The Supreme Court Tuesday dismissed a plea seeking to ban lawmakers from practising as advocates. A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said that the Bar Council of India Rules do not prohibit legislators from practising as lawyers.

The Supreme Court Tuesday dismissed a plea seeking to ban lawmakers from practising as advocates. A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said that the Bar Council of India Rules do not prohibit legislators from practising as lawyers. The court was hearing a PIL filed by BJP leader and advocate Ashwini Upadhyay seeking to bar lawyer-lawmakers (MPs, MLAs, MLCs) from practising in courts during their tenure in legislature.

Lawyers elected as lawmakers can practice in courts: Supreme Court

Spain's parliament on Friday ousted Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy in a no-confidence vote sparked by fury over his party's corruption woes, with his Socialist arch-rival Pedro Sanchez automatically taking over.&nbsp;

An absolute majority of 180 lawmakers voted for the motion to loud applause and shouts of "Yes we can," converting Rajoy into the first prime minister to be ousted by such a vote since Spain transitioned to democracy in 1977.

The bespectacled 63-year-old leader got up and shook hands with Sanchez before leaving the lower house without a word.

Rajoy had already admitted defeat minutes before the vote, knowing that an absolute majority of lawmakers as diverse as Catalan separatists and Basque nationalists had pledged their support for the no-confidence motion.

"It's been an honour -- there is none bigger -- to have been Spain's prime minister," he told parliament, with lawmakers from his conservative Popular Party (PP) giving him a standing ovation.

Sanchez, Spain's 46-year-old opposition leader, had instigated the no-confidence motion last week after a court revealed details of a vast system of bribes given to former PP officials in exchange for lucrative public contracts between 1999-2005.

After years of anger over the scandals tainting the PP, corruption finally got the better of the party and sealed Rajoy's downfall.

"Today we are signing a new page in the history of democracy in our country," Sanchez told parliament prior to the vote.

But PP lawmaker Rafael Hernando told him he would be entering the prime minister's office "through the back door" after failing to win 2015 and 2016 general elections.

"For the first time we may get a prime minister who didn't win elections," he retorted.&nbsp;

Tough ride for Sanchez 
In order to push through the no-confidence motion, the Socialists, who hold just 84 of the parliament's 350 seats, had to cosy up to parties they had previously clashed with, like Catalan separatists and the anti-establishment Podemos.

As such, even if he has pledged to govern long enough to restore "institutional stability" before calling early elections, Sanchez's new government will likely be highly unstable.

Podemos has already asked to be part of his new government.

Aitor Esteban of the Basque PNV nationalist party, whose support proved decisive for the motion's success, on Thursday warned that such a minority government would be "weak and difficult, complicated."

"This is going to be a constant bing, bang, boom."

A scandal too far 
Although Rajoy survived a similar no-confidence vote last year, Friday's ballot draws a line under his rollercoaster time in office which began in 2011 and saw him implementing drastic spending cuts before winning re-election in 2015 and 2016.&nbsp;

Despite winning the last two votes, he lacked the absolute majority of his first term.

He put Spain back onto the path of growth after a devastating economic crisis although unemployment remains sky-high, jobs precarious and many complain inequalities have risen.

But his term in office was also marred by a series of corruption scandals involving former PP members.

Last week the National Court, which deals with major criminal cases, sentenced 29 people with links to the PP, including a former treasurer, to a total of 351 years in jail.&nbsp;

It also ordered the party to pay back 245,000 euros ($290,000) received from the scheme to help finance election campaigns.

'What moral authority'? 
Rajoy became Spain's first sitting prime minister to give evidence at trial when he was called as a witness last year.

In its ruling, the court said the credibility of Rajoy's testimony "should be questioned".

During Thursday's pre-vote debate, Rajoy said the corruption case "does not concern members of the government" and repeated the party's argument that only a tiny number of its politicians have been tainted by corruption.

He also hit back by listing the many graft cases involving the Socialists over the years.

"Are you Mother Teresa of Calcutta? With what moral authority do you speak?" he told Sanchez.

The no-confidence vote launched by Rajoy's rival Socialist party chief Pedro Sanchez proved the nail in the coffin of a man variously described as an uncharismatic and rigid do-nothing or a stellar strategist with strong political acumen

Spain's parliament on Friday ousted Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy in a no-confidence vote sparked by fury over his party's corruption woes, with his Socialist arch-rival Pedro Sanchez automatically taking over. An absolute majority of 180 lawmakers voted for the motion to loud applause and shouts of "Yes we can," converting Rajoy into the first prime minister to be ousted by such a vote since Spain transitioned to democracy in 1977. The bespectacled 63-year-old leader got up and shook hands with Sanchez before leaving the lower house without a word. Rajoy had already admitted defeat minutes before the vote, knowing that an absolute majority of lawmakers as diverse as Catalan separatists and Basque nationalists had pledged their support for the no-confidence motion. "It's been an honour -- there is none bigger -- to have been Spain's prime minister," he told parliament, with lawmakers from his conservative Popular Party (PP) giving him a standing ovation. Sanchez, Spain's 46-year-old opposition leader, had instigated the no-confidence motion last week after a court revealed details of a vast system of bribes given to former PP officials in exchange for lucrative public contracts between 1999-2005. After years of anger over the scandals tainting the PP, corruption finally got the better of the party and sealed Rajoy's downfall. "Today we are signing a new page in the history of democracy in our country," Sanchez told parliament prior to the vote. But PP lawmaker Rafael Hernando told him he would be entering the prime minister's office "through the back door" after failing to win 2015 and 2016 general elections. "For the first time we may get a prime minister who didn't win elections," he retorted. Tough ride for Sanchez In order to push through the no-confidence motion, the Socialists, who hold just 84 of the parliament's 350 seats, had to cosy up to parties they had previously clashed with, like Catalan separatists and the anti-establishment Podemos. As such, even if he has pledged to govern long enough to restore "institutional stability" before calling early elections, Sanchez's new government will likely be highly unstable. Podemos has already asked to be part of his new government. Aitor Esteban of the Basque PNV nationalist party, whose support proved decisive for the motion's success, on Thursday warned that such a minority government would be "weak and difficult, complicated." "This is going to be a constant bing, bang, boom." A scandal too far Although Rajoy survived a similar no-confidence vote last year, Friday's ballot draws a line under his rollercoaster time in office which began in 2011 and saw him implementing drastic spending cuts before winning re-election in 2015 and 2016. Despite winning the last two votes, he lacked the absolute majority of his first term. He put Spain back onto the path of growth after a devastating economic crisis although unemployment remains sky-high, jobs precarious and many complain inequalities have risen. But his term in office was also marred by a series of corruption scandals involving former PP members. Last week the National Court, which deals with major criminal cases, sentenced 29 people with links to the PP, including a former treasurer, to a total of 351 years in jail. It also ordered the party to pay back 245,000 euros ($290,000) received from the scheme to help finance election campaigns. 'What moral authority'? Rajoy became Spain's first sitting prime minister to give evidence at trial when he was called as a witness last year. In its ruling, the court said the credibility of Rajoy's testimony "should be questioned". During Thursday's pre-vote debate, Rajoy said the corruption case "does not concern members of the government" and repeated the party's argument that only a tiny number of its politicians have been tainted by corruption. He also hit back by listing the many graft cases involving the Socialists over the years. "Are you Mother Teresa of Calcutta? With what moral authority do you speak?" he told Sanchez.

Parliament ousts Spain PM, replaced by Socialist leader

Lawmakers in the US are having discussions on the potential impact of a new law under which any significant purchase of military equipment from Russia would attract American sanctions, an influential US senator said today.

Senator Tim Kaine, who is on the both Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate Armed Services Committee, said sanctions like Countering America's Adversaries through Sanction Act (CAATSA) would drive friends and allies away and give adversaries a chance to come together.

Signed into law by President Donald Trump in August 2017, the Countering America's Adversaries through Sanction Act or CCTSA imposes sanctions on a country or utility for any significant purchase of military equipment from Russia.

"We worry about it (CAATSA) will drive our allies away and also we give adversaries reasons to come together," Kaine told PTI.&nbsp

Kaine said both the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee are working to bring in the necessary reform in CAATSA.&nbsp

"We are starting to talk about CAATSA reforms both in the armed services and the foreign relations committees,? he said, but quickly added that ?it is premature? to say what will happen.&nbsp

"But we're having the discussion about the application of CAATSA now and how it would punish potentially punish allies of ours," Kaine said.

Responding to a question on Prime Minister Narendra Modi having informal summits with the presidents of China and Russia, he said it "does not worry" him.&nbsp

"Of course, they are going to talk to great nations that are in their neighbourhood. Of course, they will," he said.&nbsp

"I continue to believe this administration understands how important the US India relationship is. I don't mind criticising President Trump. But on US-India relationship, I do know that they view it as very important," Kaine said.

"They understand the importance of the relationship. I mean, they definitely do," said the Senator from Virginia, who was vice presidential nominee of the Democratic party in the 2016 presidential elections.&nbsp

Signed into law by President Donald Trump in August 2017, the Countering America's Adversaries through Sanction Act or CCTSA imposes sanctions on a country or utility for any significant purchase of military equipment from Russia

Lawmakers in the US are having discussions on the potential impact of a new law under which any significant purchase of military equipment from Russia would attract American sanctions, an influential US senator said today. Senator Tim Kaine, who is on the both Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate Armed Services Committee, said sanctions like Countering America's Adversaries through Sanction Act (CAATSA) would drive friends and allies away and give adversaries a chance to come together. Signed into law by President Donald Trump in August 2017, the Countering America's Adversaries through Sanction Act or CCTSA imposes sanctions on a country or utility for any significant purchase of military equipment from Russia. "We worry about it (CAATSA) will drive our allies away and also we give adversaries reasons to come together," Kaine told PTI. Kaine said both the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee are working to bring in the necessary reform in CAATSA. "We are starting to talk about CAATSA reforms both in the armed services and the foreign relations committees,? he said, but quickly added that ?it is premature? to say what will happen. "But we're having the discussion about the application of CAATSA now and how it would punish potentially punish allies of ours," Kaine said. Responding to a question on Prime Minister Narendra Modi having informal summits with the presidents of China and Russia, he said it "does not worry" him. "Of course, they are going to talk to great nations that are in their neighbourhood. Of course, they will," he said. "I continue to believe this administration understands how important the US India relationship is. I don't mind criticising President Trump. But on US-India relationship, I do know that they view it as very important," Kaine said. "They understand the importance of the relationship. I mean, they definitely do," said the Senator from Virginia, who was vice presidential nominee of the Democratic party in the 2016 presidential elections.

Lawmakers discuss about impact of CAATSA on allies: US Senator

British parliamentarians said they were prepared to issue formal summons for Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg to appear before them and answer questions over a data scandal which has engulfed the technology giant.

The social network has faced questions on both sides of the Atlantic over how millions of users' details got into the hands of political consultancy Cambridge Analytica, and over its wider handling of personal data.

Zuckerberg previously declined to come in person to answer questions from British lawmakers, instead sending Facebook's Chief Technology Officer Mike Schroepfer to face a four-hour grilling last month. Schroepfer apologised for errors made by the firm and vowed to do more to improve transparency.

But the head of parliament's Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee Damian Collins said on Tuesday he still wanted Zuckerberg to appear before lawmakers, ideally by May 24, and listed 39 questions or points which remained unanswered.

"While Mr Zuckerberg does not normally come under the jurisdiction of the UK parliament, he will do so the next time he enters the country," Collins wrote in a letter.

"We hope that he will respond positively to our request, but if not the Committee will resolve to issue a formal summons for him to appear when he is next in the UK."

Zuckerberg previously declined to come in person to answer questions from British lawmakers, instead sending Facebook's Chief Technology Officer Mike Schroepfer to face a four-hour grilling last month

British parliamentarians said they were prepared to issue formal summons for Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg to appear before them and answer questions over a data scandal which has engulfed the technology giant. The social network has faced questions on both sides of the Atlantic over how millions of users' details got into the hands of political consultancy Cambridge Analytica, and over its wider handling of personal data. Zuckerberg previously declined to come in person to answer questions from British lawmakers, instead sending Facebook's Chief Technology Officer Mike Schroepfer to face a four-hour grilling last month. Schroepfer apologised for errors made by the firm and vowed to do more to improve transparency. But the head of parliament's Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee Damian Collins said on Tuesday he still wanted Zuckerberg to appear before lawmakers, ideally by May 24, and listed 39 questions or points which remained unanswered. "While Mr Zuckerberg does not normally come under the jurisdiction of the UK parliament, he will do so the next time he enters the country," Collins wrote in a letter. "We hope that he will respond positively to our request, but if not the Committee will resolve to issue a formal summons for him to appear when he is next in the UK."

UK lawmakers prepared to summon Facebook boss Zuckerberg over data scandal

Top American lawmakers and experts have warned that imposition of sanctions on India under a newly-enacted law if it buys the S-400 air defence missile system from Russia could be disastrous for the Indo-US ties. Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), which was signed into law in August 2017 and went into effect in January this year, mandates the Trump administration to punish entities engaging in significant transaction with the defence or intelligence sectors of Russia.

At an event on the Capitol Hill, experts and lawmakers warned that any imposition of sanctions on India, which is now a major defence partner, could be disastrous for the bilateral relationship and as such there is an urgent need to prevent that from happening.

“I do think, it (CAATSA) is a serious issue that needs to be dealt. There needs to be a dialogue between the US and India. Our goal is not to sanction India,” Congressman Joe Crowley, House Democratic Caucus Chairman, said at the US-India Friendship event.

“But given the kind of destabilising activities Russia has been doing across the world in particular against democracies, it is important to slap sanctions against Russia,” he said. “But when it comes to those third-party agreements I think there has to be dialogue between the US and India understanding the needs that India has as a nation for self-defence as well that has to be taken into consideration,” Crowley said in response to a question.

India is currently in an advance stage of negotiations with Russia for five S-400 system worth an estimate USD 4.5 billion. The S-400 Triumf long-range air defence missile system has the capability to destroy incoming hostile aircraft, missiles and even drones at ranges of up to 400 km. The S-400 missile system can fire three types of missiles and simultaneously engage 36 targets, thereby creating a layered defence.

Flagging the issue, Nisha Desai Biswal, the former Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia and the current president of the US India Business Council said that CAATSA sanctions is something that members of Congress need to be “really critically aware” of and thinking through as they deal with the intention around the Russia Sanctions legislation.

“It is something that we are all mindful of and looking at very very carefully. But I do think that we need to acknowledge and address the continuing importance for India of its relationship with Russia and how we how we manage the way forward on that issue,” Biswal said.

CAATSA sanctions would “damage” US-India relationship, warned Keith Webster, who represented Pentagon in the Defense Trade and Technology Initiative (DTTI) in the previous Obama Administration. He is currently president of the defence and aerospace export council US Chamber of Commerce.

Observing that the purpose of this legislation is certainly not to target India, Benjamin Schwartz who leads the US-India Business Council’s Defence and Aerospace programme, said one of the unintended consequences of two words “significant transactions” in that legislation is that it’s exacerbated some of the concerns about the US as a reliable security provider.

The legislation says that if a significant transaction takes place with the Russian defence or intelligence services that country or that entity is subject to potential US sanctions. There is a potential of a waiver to take place at the presidential level, Schwartz said.

“I say this is unintended because the only country or at least the country that would benefit the very most from any type of sanctions from the United States on India would be Russia. So that was clearly not the intention of this legislation. I personally don’t think that the US Congress or the US government would ultimately follow through with that kind of situation because that wasn’t the intention of the legislation.”

But one of the challenges that we faced in promoting US India defence relationship is demonstrating that the US is a reliable partner of India. So all efforts should be “on trying to eliminate any of the ambiguity or the uncertainty that that legislative language may be creating,” Schwartz said.

Experts and lawmakers warned that any imposition of sanctions on India, which is now a major defence partner, could be disastrous for the bilateral relationship and as such there is an urgent need to prevent that from happening.

Top American lawmakers and experts have warned that imposition of sanctions on India under a newly-enacted law if it buys the S-400 air defence missile system from Russia could be disastrous for the Indo-US ties. Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), which was signed into law in August 2017 and went into effect in January this year, mandates the Trump administration to punish entities engaging in significant transaction with the defence or intelligence sectors of Russia. At an event on the Capitol Hill, experts and lawmakers warned that any imposition of sanctions on India, which is now a major defence partner, could be disastrous for the bilateral relationship and as such there is an urgent need to prevent that from happening. “I do think, it (CAATSA) is a serious issue that needs to be dealt. There needs to be a dialogue between the US and India. Our goal is not to sanction India,” Congressman Joe Crowley, House Democratic Caucus Chairman, said at the US-India Friendship event. “But given the kind of destabilising activities Russia has been doing across the world in particular against democracies, it is important to slap sanctions against Russia,” he said. “But when it comes to those third-party agreements I think there has to be dialogue between the US and India understanding the needs that India has as a nation for self-defence as well that has to be taken into consideration,” Crowley said in response to a question. India is currently in an advance stage of negotiations with Russia for five S-400 system worth an estimate USD 4.5 billion. The S-400 Triumf long-range air defence missile system has the capability to destroy incoming hostile aircraft, missiles and even drones at ranges of up to 400 km. The S-400 missile system can fire three types of missiles and simultaneously engage 36 targets, thereby creating a layered defence. Flagging the issue, Nisha Desai Biswal, the former Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia and the current president of the US India Business Council said that CAATSA sanctions is something that members of Congress need to be “really critically aware” of and thinking through as they deal with the intention around the Russia Sanctions legislation. “It is something that we are all mindful of and looking at very very carefully. But I do think that we need to acknowledge and address the continuing importance for India of its relationship with Russia and how we how we manage the way forward on that issue,” Biswal said. CAATSA sanctions would “damage” US-India relationship, warned Keith Webster, who represented Pentagon in the Defense Trade and Technology Initiative (DTTI) in the previous Obama Administration. He is currently president of the defence and aerospace export council US Chamber of Commerce. Observing that the purpose of this legislation is certainly not to target India, Benjamin Schwartz who leads the US-India Business Council’s Defence and Aerospace programme, said one of the unintended consequences of two words “significant transactions” in that legislation is that it’s exacerbated some of the concerns about the US as a reliable security provider. The legislation says that if a significant transaction takes place with the Russian defence or intelligence services that country or that entity is subject to potential US sanctions. There is a potential of a waiver to take place at the presidential level, Schwartz said. “I say this is unintended because the only country or at least the country that would benefit the very most from any type of sanctions from the United States on India would be Russia. So that was clearly not the intention of this legislation. I personally don’t think that the US Congress or the US government would ultimately follow through with that kind of situation because that wasn’t the intention of the legislation.” But one of the challenges that we faced in promoting US India defence relationship is demonstrating that the US is a reliable partner of India. So all efforts should be “on trying to eliminate any of the ambiguity or the uncertainty that that legislative language may be creating,” Schwartz said.

US should not sanction India over defence deal with Russia: American lawmakers

Hawaii would become the seventh US state to legalize physician-assisted suicide for terminally ill patients under legislation passed by the state Senate on Thursday and sent to the governor.

The bill would allow terminally ill individuals to obtain a doctor's prescription for medication to hasten their death so long as two physicians agree the patient has no more than six months to live and is mentally competent.

The measure also would require a patient seeking life-ending medical aid to undergo a mental health evaluation, to present two separate requests to an attending physician and for two witnesses to attest to the patient’s wish to die.

While a doctor could dispense the medication, patients would be required to take it on their own.

The bill is due to be automatically enacted on April 17 unless Governor David Ige signs it into law before then or vetoes it.

The advocacy group Compassion and Choices, which backed and lobbied for the measure, said Ige, a Democrat, is expected to sign the bill.

The measure was approved by the Hawaii House of Representatives on a 39-12 vote on March 6, and cleared the Senate on a vote of 23-2. Democrats hold a majority in both bodies.

Six other states - California, Colorado, Montana, Oregon, Vermont and Washington - already have laws on the books to legalize medical aid in dying for terminally ill patients, terminology preferred by advocates to the phrase "physician-assisted suicide."

The District of Columbia also has enacted such a statute.

Supporters have sought to widen legalization of the practice as a way to help end-stage cancer and other patients with incurable diseases to die with less pain and suffering.

Opponents have included some religious groups and some advocates for the elderly and disabled who have argued that unscrupulous caregivers or relatives could pressure vulnerable patients to take their own lives.

Oregon was the first to legalize physician-assisted suicide with a statute that took effect in 1998. Since then, some 200 end-of-life prescriptions have been written a year and about two-thirds of them being used, according to Aubrey Hawk, a spokeswoman for Compassion and Choices.

Hawaii would become the seventh US state to legalize physician-assisted suicide for terminally ill patients

Hawaii would become the seventh US state to legalize physician-assisted suicide for terminally ill patients under legislation passed by the state Senate on Thursday and sent to the governor. The bill would allow terminally ill individuals to obtain a doctor's prescription for medication to hasten their death so long as two physicians agree the patient has no more than six months to live and is mentally competent. The measure also would require a patient seeking life-ending medical aid to undergo a mental health evaluation, to present two separate requests to an attending physician and for two witnesses to attest to the patient’s wish to die. While a doctor could dispense the medication, patients would be required to take it on their own. The bill is due to be automatically enacted on April 17 unless Governor David Ige signs it into law before then or vetoes it. The advocacy group Compassion and Choices, which backed and lobbied for the measure, said Ige, a Democrat, is expected to sign the bill. The measure was approved by the Hawaii House of Representatives on a 39-12 vote on March 6, and cleared the Senate on a vote of 23-2. Democrats hold a majority in both bodies. Six other states - California, Colorado, Montana, Oregon, Vermont and Washington - already have laws on the books to legalize medical aid in dying for terminally ill patients, terminology preferred by advocates to the phrase "physician-assisted suicide." The District of Columbia also has enacted such a statute. Supporters have sought to widen legalization of the practice as a way to help end-stage cancer and other patients with incurable diseases to die with less pain and suffering. Opponents have included some religious groups and some advocates for the elderly and disabled who have argued that unscrupulous caregivers or relatives could pressure vulnerable patients to take their own lives. Oregon was the first to legalize physician-assisted suicide with a statute that took effect in 1998. Since then, some 200 end-of-life prescriptions have been written a year and about two-thirds of them being used, according to Aubrey Hawk, a spokeswoman for Compassion and Choices.

Hawaii lawmakers approve medical aid in dying for terminally ill

lawmakers

Lawmakers, News on Lawmakers, stories on Lawmakers, articles on Lawmakers, Lawmakers stories at Wion, Lawmakers news, Lawmakers latest news