Internet giant Google is at loggerheads with the justice department of the United States. CEO of google's parent company Alphabet Sundar Pichai and US district judge Amit Mehta has been decided to hear the case. Watch report.

US-Google lawsuit | Indian -born judge Amit Mehta to head case

When FBI Special Agent Richard Trask took the witness stand in federal court in Grand Rapids, Michigan, last week to detail a plot to kidnap the governors of Michigan and Virginia, the prosecutor first asked him what the men involved had in common.

They were all from “multiple militias from different states,” replied Trask, who is a domestic terrorism expert for the Detroit field office.

Nils Kessler, the prosecutor, paused on the word “militia,” noting that it meant different things to different people. “These are groups that call themselves militias?” he asked. “But they are not under any government authority or anything like that?”

“That’s correct,” Trask responded.

For decades, federal authorities and academics have described private paramilitary organizations — armed groups who train together on military tactics and techniques — as “militias” or as part of the “militia movement.” But the term has taken on new meaning as makeshift vigilante groups have popped up with increasing frequency in the months leading up to a contentious election.

Once limited to the far-right fringe, the term militia now encompasses a far wider spectrum, representing everything from armed-to-the-teeth neighborhood watch organizations to an all-Black paramilitary group that marches to protest police violence.

The rising visibility of such groups has put a spotlight on the word “militia” itself, with many critics demanding it be replaced. They contend that the term has fundamentally lost its meaning as more groups use it to camouflage threats of violence.

Historically, militias have referred to an auxiliary force raised from the civilian population to bolster the Army. The issue in the United States, experts said, is that private paramilitary groups have long cloaked their activities in the vocabulary of the American Revolution and the Constitution, creating an aura of legality that does not exist.

“The use of the word militia anytime you are talking about anything other than a state militia like the National Guard, it is just wrong,” said Mary McCord, a former Justice Department official now running an institute that specializes in constitutional law at Georgetown University Law Center. “Using that term without putting ‘unlawful’ in front of it suggests that there is some legitimacy or even constitutional authority for their existence, which there isn’t.”

One such group in Michigan, called the Wolverine Watchmen, was at the center of the suspected plot to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and commit other planned violence. Federal and state authorities announced the arrest this month of 14 men linked to the group.

That drew even more attention to the term, escalating demands to label such groups “terrorists.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., wrote on Twitter, “Genuine question for the media/law enforcement: why are you calling these armed neo-Nazi groups breaking the law ‘militias’ instead of ‘gangs’ or ‘domestic terrorist groups?’”

Last spring, various anti-government groups condemned the coronavirus lockdown measures as a form of “tyranny” and organized some of the first protests against them. More groups turned out in force during demonstrations against police brutality. Scuffles between protesters and members of armed groups have led to deaths in Kenosha, Wisconsin; Portland, Oregon; and Denver.

There are currently about 181 active anti-government paramilitary groups in the United States, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks them. Some claim thousands of members, but more often their numbers are far smaller, experts said.

American schoolchildren are often taught that Revolutionary War militiamen were heroes. “Patriots formed militia groups to defend the colonies against the British,” reads a brief passage in a fifth grade textbook used in Hillsboro, Oregon, “Some militiamen called themselves minutemen because they could be ready at a moment’s notice.”

In addition, the Second Amendment says, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Many groups cite that language to justify their use of the term. But experts note that “well-regulated,” implies state control and not freelance efforts by all comers.

The name “militia” suggests the idea of citizen soldiers and patriotism, plus it lends such groups “the color of the law,” said Mark Pitcavage, a senior research fellow with the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism.

Underneath that veneer lies a fundamental contradiction, experts noted, with members of the current movement advocating an armed resistance against the very state that the original militias were formed to protect.

It is difficult to pinpoint which group first resurrected the name “militia.” Some historians consider the Ku Klux Klan a militia, and over the past century various militant groups drew on the Revolution for their names.

In the 1970s, far-right activists, alarmed by civil rights legislation as well as new environmental laws, pushed to reassert local control. The Posse Comitatus movement, rooted in white Christian fundamentalism, developed the concept of citizen posses.

Its manual stated that any official who disobeyed the Constitution should “be removed by the Posse to a populated intersection of the streets in the township and at high noon be hung there by the neck, the body remaining until sundown as an example to those who would subvert the law,” according to Daniel Levitas, author of “The Terrorist Next Door,” a history of extremist groups.

“Unorganized militia,” a 19th century legal term, was considered obsolete after the Militia Act of 1903, when federal law began incorporating all legal militias into the National Guard, controlled by state governors. Although the wording differs, all 50 states ban private paramilitary groups that further “civil disorder.”

Fast forward to the early 1990s, when the term gained new life after the violent sieges by federal law enforcement agents against the cabin of Randy Weaver in Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992, and the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, in 1993.

Those on the far-right, already dedicated to the idea of a “leaderless resistance,” concluded that they needed to organize into paramilitary groups to protect themselves from government “tyranny.” Pamphlets appeared with titles like “The Field Manual of the Free Militia” that explained how to establish one.

Using the word “militia” and other historical vocabulary was a deliberate attempt to attract a broader membership by veiling the often racist, anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant and homophobic origins of such groups, experts said.

“Right-wing extremist organizations try to cloak themselves in heroic garb,” said David Neiwert, author of “Alt-America,” who has tracked such groups for decades. “That is the basis of a lot of the appeal; this is your chance to be a hero.”

Paramilitary organizations mushroomed in the 1990s, with some 370 formed by the middle of the decade. Then came the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, sprouting from the same ideology if not directly connected to a militia, that left 168 people dead. Scores of paramilitary organizations collapsed as their appeal dimmed.

But political fights over the Second Amendment kept the movement alive; plus, conspiracy theories about a looming foreign invasion never faded entirely. In recent years, the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017 marked the first high-profile appearance of such armed groups at protests.

Experts who continue to use the word “militia” said it helped to define a distinct category among adherents of various fringe ideologies or criminal organizations including white supremacists, prison gangs, the tax protest movement, anti-vaxxers, skinheads, survivalists and others.

“Terrorist” was the most popular substitute that circulated on social media, but the legal definition of terrorism refers to organized attacks meant to intimidate or coerce in an attempt to influence government policy. Many experts consider that too broad. The majority of militia members “will never be involved with a terrorist act,” said Pitcavage.

The term gangs is also considered a poor fit since law enforcement agencies tend to use that to describe violent criminal enterprises. Some experts said they felt like they were under siege by “language police” over a word they have used for decades.

In Michigan, federal authorities said the plotters discussed putting the governor on trial as a “tyrant” before Election Day. The case has become an election issue as President Donald Trump has cast doubts on the plot and continued to vilify Whitmer.

The possibility that armed groups might try to intimidate voters at the polls prompted the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law to publish a legal guide to confront such groups for all 50 states.

“It has all been whitewashed and made safe for broader public consumption by wrapping it in the flag,” said Neiwert. “They call themselves patriots, although you have never met a more seditious bunch.” 
&nbsp;

When FBI Special Agent Richard Trask took the witness stand in federal court in Grand Rapids, Michigan, last week to detail a plot to kidnap the governors of Michigan and Virginia, the prosecutor first asked him what the men involved had in common.

When FBI Special Agent Richard Trask took the witness stand in federal court in Grand Rapids, Michigan, last week to detail a plot to kidnap the governors of Michigan and Virginia, the prosecutor first asked him what the men involved had in common. They were all from “multiple militias from different states,” replied Trask, who is a domestic terrorism expert for the Detroit field office. Nils Kessler, the prosecutor, paused on the word “militia,” noting that it meant different things to different people. “These are groups that call themselves militias?” he asked. “But they are not under any government authority or anything like that?” “That’s correct,” Trask responded. For decades, federal authorities and academics have described private paramilitary organizations — armed groups who train together on military tactics and techniques — as “militias” or as part of the “militia movement.” But the term has taken on new meaning as makeshift vigilante groups have popped up with increasing frequency in the months leading up to a contentious election. Once limited to the far-right fringe, the term militia now encompasses a far wider spectrum, representing everything from armed-to-the-teeth neighborhood watch organizations to an all-Black paramilitary group that marches to protest police violence. The rising visibility of such groups has put a spotlight on the word “militia” itself, with many critics demanding it be replaced. They contend that the term has fundamentally lost its meaning as more groups use it to camouflage threats of violence. Historically, militias have referred to an auxiliary force raised from the civilian population to bolster the Army. The issue in the United States, experts said, is that private paramilitary groups have long cloaked their activities in the vocabulary of the American Revolution and the Constitution, creating an aura of legality that does not exist. “The use of the word militia anytime you are talking about anything other than a state militia like the National Guard, it is just wrong,” said Mary McCord, a former Justice Department official now running an institute that specializes in constitutional law at Georgetown University Law Center. “Using that term without putting ‘unlawful’ in front of it suggests that there is some legitimacy or even constitutional authority for their existence, which there isn’t.” One such group in Michigan, called the Wolverine Watchmen, was at the center of the suspected plot to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and commit other planned violence. Federal and state authorities announced the arrest this month of 14 men linked to the group. That drew even more attention to the term, escalating demands to label such groups “terrorists.” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., wrote on Twitter, “Genuine question for the media/law enforcement: why are you calling these armed neo-Nazi groups breaking the law ‘militias’ instead of ‘gangs’ or ‘domestic terrorist groups?’” Last spring, various anti-government groups condemned the coronavirus lockdown measures as a form of “tyranny” and organized some of the first protests against them. More groups turned out in force during demonstrations against police brutality. Scuffles between protesters and members of armed groups have led to deaths in Kenosha, Wisconsin; Portland, Oregon; and Denver. There are currently about 181 active anti-government paramilitary groups in the United States, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks them. Some claim thousands of members, but more often their numbers are far smaller, experts said. American schoolchildren are often taught that Revolutionary War militiamen were heroes. “Patriots formed militia groups to defend the colonies against the British,” reads a brief passage in a fifth grade textbook used in Hillsboro, Oregon, “Some militiamen called themselves minutemen because they could be ready at a moment’s notice.” In addition, the Second Amendment says, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Many groups cite that language to justify their use of the term. But experts note that “well-regulated,” implies state control and not freelance efforts by all comers. The name “militia” suggests the idea of citizen soldiers and patriotism, plus it lends such groups “the color of the law,” said Mark Pitcavage, a senior research fellow with the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Extremism. Underneath that veneer lies a fundamental contradiction, experts noted, with members of the current movement advocating an armed resistance against the very state that the original militias were formed to protect. It is difficult to pinpoint which group first resurrected the name “militia.” Some historians consider the Ku Klux Klan a militia, and over the past century various militant groups drew on the Revolution for their names. In the 1970s, far-right activists, alarmed by civil rights legislation as well as new environmental laws, pushed to reassert local control. The Posse Comitatus movement, rooted in white Christian fundamentalism, developed the concept of citizen posses. Its manual stated that any official who disobeyed the Constitution should “be removed by the Posse to a populated intersection of the streets in the township and at high noon be hung there by the neck, the body remaining until sundown as an example to those who would subvert the law,” according to Daniel Levitas, author of “The Terrorist Next Door,” a history of extremist groups. “Unorganized militia,” a 19th century legal term, was considered obsolete after the Militia Act of 1903, when federal law began incorporating all legal militias into the National Guard, controlled by state governors. Although the wording differs, all 50 states ban private paramilitary groups that further “civil disorder.” Fast forward to the early 1990s, when the term gained new life after the violent sieges by federal law enforcement agents against the cabin of Randy Weaver in Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992, and the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, in 1993. Those on the far-right, already dedicated to the idea of a “leaderless resistance,” concluded that they needed to organize into paramilitary groups to protect themselves from government “tyranny.” Pamphlets appeared with titles like “The Field Manual of the Free Militia” that explained how to establish one. Using the word “militia” and other historical vocabulary was a deliberate attempt to attract a broader membership by veiling the often racist, anti-Semitic, anti-immigrant and homophobic origins of such groups, experts said. “Right-wing extremist organizations try to cloak themselves in heroic garb,” said David Neiwert, author of “Alt-America,” who has tracked such groups for decades. “That is the basis of a lot of the appeal; this is your chance to be a hero.” Paramilitary organizations mushroomed in the 1990s, with some 370 formed by the middle of the decade. Then came the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, sprouting from the same ideology if not directly connected to a militia, that left 168 people dead. Scores of paramilitary organizations collapsed as their appeal dimmed. But political fights over the Second Amendment kept the movement alive; plus, conspiracy theories about a looming foreign invasion never faded entirely. In recent years, the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017 marked the first high-profile appearance of such armed groups at protests. Experts who continue to use the word “militia” said it helped to define a distinct category among adherents of various fringe ideologies or criminal organizations including white supremacists, prison gangs, the tax protest movement, anti-vaxxers, skinheads, survivalists and others. “Terrorist” was the most popular substitute that circulated on social media, but the legal definition of terrorism refers to organized attacks meant to intimidate or coerce in an attempt to influence government policy. Many experts consider that too broad. The majority of militia members “will never be involved with a terrorist act,” said Pitcavage. The term gangs is also considered a poor fit since law enforcement agencies tend to use that to describe violent criminal enterprises. Some experts said they felt like they were under siege by “language police” over a word they have used for decades. In Michigan, federal authorities said the plotters discussed putting the governor on trial as a “tyrant” before Election Day. The case has become an election issue as President Donald Trump has cast doubts on the plot and continued to vilify Whitmer. The possibility that armed groups might try to intimidate voters at the polls prompted the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law to publish a legal guide to confront such groups for all 50 states. “It has all been whitewashed and made safe for broader public consumption by wrapping it in the flag,” said Neiwert. “They call themselves patriots, although you have never met a more seditious bunch.”

What is a militia? And why is the word so controversial these days?

A few days after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, David Letterman sat behind his desk at CBS’s “Late Show” and shared the story of a rally in Choteau, Montana, to raise money for New York. Getting choked up, he told his viewers, “If that doesn’t tell you everything you need to know about the spirit of the United States, then I can’t help you.”

Nineteen years later, with the country in the midst of a monthslong pandemic, Letterman found it difficult to conjure up any similarly inspiring anecdotes. One morning last week, this veteran late-night host, broadcaster and comedian, now 73, was sitting in a park here, contemplating the Hudson River and cracking wise about the Governor Mario M. Cuomo Bridge.

“It looks kind of unfinished,” he said through a fabric mask that barely held back his unruly beard. “Doesn’t it look like the new kid got to design it?”

But truth be told, Letterman was in a more melancholy than mirthful frame of mind. Though he, his wife, Regina, and their son, Harry, have remained safe, he knows several people who were stricken by the coronavirus, some of whom died from it. And he is deeply frustrated by what he feels have been inconsistent, nationwide efforts to inform people about the pandemic and mitigate its spread.

While hardly its most devastating casualty, Letterman’s Netflix interview show, “My Next Guest Needs No Introduction,” returns Wednesday but nearly came to a halt. He had recorded two episodes, with Kim Kardashian West and with Robert Downey Jr., before the pandemic, and believed the season — if not the series — was finished.

Instead, he was able to produce two more episodes over the summer, under substantially different circumstances: one with Dave Chappelle, which was recorded at an outdoor pavilion in Yellow Springs, Ohio; and one with Lizzo, at her home studio in Los Angeles, which had no audience at all.

For Letterman, each of these episodes offered him a further education in the evolution of entertainment and deeper insights as an interviewer and observer of human nature. Even so, he found himself yearning for what he called “the carefree days of nonsense” when he could “bring people into a theater and talk to them for an hour, and when we were done I would go out into the crowd and shake hands, and everybody would want to tongue-kiss me.”

“We don’t do that anymore,” he added.

Letterman spoke further about his pandemic experience, the making of his Netflix series and what he hopes the future might hold for him. These are edited excerpts from that conversation.

Q: How has the pandemic been for you? What is it like for you now?

A: Like everybody else, you forget about it. Six, eight months into it, you go on talking as though things are normal, and then it’s, oh, no, we can’t do that because of the pandemic. In the beginning, it was more than ghastly. The husband of a woman that worked at (“Late Show”), he died. A teacher at Harry’s school died. Paul Shaffer and his wife both had it. Cathy, his wife, was hospitalized. Barbara Gaines, who was a producer on the show, she and her wife both had it. And on and on and on.

Q: How do you feel when you come into contact with people elsewhere in the country who don’t seem to be taking the pandemic as seriously?

A: That makes me very sad. Because we learned a lesson that these other people are dismissing. I was talking to a friend of mine, and he was furious at the mayor of his city for keeping it closed, and he said, “Well, that guy will never be reelected.” And I just thought, do I tell him what this really can be? We’re looking at a quarter of a million people dead soon. But I just didn’t want to have that fight. 
 
Q: After the 9/11 attacks, you gave several “Late Show” monologues where you tried to rally your viewers’ spirits and bring them together. Do you ever feel like saying anything similar now?

A: Something applicable to these times? I wish I had the wherewithal to say something meaningful. But all of these people who are resisting the idea of prevention, I just keep thinking: What about the families of the 220,000 people who are dead? I wonder how they’re feeling. I don’t get it. I have no solution other than to do what is told: Take care of yourself and your family.

Q: How did the pandemic affect your work on your Netflix series?

A: I thought we were done for good. Really. In the beginning, it really seemed like, holy God, they’re coming over the wall, we’re all going to die. People keep reminding me that, at my age, I’m particularly vulnerable. Which I don’t appreciate at all. “Dad, you know you’re close to 100, you’d better not go out.”

Q: How did you decide to continue with your season?

A: We had two more episodes (with Lizzo and Dave Chappelle) in preproduction, and we were eager to do something. We did them within a very short period of time, and then we came home. By that point, there were protocols in place from the production company and from Netflix that we had to observe, gladly, and we got through it OK.

Q: Kim Kardashian West, who is now a prized guest on your Netflix series, was a frequent target of mockery in your “Late Show” days.

A: Oh, I was at the head of that list. I can remember when she would be booked on the show, it was like, I don’t know anything about her, and I’ve never seen her show. And then when we went to talk to Kanye, I thought, oh, I’ve misjudged this woman.

Q: What changed your mind about her?

A: After we met with Kanye West (for the previous season of the Netflix series), I had a long talk with her at their home, and I started to think about how I had used her as a joke and regarded her as someone not to be taken seriously. I found that that impression was not the end of the story. She had a family. She has her prison reform program. I won’t comment on the ease of being married to Kanye West. And if she can keep a show like that on the air for all those years, that’s an accomplishment. If you can stay in business on television that long, good for you.

Q: You went to Yellow Springs, Ohio, to interview Dave Chappelle. Did you perform at his outdoor comedy show there?

A: Yes. I think I did it. (To his publicist) Did I do it? (Publicist answers: “You did it.”) I’m being told I did it (laughs). It was grand. The setting is unique. It’s outdoors. Everybody’s tested, everybody social distanced. He had three or four comics on and each comic made my heart sink deeper. Because when I was doing comedy, a lot of it was (weakly) “Hey, where you from?” But these men and women, whoa — the level of it, the intellect of it, the presentation of it is so much more than it was when me and my little buddies were, “Hey, how ya doin’, I just got in from Indiana.” Really? No one cares. Get outta here.

Q: Do you ever have moments in these interviews where you feel as if you don’t have a shared frame of reference to talk to some of these guests?

A: Yes. Because the experience is barely parallel. We’re all in show business, but that’s as close a comparison as you can make, culturally. I did feel like, is this going to look stupid? An old guy here, trying to talk to people who are thriving and alive and dominating the world through social media? I felt like it was a wreck. That’s the inner dialogue.

Q: How do you get past this?

A: Like anybody else that you talk to, every human being, there are situations that helped develop into what they are. So you’re going to get a story out of anybody. It may not happen in the first five minutes, but in every one of these experiences, there’s always a conduit for mutual experience. “Oh yeah? You think that’s something? Well, one time I choked on a peanut-butter sandwich and nearly died.” You have to make everybody a good interview.

Q: Do you think that late-night television, a genre that you helped to pioneer, has been diminished in recent years — that so much of it has become political comedy that doesn’t really move the needle and crowds out everything else?

A: I know that people have been hugely successful with it. Stephen (Colbert) has done a great job with my old show — his show now. In my day, the goal was just anything to make the audience laugh. That may be part of the dynamic now. People have this hunger to see the current administration being assailed and embarrassing itself. So I think that’s what (late-night shows) worked toward. I don’t fault them for that. After a while, it wears thin, but the appetite for it has not worn thin. I think they still do enough business to keep people happy.

Q: Do you ever find yourself fearing for the future of this country?

A: I really did, until recently. And now I am confident — or more confident than I’ve been in the last four years — that we’re changing presidents in a couple of weeks. And it will be a huge victory. Not just for our culture and our government, but the simple act of voting will have been the reason that the rest of our country is put back together and, in many ways, saved from what appears to be tyranny, certainly jeopardy. I think it will be a huge victory on many fronts, not the least of which is calling attention to the valuable freedom of voting.

Q: Please don’t mistake this for a suggestion, but do you ever think about packing it in as a broadcaster entirely?

A: First of all, you can’t hurt my feelings because I’m dead inside. But the Netflix people put me back in business in a way that has been, for me, really, really fun. On the other hand, I recognize my own shelf life. I’m way overdue. When it happens, I still will enjoy little things here and there, and that’ll be enough. But there’s other people more capable. I got no problem with that. If there is any kind of schedule, it would be when my son is finished with high school. But if it’s tomorrow, that’s fine.

Q: Your son, Harry, is 16 now. Are you worried about how the pandemic is going to affect his life?

A: I think it’s every parent’s concern, regardless of the age of their kids. But for Harry and his buddies, the junior year of high school is a crucial experience. Now they’re starting to look beyond high school, and it’s not good. For guys Harry’s age and older, it might be a setback. Time takes care of everything, and one hopes that that’s the case here.

Q: How do you talk about these feelings with him?

A: I had a conversation with my son the other night that went this way. Because of the pandemic and the fact that he’s getting older, I said, Harry, your mother and I have two responsibilities. One is to keep you safe. And other than the time that your mother let you roll off the bed and land on your head, we have kept you safe. The other responsibility is your happiness. And he said, “Have you been drinking?” So that’s how that works at my house.

&nbsp;

A few days after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, David Letterman sat behind his desk at CBS’s “Late Show” and shared the story of a rally in Choteau, Montana, to raise money for New York.

A few days after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, David Letterman sat behind his desk at CBS’s “Late Show” and shared the story of a rally in Choteau, Montana, to raise money for New York. Getting choked up, he told his viewers, “If that doesn’t tell you everything you need to know about the spirit of the United States, then I can’t help you.” Nineteen years later, with the country in the midst of a monthslong pandemic, Letterman found it difficult to conjure up any similarly inspiring anecdotes. One morning last week, this veteran late-night host, broadcaster and comedian, now 73, was sitting in a park here, contemplating the Hudson River and cracking wise about the Governor Mario M. Cuomo Bridge. “It looks kind of unfinished,” he said through a fabric mask that barely held back his unruly beard. “Doesn’t it look like the new kid got to design it?” But truth be told, Letterman was in a more melancholy than mirthful frame of mind. Though he, his wife, Regina, and their son, Harry, have remained safe, he knows several people who were stricken by the coronavirus, some of whom died from it. And he is deeply frustrated by what he feels have been inconsistent, nationwide efforts to inform people about the pandemic and mitigate its spread. While hardly its most devastating casualty, Letterman’s Netflix interview show, “My Next Guest Needs No Introduction,” returns Wednesday but nearly came to a halt. He had recorded two episodes, with Kim Kardashian West and with Robert Downey Jr., before the pandemic, and believed the season — if not the series — was finished. Instead, he was able to produce two more episodes over the summer, under substantially different circumstances: one with Dave Chappelle, which was recorded at an outdoor pavilion in Yellow Springs, Ohio; and one with Lizzo, at her home studio in Los Angeles, which had no audience at all. For Letterman, each of these episodes offered him a further education in the evolution of entertainment and deeper insights as an interviewer and observer of human nature. Even so, he found himself yearning for what he called “the carefree days of nonsense” when he could “bring people into a theater and talk to them for an hour, and when we were done I would go out into the crowd and shake hands, and everybody would want to tongue-kiss me.” “We don’t do that anymore,” he added. Letterman spoke further about his pandemic experience, the making of his Netflix series and what he hopes the future might hold for him. These are edited excerpts from that conversation. Q: How has the pandemic been for you? What is it like for you now? A: Like everybody else, you forget about it. Six, eight months into it, you go on talking as though things are normal, and then it’s, oh, no, we can’t do that because of the pandemic. In the beginning, it was more than ghastly. The husband of a woman that worked at (“Late Show”), he died. A teacher at Harry’s school died. Paul Shaffer and his wife both had it. Cathy, his wife, was hospitalized. Barbara Gaines, who was a producer on the show, she and her wife both had it. And on and on and on. Q: How do you feel when you come into contact with people elsewhere in the country who don’t seem to be taking the pandemic as seriously? A: That makes me very sad. Because we learned a lesson that these other people are dismissing. I was talking to a friend of mine, and he was furious at the mayor of his city for keeping it closed, and he said, “Well, that guy will never be reelected.” And I just thought, do I tell him what this really can be? We’re looking at a quarter of a million people dead soon. But I just didn’t want to have that fight. Q: After the 9/11 attacks, you gave several “Late Show” monologues where you tried to rally your viewers’ spirits and bring them together. Do you ever feel like saying anything similar now? A: Something applicable to these times? I wish I had the wherewithal to say something meaningful. But all of these people who are resisting the idea of prevention, I just keep thinking: What about the families of the 220,000 people who are dead? I wonder how they’re feeling. I don’t get it. I have no solution other than to do what is told: Take care of yourself and your family. Q: How did the pandemic affect your work on your Netflix series? A: I thought we were done for good. Really. In the beginning, it really seemed like, holy God, they’re coming over the wall, we’re all going to die. People keep reminding me that, at my age, I’m particularly vulnerable. Which I don’t appreciate at all. “Dad, you know you’re close to 100, you’d better not go out.” Q: How did you decide to continue with your season? A: We had two more episodes (with Lizzo and Dave Chappelle) in preproduction, and we were eager to do something. We did them within a very short period of time, and then we came home. By that point, there were protocols in place from the production company and from Netflix that we had to observe, gladly, and we got through it OK. Q: Kim Kardashian West, who is now a prized guest on your Netflix series, was a frequent target of mockery in your “Late Show” days. A: Oh, I was at the head of that list. I can remember when she would be booked on the show, it was like, I don’t know anything about her, and I’ve never seen her show. And then when we went to talk to Kanye, I thought, oh, I’ve misjudged this woman. Q: What changed your mind about her? A: After we met with Kanye West (for the previous season of the Netflix series), I had a long talk with her at their home, and I started to think about how I had used her as a joke and regarded her as someone not to be taken seriously. I found that that impression was not the end of the story. She had a family. She has her prison reform program. I won’t comment on the ease of being married to Kanye West. And if she can keep a show like that on the air for all those years, that’s an accomplishment. If you can stay in business on television that long, good for you. Q: You went to Yellow Springs, Ohio, to interview Dave Chappelle. Did you perform at his outdoor comedy show there? A: Yes. I think I did it. (To his publicist) Did I do it? (Publicist answers: “You did it.”) I’m being told I did it (laughs). It was grand. The setting is unique. It’s outdoors. Everybody’s tested, everybody social distanced. He had three or four comics on and each comic made my heart sink deeper. Because when I was doing comedy, a lot of it was (weakly) “Hey, where you from?” But these men and women, whoa — the level of it, the intellect of it, the presentation of it is so much more than it was when me and my little buddies were, “Hey, how ya doin’, I just got in from Indiana.” Really? No one cares. Get outta here. Q: Do you ever have moments in these interviews where you feel as if you don’t have a shared frame of reference to talk to some of these guests? A: Yes. Because the experience is barely parallel. We’re all in show business, but that’s as close a comparison as you can make, culturally. I did feel like, is this going to look stupid? An old guy here, trying to talk to people who are thriving and alive and dominating the world through social media? I felt like it was a wreck. That’s the inner dialogue. Q: How do you get past this? A: Like anybody else that you talk to, every human being, there are situations that helped develop into what they are. So you’re going to get a story out of anybody. It may not happen in the first five minutes, but in every one of these experiences, there’s always a conduit for mutual experience. “Oh yeah? You think that’s something? Well, one time I choked on a peanut-butter sandwich and nearly died.” You have to make everybody a good interview. Q: Do you think that late-night television, a genre that you helped to pioneer, has been diminished in recent years — that so much of it has become political comedy that doesn’t really move the needle and crowds out everything else? A: I know that people have been hugely successful with it. Stephen (Colbert) has done a great job with my old show — his show now. In my day, the goal was just anything to make the audience laugh. That may be part of the dynamic now. People have this hunger to see the current administration being assailed and embarrassing itself. So I think that’s what (late-night shows) worked toward. I don’t fault them for that. After a while, it wears thin, but the appetite for it has not worn thin. I think they still do enough business to keep people happy. Q: Do you ever find yourself fearing for the future of this country? A: I really did, until recently. And now I am confident — or more confident than I’ve been in the last four years — that we’re changing presidents in a couple of weeks. And it will be a huge victory. Not just for our culture and our government, but the simple act of voting will have been the reason that the rest of our country is put back together and, in many ways, saved from what appears to be tyranny, certainly jeopardy. I think it will be a huge victory on many fronts, not the least of which is calling attention to the valuable freedom of voting. Q: Please don’t mistake this for a suggestion, but do you ever think about packing it in as a broadcaster entirely? A: First of all, you can’t hurt my feelings because I’m dead inside. But the Netflix people put me back in business in a way that has been, for me, really, really fun. On the other hand, I recognize my own shelf life. I’m way overdue. When it happens, I still will enjoy little things here and there, and that’ll be enough. But there’s other people more capable. I got no problem with that. If there is any kind of schedule, it would be when my son is finished with high school. But if it’s tomorrow, that’s fine. Q: Your son, Harry, is 16 now. Are you worried about how the pandemic is going to affect his life? A: I think it’s every parent’s concern, regardless of the age of their kids. But for Harry and his buddies, the junior year of high school is a crucial experience. Now they’re starting to look beyond high school, and it’s not good. For guys Harry’s age and older, it might be a setback. Time takes care of everything, and one hopes that that’s the case here. Q: How do you talk about these feelings with him? A: I had a conversation with my son the other night that went this way. Because of the pandemic and the fact that he’s getting older, I said, Harry, your mother and I have two responsibilities. One is to keep you safe. And other than the time that your mother let you roll off the bed and land on your head, we have kept you safe. The other responsibility is your happiness. And he said, “Have you been drinking?” So that’s how that works at my house.

David Letterman isn’t here to cheer you up this time

Boston's Franklin Park Zoo welcomed the birth of its first baby gorilla on Wednesday (October 14). The little boy weighed in at 6 pounds, 3 ounces after being delivered by Cesarean section following some unexpected bleeding by his mother, Kiki.

First baby gorilla born at Boston zoo

Washington has batted for the formalisation of Quad, a grouping of the United States, Japan, India and Australia.

In a telephonic briefing, Deputy Secretary of State Stephen E. Biegun said, "It is our view, that in the passage of time, Quad should become more regularised and at some point formalised as well, as we really begin to understand what the parameters of the cooperation are and how we can regularise it, that is very important"

The remarks come weeks after Quad foreign ministers had an in-person meeting in Tokyo earlier this month. This was the 2nd such Quad FMs meet that took place, the first took place last year in New York.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/eyeing-china-australia-accepts-indias-invitation-to-rejoin-quad-drill-naval-exercises-336547" hreflang="en">Eyeing China, Australia accepts India's invitation to rejoin 'quad' drill naval exercises</a>

Highlighting how Quad's origin lies after 2004 Tsunami in Asia, Biegun explained,"not necessarily advocating for Quad plus but rather continuation and regularisation of the Quad with an eventual goal of understanding how it can be best formalised and welcoming cooperation with any country in the Indo pacific that guarantees sovereignty and prosperity for its members"

Amidst the COVID pandemic, countries of the quad and other like-minded countries like Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand had a virtual meet at foreign secretary-level to exchange best ideas and deal with the crisis.

Asked on the expansion of the grouping, Biegun said, "There is no designed policy for quad expansion that is being advocated by US. Quad is still undefined entity....and it is premature...on expanding the Quad."

Deputy Secretary of State had visited India and Bangladesh earlier this month, a visit that comes ahead of US secretary of state Mike Pompeo's visit to India on 26th and 27th October for India and US 2+2 dialogue at foreign and defence ministers level. &nbsp;Pompeo will also visit Sri Lanka and the Maldives during that visit.

Washington has batted for the formalisation of Quad, a grouping of the United States, Japan, India and Australia. In a telephonic briefing, Deputy Secretary of State Stephen E.

Washington has batted for the formalisation of Quad, a grouping of the United States, Japan, India and Australia. In a telephonic briefing, Deputy Secretary of State Stephen E. Biegun said, "It is our view, that in the passage of time, Quad should become more regularised and at some point formalised as well, as we really begin to understand what the parameters of the cooperation are and how we can regularise it, that is very important" The remarks come weeks after Quad foreign ministers had an in-person meeting in Tokyo earlier this month. This was the 2nd such Quad FMs meet that took place, the first took place last year in New York. Also read: Eyeing China, Australia accepts India's invitation to rejoin 'quad' drill naval exercises Highlighting how Quad's origin lies after 2004 Tsunami in Asia, Biegun explained,"not necessarily advocating for Quad plus but rather continuation and regularisation of the Quad with an eventual goal of understanding how it can be best formalised and welcoming cooperation with any country in the Indo pacific that guarantees sovereignty and prosperity for its members" Amidst the COVID pandemic, countries of the quad and other like-minded countries like Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand had a virtual meet at foreign secretary-level to exchange best ideas and deal with the crisis. Asked on the expansion of the grouping, Biegun said, "There is no designed policy for quad expansion that is being advocated by US. Quad is still undefined entity....and it is premature...on expanding the Quad." Deputy Secretary of State had visited India and Bangladesh earlier this month, a visit that comes ahead of US secretary of state Mike Pompeo's visit to India on 26th and 27th October for India and US 2+2 dialogue at foreign and defence ministers level. Pompeo will also visit Sri Lanka and the Maldives during that visit.

United States bats for formalisation of Quad

The Plastic Bag Store looks like a typical New York City grocery store in the heart of Times Square, but a closer look at the boxes of sushi rolls and cereal have labels like "plastic bagacado roll," "Yucky Shards," and "Caps N' Such." Beginning Monday (Oct. 19), all plastic carryout bags are banned throughout the entire state of New York, where according to the state's Department of Environmental Conservation, more than 23 billion plastic bags are used each year.

The Plastic Bag Store opens to coincide with NY's plastic bag ban

After emerging last year in China which was then followed by a massive loss of lives across the globe, the novel coronavirus has crossed another grim milestone with the confirmed infections surpassing 40 million on Monday.

Covid-19 has caused 40,000,234 infections and 1,113,896 fatalities worldwide, according to an AFP tally compiled on official figures.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-over-55000-cases-reported-total-infections-cross-75-million-mark-336336">India: Over 55,000 cases reported; total infections cross 7.5 million-mark</a>

More than 50 per cent of the infections are from the three worst-hit countries: the United States with 8,154,935 cases, India with 7,550,273 and Brazil 5,235,344.

The deadly virus which was detected in China last year has also recorded the highest-ever 2.5 million cases in the last seven days.&nbsp;

Meanwhile, on Sunday, figures confirmed that more than 250,000 people have died in Europe of Covid-19 as the continent battles a second wave of the deadly virus.

Countries like Britain, France have reimposed strong measures to curb the spread of Covid-19 as the fear of rising cases putting stress on the medical system grows.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

After emerging last year in China which was then followed by a massive loss of lives across the globe, the novel coronavirus has crossed another grim milestone with the confirmed infections surpassing 40 million on Monday.

After emerging last year in China which was then followed by a massive loss of lives across the globe, the novel coronavirus has crossed another grim milestone with the confirmed infections surpassing 40 million on Monday. Covid-19 has caused 40,000,234 infections and 1,113,896 fatalities worldwide, according to an AFP tally compiled on official figures. Also read | India: Over 55,000 cases reported; total infections cross 7.5 million-mark More than 50 per cent of the infections are from the three worst-hit countries: the United States with 8,154,935 cases, India with 7,550,273 and Brazil 5,235,344. The deadly virus which was detected in China last year has also recorded the highest-ever 2.5 million cases in the last seven days. Meanwhile, on Sunday, figures confirmed that more than 250,000 people have died in Europe of Covid-19 as the continent battles a second wave of the deadly virus. Countries like Britain, France have reimposed strong measures to curb the spread of Covid-19 as the fear of rising cases putting stress on the medical system grows.

Coronavirus: Worldwide cases surpass 40 million; more than 50% cases from US, India and Brazil

The federal government of the United States will be&nbsp;executing a woman for the first time since&nbsp;1953&nbsp;for&nbsp;strangling a Missouri woman.

There have been a string of executions in the US this year, and the federal government has finalised dates for two more criminals, which includes a woman.

Identified as&nbsp;Lisa Montgomery, she will be receiving a lethal injection on December 08, as reported by local media channels.

Montgomery was arrested in 2004 and was&nbsp;convicted of strangling an eight-months pregnant&nbsp;woman from Missouri, then cut out and kidnapped the baby.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/i-may-have-to-leave-country-donald-trump-says-about-losing-to-biden-in-us-election-336195">Also read|&nbsp;'I may have to leave country': Donald Trump says about losing to Biden in US election</a>

As per the&nbsp;US Bureau of Prisons records, the last two women to ever be executed in the United States of America was&nbsp;Bonnie Brown Heady, who was executed on&nbsp;December 18, 1953 for&nbsp;kidnapping and murder, and&nbsp;Ethel Rosenberg who was executed&nbsp;for espionage. Her husband, too was executed.

The criminal is being held at the federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana currently. The second convict to be executed this year is also at the same facility.

However, Montgomery's lawyers have&nbsp;urged the government to reconsider this decision as they argued that she is&nbsp;mentally ill due to the&nbsp;horrible childhood abuse. They also claimed that Montgomery&nbsp;had poor representation at trial.

The federal government of the United States will be executing a woman for the first time since 1953 for strangling a Missouri woman. There have been a string of executions in the US this year, and the federal government has finalised dates for two more criminals, which includes a woman.

The federal government of the United States will be executing a woman for the first time since 1953 for strangling a Missouri woman. There have been a string of executions in the US this year, and the federal government has finalised dates for two more criminals, which includes a woman. Identified as Lisa Montgomery, she will be receiving a lethal injection on December 08, as reported by local media channels. Montgomery was arrested in 2004 and was convicted of strangling an eight-months pregnant woman from Missouri, then cut out and kidnapped the baby. Also read| 'I may have to leave country': Donald Trump says about losing to Biden in US election As per the US Bureau of Prisons records, the last two women to ever be executed in the United States of America was Bonnie Brown Heady, who was executed on December 18, 1953 for kidnapping and murder, and Ethel Rosenberg who was executed for espionage. Her husband, too was executed. The criminal is being held at the federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana currently. The second convict to be executed this year is also at the same facility. However, Montgomery's lawyers have urged the government to reconsider this decision as they argued that she is mentally ill due to the horrible childhood abuse. They also claimed that Montgomery had poor representation at trial.

US to execute first woman in December after six decades

Watch this week's West Asia Post as Ghadi Francis talks to Ali Hamdan, an adviser to the Lebanese Parliament Speaker for more on the Lebanon-Israel maritime talks. Also on the show, we explore how autocrats are hijacking mega sporting events to expand their soft power? For more such stories, keep watching the West Asia post with Ghadi Francis every Friday at 8:30 PM, only on WION.

The West Asia Post - Episode 3

When China first opened to overseas investors, the country was desperate for foreign technology to revive its growth. Now, as China faces rising global barriers, its leader, Xi Jinping, is urging greater domestic innovation.

Xi delivered this message Wednesday while making an anniversary pilgrimage to the southern city of Shenzhen, which in 1980 was established as a “special economic zone” next to the global financial hub of Hong Kong. Shenzhen quickly became an incubator for “reform and opening up,” the strategy championed by Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping that paved the way for the country’s decadeslong economic takeoff.

Forty years later, Xi said China still welcomed foreign investors, but he also said it must prepare for a less welcoming world. The coronavirus pandemic has accelerated the rise of barriers to the free flow of goods and technology, Xi said, a theme that he has stressed recently.

“The world economy is at low ebb, and international trade and investment have drastically shrunk,” Xi said to a conference hall packed with officials and guests wearing protective masks, in a speech that was promoted heavily by the Chinese news media.

Xi did not refer directly to the Trump administration’s efforts to restrict Chinese companies’ access to U.S. technology amid escalating tensions between the two countries. Instead, Xi broadly warned that “the world has entered a period of turbulence and transformation.” Shenzhen’s experience, he said, showed that China must “gain the initiative in the global technological revolution.”

China is striving to revive its economy and repair its international standing amid the coronavirus pandemic, which began late last year in the central city of Wuhan. The pandemic has driven negative views of China to new heights in the United States and other wealthy democracies, according to a survey by the Pew Research Center that was published last week.

Xi is also trying to quell jitters about Hong Kong, the semi-autonomous Chinese territory where a sweeping security law was recently imposed in response to tumultuous anti-government protests last year.

Xi’s speech in Shenzhen gave a likely preview of a Communist Party leaders’ meeting late this month, when he will lay out China’s economic strategy for the next five years, including harnessing more domestic innovation and consumer spending.

Xi pledged to make Shenzhen a proving ground for upgrading China’s economy and strengthening innovation, citing plans to step up spending on technology research. He stressed Shenzhen’s importance in a regional economic initiative that also encompasses Hong Kong, a strategy that could enhance Chinese influence over the former British colony and underscore its reduced importance for Beijing.

Xi’s speech and other comments during his trip this week to Guangdong province, which includes Shenzhen, have also underscored his effort to redefine China’s decades-old strategy of “opening up.”

Past leaders stressed drawing in foreign capital and technology to help China catch up; Xi wants to shift the balance by taking Chinese technology, investment and power to the world.

“We’re experiencing a transformation the likes of which hasn’t happened for a century,” Xi said Monday while visiting a factory in Chaozhou, another coastal city in Guangdong. “We must take the road toward a higher level of self-reliance.”

Officials have already spent years trying to shift Shenzhen from low-end industry to high-tech design and manufacturing. Xi wants to wean China off foreign suppliers for crucial components, such as silicon chips, and the city is a part of those plans. Shenzhen is home to the headquarters of big Chinese tech firms such as Huawei, one of the world’s biggest smartphone sellers. The United States has imposed several restrictions against Huawei in the past year, deeming the company a security threat, a claim that the company denies.

“This is a new spin using Shenzhen to say, ‘We can be economically strong, we can be technologically innovative, we can be socially progressive — on Chinese terms,’” said Juan Du, an associate professor of architecture at the University of Hong Kong and author of a recent study, “The Shenzhen Experiment.”

“A lot is riding on this for Shenzhen to be able to set an example for other cities in China,” she said. “Shenzhen’s importance to the national psyche is far greater than just its economic importance.”

But China remains greatly dependent on imported technologies, especially semiconductors, the brains of all electronic devices. Despite billions of dollars in state support, Chinese chipmakers are still far behind rivals in Taiwan, South Korea and the United States.

The Trump administration is threatening to block Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation, China’s most advanced chip manufacturer, from using U.S. software and equipment out of fear that its products are used by the Chinese military, which the company denies. The technology involved in chip production is fiendishly complex to master, making it difficult for Chinese companies to easily catch up with foreign makers.

“The Chinese government is pretty much aware that technology, by and large, comes from the private sector,” said Jean-Pierre Cabestan, a professor of Chinese politics at Hong Kong Baptist University. Shenzhen and its tech companies, he said, are “very much part of this effort to leapfrog and catch up with Western countries in high-tech.”

Xi’s vision of Shenzhen as a base for China’s rising technological prowess carries extra resonance because his father, Xi Zhongxun, was an official who helped to establish the region as a scrappy boomtown.

After former Communist Chairman Mao Zedong’s Cultural Revolution, a surge of people fled to Hong Kong, and Xi Zhongxun, then the party secretary of Guangdong, hoped zones like Shenzhen would help revive the economy and stanch the departures, said Joseph Torigian, an assistant professor at American University in Washington who is writing a biography of the elder Xi. The younger Xi mentioned his father indirectly in his speech, citing him only as an unnamed provincial leader.

Hong Kong investment and expertise were crucial to Shenzhen’s rise in the 1980s, but Xi’s speech Wednesday showed the financial hub’s reduced role in China’s ambitions.

The officials applauding Xi in Shenzhen included Hong Kong’s chief executive, Carrie Lam, who is charged with enforcing the draconian new national security law. Earlier this week, Lam abruptly postponed her annual policy speech to avoid it coinciding with Xi’s visit to Shenzhen.

“It shows again that Hong Kong is a kind of appendage to mainland China,” Cabestan said.

Xi also used his speech in Shenzhen to vow a bigger role for markets, but Chinese entrepreneurs and economists have expressed skepticism about his commitment. Since coming to power in 2012, he has stressed that the party must keep a tight grip on the economy and that state companies must dominate key sectors of industry. Last month, the Chinese party announced plans to extend its role in private businesses.

Xi’s visit to Shenzhen did not signal any shift from his established economic course, said Deng Yuwen, a former editor for a party newspaper who now lives in the United States.

“I think the propaganda pitch has been set this high this time to try to shift the outside world’s view saying that China is not reforming and is closing itself off,” Deng said by telephone. “Oftentimes, what action you take is not the same thing as in the propaganda.”

When China first opened to overseas investors, the country was desperate for foreign technology to revive its growth. Now, as China faces rising global barriers, its leader, Xi Jinping, is urging greater domestic innovation.

When China first opened to overseas investors, the country was desperate for foreign technology to revive its growth. Now, as China faces rising global barriers, its leader, Xi Jinping, is urging greater domestic innovation. Xi delivered this message Wednesday while making an anniversary pilgrimage to the southern city of Shenzhen, which in 1980 was established as a “special economic zone” next to the global financial hub of Hong Kong. Shenzhen quickly became an incubator for “reform and opening up,” the strategy championed by Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping that paved the way for the country’s decadeslong economic takeoff. Forty years later, Xi said China still welcomed foreign investors, but he also said it must prepare for a less welcoming world. The coronavirus pandemic has accelerated the rise of barriers to the free flow of goods and technology, Xi said, a theme that he has stressed recently. “The world economy is at low ebb, and international trade and investment have drastically shrunk,” Xi said to a conference hall packed with officials and guests wearing protective masks, in a speech that was promoted heavily by the Chinese news media. Xi did not refer directly to the Trump administration’s efforts to restrict Chinese companies’ access to U.S. technology amid escalating tensions between the two countries. Instead, Xi broadly warned that “the world has entered a period of turbulence and transformation.” Shenzhen’s experience, he said, showed that China must “gain the initiative in the global technological revolution.” China is striving to revive its economy and repair its international standing amid the coronavirus pandemic, which began late last year in the central city of Wuhan. The pandemic has driven negative views of China to new heights in the United States and other wealthy democracies, according to a survey by the Pew Research Center that was published last week. Xi is also trying to quell jitters about Hong Kong, the semi-autonomous Chinese territory where a sweeping security law was recently imposed in response to tumultuous anti-government protests last year. Xi’s speech in Shenzhen gave a likely preview of a Communist Party leaders’ meeting late this month, when he will lay out China’s economic strategy for the next five years, including harnessing more domestic innovation and consumer spending. Xi pledged to make Shenzhen a proving ground for upgrading China’s economy and strengthening innovation, citing plans to step up spending on technology research. He stressed Shenzhen’s importance in a regional economic initiative that also encompasses Hong Kong, a strategy that could enhance Chinese influence over the former British colony and underscore its reduced importance for Beijing. Xi’s speech and other comments during his trip this week to Guangdong province, which includes Shenzhen, have also underscored his effort to redefine China’s decades-old strategy of “opening up.” Past leaders stressed drawing in foreign capital and technology to help China catch up; Xi wants to shift the balance by taking Chinese technology, investment and power to the world. “We’re experiencing a transformation the likes of which hasn’t happened for a century,” Xi said Monday while visiting a factory in Chaozhou, another coastal city in Guangdong. “We must take the road toward a higher level of self-reliance.” Officials have already spent years trying to shift Shenzhen from low-end industry to high-tech design and manufacturing. Xi wants to wean China off foreign suppliers for crucial components, such as silicon chips, and the city is a part of those plans. Shenzhen is home to the headquarters of big Chinese tech firms such as Huawei, one of the world’s biggest smartphone sellers. The United States has imposed several restrictions against Huawei in the past year, deeming the company a security threat, a claim that the company denies. “This is a new spin using Shenzhen to say, ‘We can be economically strong, we can be technologically innovative, we can be socially progressive — on Chinese terms,’” said Juan Du, an associate professor of architecture at the University of Hong Kong and author of a recent study, “The Shenzhen Experiment.” “A lot is riding on this for Shenzhen to be able to set an example for other cities in China,” she said. “Shenzhen’s importance to the national psyche is far greater than just its economic importance.” But China remains greatly dependent on imported technologies, especially semiconductors, the brains of all electronic devices. Despite billions of dollars in state support, Chinese chipmakers are still far behind rivals in Taiwan, South Korea and the United States. The Trump administration is threatening to block Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation, China’s most advanced chip manufacturer, from using U.S. software and equipment out of fear that its products are used by the Chinese military, which the company denies. The technology involved in chip production is fiendishly complex to master, making it difficult for Chinese companies to easily catch up with foreign makers. “The Chinese government is pretty much aware that technology, by and large, comes from the private sector,” said Jean-Pierre Cabestan, a professor of Chinese politics at Hong Kong Baptist University. Shenzhen and its tech companies, he said, are “very much part of this effort to leapfrog and catch up with Western countries in high-tech.” Xi’s vision of Shenzhen as a base for China’s rising technological prowess carries extra resonance because his father, Xi Zhongxun, was an official who helped to establish the region as a scrappy boomtown. After former Communist Chairman Mao Zedong’s Cultural Revolution, a surge of people fled to Hong Kong, and Xi Zhongxun, then the party secretary of Guangdong, hoped zones like Shenzhen would help revive the economy and stanch the departures, said Joseph Torigian, an assistant professor at American University in Washington who is writing a biography of the elder Xi. The younger Xi mentioned his father indirectly in his speech, citing him only as an unnamed provincial leader. Hong Kong investment and expertise were crucial to Shenzhen’s rise in the 1980s, but Xi’s speech Wednesday showed the financial hub’s reduced role in China’s ambitions. The officials applauding Xi in Shenzhen included Hong Kong’s chief executive, Carrie Lam, who is charged with enforcing the draconian new national security law. Earlier this week, Lam abruptly postponed her annual policy speech to avoid it coinciding with Xi’s visit to Shenzhen. “It shows again that Hong Kong is a kind of appendage to mainland China,” Cabestan said. Xi also used his speech in Shenzhen to vow a bigger role for markets, but Chinese entrepreneurs and economists have expressed skepticism about his commitment. Since coming to power in 2012, he has stressed that the party must keep a tight grip on the economy and that state companies must dominate key sectors of industry. Last month, the Chinese party announced plans to extend its role in private businesses. Xi’s visit to Shenzhen did not signal any shift from his established economic course, said Deng Yuwen, a former editor for a party newspaper who now lives in the United States. “I think the propaganda pitch has been set this high this time to try to shift the outside world’s view saying that China is not reforming and is closing itself off,” Deng said by telephone. “Oftentimes, what action you take is not the same thing as in the propaganda.”

In city where China welcomed the world, Xi prepares for a colder one

President Donald Trump's U.S. Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett on Wednesday said it is an "open question" as to whether Trump could pardon himself while adding that the nation's top judicial body "can't control" whether a president obeys its decisions.

On the third day of her four-day Judiciary Committee hearing, Barrett also sought to allay Democratic fears that she would be an automatic vote to strike down the Obamacare healthcare law in a case due to be argued Nov. 10, promising an "open mind."

Barrett sidestepped questions from senators on the ability of presidents to evade efforts to hold them accountable.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/barretts-testimony-is-a-deft-mix-of-expertise-and-evasion-335202" hreflang="en">Barrett’s testimony is a deft mix of expertise and evasion</a>

Trump has said he has the "absolute power" to pardon himself, part of his executive clemency authority. Asked by Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy whether a president has such power, Barrett said the "question has never been litigated."

"That question may or may not arise but it's one that calls for legal analysis of what the scope of the pardon power is. So because it would be opining on an open question when I haven't gone through the judicial process to decide it, it's not one on which I can offer a view," Barrett added.

Trump faces a criminal investigation about the conduct of himself and his businesses by a New York City prosecutor who is seeking his financial records and tax returns. Trump also has issued executive clemency to political allies and friends.

Barrett, a conservative federal appellate judge, is the Republican president's third selection for a lifetime job on the Supreme Court. Trump has asked the Senate, controlled by his fellow Republicans, to confirm her before the Nov. 3 U.S. election.

Barrett said "no one is above the law" but twice declined to answer directly when Leahy asked her whether a president who refuses to comply with a court order is a threat to the U.S. constitutional system of checks and balances within the three branches of government.

"The Supreme Court can't control whether or not the president obeys," Barrett said.

Supreme Court rulings, Barrett said, have the "force of law" but the court lacks enforcement power and relies on the other branches of government.

"A court can pronounce the law and issue a judgment but it lacks control over how the political branches respond to it," Barrett added.

Barrett declined to discuss whether Trump is violating the U.S. Constitution's "emoluments" clause with his business dealings, objecting to Leahy's characterization of the provision as an anti-corruption measure. The provision bar presidents from taking gifts or payments from foreign and state governments without congressional approval.

"I don't know if I would characterize it as an anti-corruption clause," Barrett said, adding that it was designed to "prevent foreign countries from having influence."

OBAMACARE CASE

Barrett could be on the high court for arguments in a challenge by Trump and Republican-led states to the 2010 law formally called the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that has helped millions of Americans obtain medical coverage and includes protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

In response to Democratic suggestions that she would vote to strike down Obamacare in its entirety if one part is deemed unlawful, Barrett said that if a statute can be saved, it is a judge's duty to do so.

Barrett indicated she favors of a broad reading of the "severability doctrine" in which courts assume that when one provision of a law is unlawful, Congress would want the rest of the statute to remain in place. The Supreme Court has taken such an approach in recent years.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/barrett-declining-to-detail-legal-views-says-she-will-not-be-a-pawn-of-trump-335274" hreflang="en">Barrett, declining to detail legal views, says she will not be ‘a pawn’ of Trump</a>

"I think insofar as it tries to effectuate what Congress would have wanted, it's the court and Congress working hand in hand," Barrett said of the doctrine.

When judges address the legal question raised in the Obamacare case, the "presumption" is that Congress did not intend the whole statute to fall, Barrett added.

"If I were on the court, and if a case involving the ACA came before me, I would approach it with an open mind," Barrett told Republican Senator John Cornyn.

Barrett has criticized previous Supreme Court rulings upholding Obamacare.

ABORTION RIGHTS

Barrett has faced questions on contentious social issues including abortion, which as a devout Catholic she personally opposes.

"This is history being made folks," Senator Lindsey Graham, the chairman of the panel, said. "This is the first time in American history that we've nominated a woman who is unashamedly pro-life and embraces her faith without apology, and she's going to the court."

Barrett, 48, would be the fifth woman ever to serve on the court.

Barrett reiterated her Tuesday comments that the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion nationwide was not a "super-precedent" that could never potentially be overturned. Barrett also said she has an "open mind" on whether to allow television coverage of Supreme Court proceedings.

Barrett's confirmation would give the court a 6-3 conservative majority. Republicans have a 53-47 Senate majority, making Barrett's confirmation a virtual certainty.

Democrats have said the winner of the presidential election should get to fill the court's vacancy left by the death of liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

The four-day hearing is scheduled to end on Thursday with testimony from outside witnesses. Republicans are preparing for a committee vote next week and a final Senate confirmation vote before the end of October. Trump nominated Barrett to a lifetime post on the court on Sept. 26.

President Donald Trump's U.S. Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett on Wednesday said it is an "open question" as to whether Trump could pardon himself while adding that the nation's top judicial body "can't control" whether a president obeys its decisions.

President Donald Trump's U.S. Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett on Wednesday said it is an "open question" as to whether Trump could pardon himself while adding that the nation's top judicial body "can't control" whether a president obeys its decisions. On the third day of her four-day Judiciary Committee hearing, Barrett also sought to allay Democratic fears that she would be an automatic vote to strike down the Obamacare healthcare law in a case due to be argued Nov. 10, promising an "open mind." Barrett sidestepped questions from senators on the ability of presidents to evade efforts to hold them accountable. Also read: Barrett’s testimony is a deft mix of expertise and evasion Trump has said he has the "absolute power" to pardon himself, part of his executive clemency authority. Asked by Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy whether a president has such power, Barrett said the "question has never been litigated." "That question may or may not arise but it's one that calls for legal analysis of what the scope of the pardon power is. So because it would be opining on an open question when I haven't gone through the judicial process to decide it, it's not one on which I can offer a view," Barrett added. Trump faces a criminal investigation about the conduct of himself and his businesses by a New York City prosecutor who is seeking his financial records and tax returns. Trump also has issued executive clemency to political allies and friends. Barrett, a conservative federal appellate judge, is the Republican president's third selection for a lifetime job on the Supreme Court. Trump has asked the Senate, controlled by his fellow Republicans, to confirm her before the Nov. 3 U.S. election. Barrett said "no one is above the law" but twice declined to answer directly when Leahy asked her whether a president who refuses to comply with a court order is a threat to the U.S. constitutional system of checks and balances within the three branches of government. "The Supreme Court can't control whether or not the president obeys," Barrett said. Supreme Court rulings, Barrett said, have the "force of law" but the court lacks enforcement power and relies on the other branches of government. "A court can pronounce the law and issue a judgment but it lacks control over how the political branches respond to it," Barrett added. Barrett declined to discuss whether Trump is violating the U.S. Constitution's "emoluments" clause with his business dealings, objecting to Leahy's characterization of the provision as an anti-corruption measure. The provision bar presidents from taking gifts or payments from foreign and state governments without congressional approval. "I don't know if I would characterize it as an anti-corruption clause," Barrett said, adding that it was designed to "prevent foreign countries from having influence." OBAMACARE CASE Barrett could be on the high court for arguments in a challenge by Trump and Republican-led states to the 2010 law formally called the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that has helped millions of Americans obtain medical coverage and includes protections for people with pre-existing conditions. In response to Democratic suggestions that she would vote to strike down Obamacare in its entirety if one part is deemed unlawful, Barrett said that if a statute can be saved, it is a judge's duty to do so. Barrett indicated she favors of a broad reading of the "severability doctrine" in which courts assume that when one provision of a law is unlawful, Congress would want the rest of the statute to remain in place. The Supreme Court has taken such an approach in recent years. Also read: Barrett, declining to detail legal views, says she will not be ‘a pawn’ of Trump "I think insofar as it tries to effectuate what Congress would have wanted, it's the court and Congress working hand in hand," Barrett said of the doctrine. When judges address the legal question raised in the Obamacare case, the "presumption" is that Congress did not intend the whole statute to fall, Barrett added. "If I were on the court, and if a case involving the ACA came before me, I would approach it with an open mind," Barrett told Republican Senator John Cornyn. Barrett has criticized previous Supreme Court rulings upholding Obamacare. ABORTION RIGHTS Barrett has faced questions on contentious social issues including abortion, which as a devout Catholic she personally opposes. "This is history being made folks," Senator Lindsey Graham, the chairman of the panel, said. "This is the first time in American history that we've nominated a woman who is unashamedly pro-life and embraces her faith without apology, and she's going to the court." Barrett, 48, would be the fifth woman ever to serve on the court. Barrett reiterated her Tuesday comments that the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion nationwide was not a "super-precedent" that could never potentially be overturned. Barrett also said she has an "open mind" on whether to allow television coverage of Supreme Court proceedings. Barrett's confirmation would give the court a 6-3 conservative majority. Republicans have a 53-47 Senate majority, making Barrett's confirmation a virtual certainty. Democrats have said the winner of the presidential election should get to fill the court's vacancy left by the death of liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The four-day hearing is scheduled to end on Thursday with testimony from outside witnesses. Republicans are preparing for a committee vote next week and a final Senate confirmation vote before the end of October. Trump nominated Barrett to a lifetime post on the court on Sept. 26.

Supreme Court can't control a president, says Trump's nominee Barrett

US President Donald Trump's announcement of completing the troop withdrawal from Afghanistan by Christmas has taken aback nation's military, with officials saying they haven't been informed about the process and concerned over its impact on Taliban-Afghanistan peace talks.&nbsp;

Trump on Wednesday tweeted that the remaining number of "brave" US military personnel would return by Christmas, a move welcomed by the Taliban.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/nato-chief-says-allies-will-leave-afghanistan-together-333582">NATO chief says allies will leave Afghanistan together</a>

He elaborated his announcement in an interview to Fox News, saying: "We're down to 4,000 troops in Afghanistan. I'll have them home by the end of the year. They're coming home, you know, as we speak. Nineteen years is enough. They're acting as policemen, OK? They're not acting as troops."

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/donald-trump-wants-us-forces-to-pull-out-from-afghanistan-by-christmas-333352">Donald Trump wants US forces to pull out from Afghanistan by Christmas</a>

Several US officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity said they were not informed about any new deadline, reported news agency The Associated Press.

In fact, they pointed to remarks by National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien on Wednesday, in which he said: "as of today, there are under 5,000 and that will go to 2,500 by early next year".

The US military has also continually said that counterterrorism personnel would remain in Afghanistan for some time in view of threats by al-Qaida and Islamic State.&nbsp;

The US has earlier maintained that any troop withdrawal from Afghanistan would depend on the situation on the ground and a considerable reduction in Taliban attacks.&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump's announcement of completing the troop withdrawal from Afghanistan by Christmas has taken aback nation's military, with officials saying they haven't been informed about the process and concerned over its impact on Taliban-Afghanistan peace talks.

US President Donald Trump's announcement of completing the troop withdrawal from Afghanistan by Christmas has taken aback nation's military, with officials saying they haven't been informed about the process and concerned over its impact on Taliban-Afghanistan peace talks. Trump on Wednesday tweeted that the remaining number of "brave" US military personnel would return by Christmas, a move welcomed by the Taliban. Also read | NATO chief says allies will leave Afghanistan together He elaborated his announcement in an interview to Fox News, saying: "We're down to 4,000 troops in Afghanistan. I'll have them home by the end of the year. They're coming home, you know, as we speak. Nineteen years is enough. They're acting as policemen, OK? They're not acting as troops." Also read | Donald Trump wants US forces to pull out from Afghanistan by Christmas Several US officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity said they were not informed about any new deadline, reported news agency The Associated Press. In fact, they pointed to remarks by National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien on Wednesday, in which he said: "as of today, there are under 5,000 and that will go to 2,500 by early next year". The US military has also continually said that counterterrorism personnel would remain in Afghanistan for some time in view of threats by al-Qaida and Islamic State. The US has earlier maintained that any troop withdrawal from Afghanistan would depend on the situation on the ground and a considerable reduction in Taliban attacks.

US military startled with Trump's announcement of complete troop withdrawal from Afghanistan

Tech giant Google faces worldwide criticism over displaying news content without paying for it. Watch this video to get more details on this.

Google faces worldwide criticism over displaying news content without paying for it

The swarm of insects — sometimes gnats, sometimes wasps or flying ants — arrived early in this year of nightmares. With summer came equally unsettling dreams: of being caught in a crowd, naked and mask-less; of meeting men in white lab coats who declared, “We dispose of the elders.”

Autumn has brought still other haunted-house dramas, particularly for women caring for a vulnerable relative or trying to manage virtual home-schooling.

“I am home-schooling my 10-year-old,” one mother told researchers in a recent study of pandemic dreams. “I dreamed that the school contacted me to say it had been decided that his whole class would come to my home and I was supposed to teach all of them for however long the school remained closed.”

Deirdre Barrett, a psychologist at Harvard Medical School and author of “Pandemic Dreams,” has administered dream surveys to thousands of people in the last year, including the one with the home-schooling mother. “At least qualitatively, you see some shifts in content of dreams from the beginning of the pandemic into the later months,” Barrett said. “It’s an indication of what is worrying people most at various points during the year.”

Barrett is editor-in-chief of the journal Dreaming, which in its September issue posted four new reports on how the sleeping brain has incorporated the threat of COVID-19. The findings reinforce current thinking about the way that waking anxiety plays out during REM sleep: in images or metaphors representing the most urgent worries, whether these involve catching the coronavirus (those clouds of insects) or violating mask-wearing protocols.

Taken together, the papers also hint at an answer to a larger question: What is the purpose of dreaming, if any?

The answers that science has on offer can seem mutually exclusive, or near so. Freud understood dreams as wish fulfillment; Finnish psychologist Antti Revonsuo saw them as simulations of pending threats. In recent years, brain scientists have argued that REM sleep — the period of sleep during which most dreaming occurs — bolsters creative thinking, learning and emotional health, providing a kind of unconscious psychotherapy.

Then again, there is some evidence that dreaming serves little or no psychological purpose — that it is no more than a “tuning of the mind in preparation for awareness,” as J. Allan Hobson, a Harvard psychiatrist, has said.

The four new studies are rooted in a more straightforward idea called the continuity hypothesis. This framework holds that the content of dreams simply reflects what people thought, felt and did during the day — the good and the bad, the hopeful and the frightening. In one study, Cassidy MacKay and Teresa DeCicco of Trent University in Canada compared dream journals kept by students in the first two weeks of the spread of the coronavirus in North America with the journals of students logged before anyone had heard of COVID-19.

The researchers categorized each image, using a standardized measure, into types such as body parts, animals, food and medical objects. The differences in the early pandemic logs jumped out.

“People were clearly thinking about coronavirus-related events, like waiting in grocery lines, and had heads in their dreams, the body part associated with catching and spreading the virus,” DeCicco said.

People with persistent waking anxieties also tended to play out scenarios involving future work, relationships and life generally in their heads over the course of a day. Previous research has correlated this pattern to scene-shifting in dreams: the frequent changing of the setting, from indoors to outdoors, city to country, mountains to coast. MacKay and DeCicco found that dreamers during the first phase of the pandemic recorded far more such shifts in their REM mini-dramas.

“These are classic anxiety dreams,” DeCicco said.

In another of the studies, Barrett recruited nearly 3,000 people online to track, describe and write about their dreams. She assessed the content of those essays, using a language-analysis algorithm that maps words onto categories like “anger,” “sadness,” “body,” “health” and “death.” These dreams, too, had all the hallmarks of heightened waking anxiety, but emotions like anger and sadness were much more prevalent among women than men.

“I wasn’t expecting this, but the findings suggest to me this idea that men are mainly experiencing fear of getting sick and dying, health fears,” Barrett said. “Women have been weathering more secondary effects; they tend to be the ones nursing sick family members, more often than males, for instance.”

Not all the dreams, in either study, were infused with darkness and fear, and many were pleasant, involving reunions with friends or family, or featuring the containment and elimination of the virus. They included wishes and threats, healthy measures and mistakes, and adjustments to news of the spread: learning and emotional processing. There were also periodic injections of hope.

In short, the studies suggest that dreaming does not serve just one purpose but many.

For everyday dreamers during the pandemic, it may be enough to know that COVID-19 nightmares, like any others, tend to be emotionally over-the-top. “It was scary in the dream, but you wake up and it’s funny,” Barrett said. “The crisis is smaller than you thought.”

The whole class of schoolchildren isn’t invading your house. The hazmat suits aren’t standing outside the door. We may get through this after all.

 
&nbsp;

The swarm of insects — sometimes gnats, sometimes wasps or flying ants — arrived early in this year of nightmares. With summer came equally unsettling dreams: of being caught in a crowd, naked and mask-less; of meeting men in white lab coats who declared, “We dispose of the elders.

The swarm of insects — sometimes gnats, sometimes wasps or flying ants — arrived early in this year of nightmares. With summer came equally unsettling dreams: of being caught in a crowd, naked and mask-less; of meeting men in white lab coats who declared, “We dispose of the elders.” Autumn has brought still other haunted-house dramas, particularly for women caring for a vulnerable relative or trying to manage virtual home-schooling. “I am home-schooling my 10-year-old,” one mother told researchers in a recent study of pandemic dreams. “I dreamed that the school contacted me to say it had been decided that his whole class would come to my home and I was supposed to teach all of them for however long the school remained closed.” Deirdre Barrett, a psychologist at Harvard Medical School and author of “Pandemic Dreams,” has administered dream surveys to thousands of people in the last year, including the one with the home-schooling mother. “At least qualitatively, you see some shifts in content of dreams from the beginning of the pandemic into the later months,” Barrett said. “It’s an indication of what is worrying people most at various points during the year.” Barrett is editor-in-chief of the journal Dreaming, which in its September issue posted four new reports on how the sleeping brain has incorporated the threat of COVID-19. The findings reinforce current thinking about the way that waking anxiety plays out during REM sleep: in images or metaphors representing the most urgent worries, whether these involve catching the coronavirus (those clouds of insects) or violating mask-wearing protocols. Taken together, the papers also hint at an answer to a larger question: What is the purpose of dreaming, if any? The answers that science has on offer can seem mutually exclusive, or near so. Freud understood dreams as wish fulfillment; Finnish psychologist Antti Revonsuo saw them as simulations of pending threats. In recent years, brain scientists have argued that REM sleep — the period of sleep during which most dreaming occurs — bolsters creative thinking, learning and emotional health, providing a kind of unconscious psychotherapy. Then again, there is some evidence that dreaming serves little or no psychological purpose — that it is no more than a “tuning of the mind in preparation for awareness,” as J. Allan Hobson, a Harvard psychiatrist, has said. The four new studies are rooted in a more straightforward idea called the continuity hypothesis. This framework holds that the content of dreams simply reflects what people thought, felt and did during the day — the good and the bad, the hopeful and the frightening. In one study, Cassidy MacKay and Teresa DeCicco of Trent University in Canada compared dream journals kept by students in the first two weeks of the spread of the coronavirus in North America with the journals of students logged before anyone had heard of COVID-19. The researchers categorized each image, using a standardized measure, into types such as body parts, animals, food and medical objects. The differences in the early pandemic logs jumped out. “People were clearly thinking about coronavirus-related events, like waiting in grocery lines, and had heads in their dreams, the body part associated with catching and spreading the virus,” DeCicco said. People with persistent waking anxieties also tended to play out scenarios involving future work, relationships and life generally in their heads over the course of a day. Previous research has correlated this pattern to scene-shifting in dreams: the frequent changing of the setting, from indoors to outdoors, city to country, mountains to coast. MacKay and DeCicco found that dreamers during the first phase of the pandemic recorded far more such shifts in their REM mini-dramas. “These are classic anxiety dreams,” DeCicco said. In another of the studies, Barrett recruited nearly 3,000 people online to track, describe and write about their dreams. She assessed the content of those essays, using a language-analysis algorithm that maps words onto categories like “anger,” “sadness,” “body,” “health” and “death.” These dreams, too, had all the hallmarks of heightened waking anxiety, but emotions like anger and sadness were much more prevalent among women than men. “I wasn’t expecting this, but the findings suggest to me this idea that men are mainly experiencing fear of getting sick and dying, health fears,” Barrett said. “Women have been weathering more secondary effects; they tend to be the ones nursing sick family members, more often than males, for instance.” Not all the dreams, in either study, were infused with darkness and fear, and many were pleasant, involving reunions with friends or family, or featuring the containment and elimination of the virus. They included wishes and threats, healthy measures and mistakes, and adjustments to news of the spread: learning and emotional processing. There were also periodic injections of hope. In short, the studies suggest that dreaming does not serve just one purpose but many. For everyday dreamers during the pandemic, it may be enough to know that COVID-19 nightmares, like any others, tend to be emotionally over-the-top. “It was scary in the dream, but you wake up and it’s funny,” Barrett said. “The crisis is smaller than you thought.” The whole class of schoolchildren isn’t invading your house. The hazmat suits aren’t standing outside the door. We may get through this after all.

What we dream when we dream about COVID-19

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday said his administration wants all US forces to pull out of Afghanistan by Christmas, speeding up the process to end America's longest war.&nbsp;

"We should have the small remaining number of our BRAVE Men and Women serving in Afghanistan home by Christmas!" Trump said on Twitter.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
We should have the small remaining number of our BRAVE Men and Women serving in Afghanistan home by Christmas!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313984510749544450?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 7, 2020</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>

Trump's remarks came when the presidential election in the US is less than 30 days away and he aspires to show that he delivered on his promise that the country should stop "endless wars".

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/taliban-afghan-negotiators-set-ground-rules-to-safeguard-peace-talks-sources-332896">Taliban, Afghan negotiators set ground rules to safeguard peace talks: Sources</a>

Washington, in a historic deal with the Taliban on February 29, vowed to pull out its forces from Afghanistan by mid-2021 and the insurgent group in return committed to not let other extremist groups flourish in the region.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/eight-killed-in-attack-targetting-afghan-governor-332763">Eight killed in attack targetting Afghan governor</a>

Last month, talks between the Taliban and Afghan government began in Doha, although the discussions soon ended up in a deadlock.

Trump's decision for troop withdrawal gained widespread support, including his Democratic rival Joe Biden who during his vice-presidential tenure had pushed to limit the nation's involvement in Afghanistan.&nbsp;

(with inputs from AFP) 
&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday said his administration wants all US forces to pull out of Afghanistan by Christmas, speeding up the process to end America's longest war.

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday said his administration wants all US forces to pull out of Afghanistan by Christmas, speeding up the process to end America's longest war. "We should have the small remaining number of our BRAVE Men and Women serving in Afghanistan home by Christmas!" Trump said on Twitter. We should have the small remaining number of our BRAVE Men and Women serving in Afghanistan home by Christmas! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 7, 2020 × Trump's remarks came when the presidential election in the US is less than 30 days away and he aspires to show that he delivered on his promise that the country should stop "endless wars". Also read | Taliban, Afghan negotiators set ground rules to safeguard peace talks: Sources Washington, in a historic deal with the Taliban on February 29, vowed to pull out its forces from Afghanistan by mid-2021 and the insurgent group in return committed to not let other extremist groups flourish in the region. Also read | Eight killed in attack targetting Afghan governor Last month, talks between the Taliban and Afghan government began in Doha, although the discussions soon ended up in a deadlock. Trump's decision for troop withdrawal gained widespread support, including his Democratic rival Joe Biden who during his vice-presidential tenure had pushed to limit the nation's involvement in Afghanistan. (with inputs from AFP)

Donald Trump wants US forces to pull out from Afghanistan by Christmas

The British auction house Christie's sold the skeleton of Stan, one of the largest known Tyrannosaurus rexes, for $31.8 million usd late Tuesday (October 6).

Stan' the T. Rex sells for $31.8 million at Christies auction house

Four countries have one agenda to stop China's efforts to dominate the Indo-Pacific. China's expansionism threat is not new and neither the 'Quad' or the Quadrilateral alliance between India, Australia, United States and Japan.

However, in the past, the group has been shy of openly declaring its intentions.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-is-the-quad-a-lost-opportunity-333008/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/quad-is-an-idea-whose-time-has-come-but-ideas-need-implementation-333013">Quad is an idea whose time has come. But ideas need implementation</a>

The group met for the first time in 2017 and a few years before this these countries had joined hands for ad hoc relief operations after the 2004 tsunami.&nbsp;

The prime ministers of India, Japan, Australia met with the then US Vice President Dick Cheney.&nbsp;

The first 'Quad' summit happened on the sidelines of the ASEAN Forum.

Since then, the idea of the alliance has been around, made news, but fallen short of taking any substantive action.&nbsp;

A decade later, though, the alliance was resurrected in 2017 and the members of 'Quad' had a working-level meeting.&nbsp;

And now, amid the pandemic, the foreign ministers have met in Tokyo, which reflects a clear sense of purpose, an urgency to take a harder stand against China.&nbsp;

America is not mincing words on China and Australia has named the Asian giant as a threat in its strategic assessment.&nbsp;

Australia's department of defence has said that China is engaged in active pursuit of "greater influence in the Indo-Pacific".&nbsp;

India has already locked in a border standoff with China and since May, New Delhi has imposed curbs on Beijing's investments.

More than 100 Chinese apps have been banned in India.&nbsp;

And, Japan's territorial disputes in the East China Sea have flared up again.&nbsp;

Japan was the country that proposed this alliance and now it has become the host for the meeting of the group's foreign ministers.

<h2>What will the 'Quad' do?</h2>

The US wants the alliance to have a clear military dimension.&nbsp;

Reports suggest Washington is considering inviting air forces of the group's allies for training at the Andersen Air Force Base in Guam

The Guam base is a key US military facility in the Pacific and may also be China's first target if hostilities escalate between the two countries.&nbsp;

Last month, the Chinese Air Force released a propaganda video that simulated an attack on the base. But eagle-eyed fact-checkers were quick to point out how Chinese stole clips from Hollywood movies to make this fake video.&nbsp;

In recent months, China has made its intentions clear. It is indulging in more fights and staking a claim on more territories.&nbsp;

The time is right for all the four nations to move beyond being a symbolic alliance.&nbsp;

It must set out clear objectives and each ally must commit to tangible contributions.&nbsp;

They could start by naming China as the common enemy first.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

Four countries have one agenda to stop China's efforts to dominate the Indo-Pacific. China's expansionism threat is not new and neither the 'Quad' or the Quadrilateral alliance between India, Australia, United States and Japan.

Four countries have one agenda to stop China's efforts to dominate the Indo-Pacific. China's expansionism threat is not new and neither the 'Quad' or the Quadrilateral alliance between India, Australia, United States and Japan. However, in the past, the group has been shy of openly declaring its intentions. Watch | Also read | Quad is an idea whose time has come. But ideas need implementation The group met for the first time in 2017 and a few years before this these countries had joined hands for ad hoc relief operations after the 2004 tsunami. The prime ministers of India, Japan, Australia met with the then US Vice President Dick Cheney. The first 'Quad' summit happened on the sidelines of the ASEAN Forum. Since then, the idea of the alliance has been around, made news, but fallen short of taking any substantive action. A decade later, though, the alliance was resurrected in 2017 and the members of 'Quad' had a working-level meeting. And now, amid the pandemic, the foreign ministers have met in Tokyo, which reflects a clear sense of purpose, an urgency to take a harder stand against China. America is not mincing words on China and Australia has named the Asian giant as a threat in its strategic assessment. Australia's department of defence has said that China is engaged in active pursuit of "greater influence in the Indo-Pacific". India has already locked in a border standoff with China and since May, New Delhi has imposed curbs on Beijing's investments. More than 100 Chinese apps have been banned in India. And, Japan's territorial disputes in the East China Sea have flared up again. Japan was the country that proposed this alliance and now it has become the host for the meeting of the group's foreign ministers. What will the 'Quad' do? The US wants the alliance to have a clear military dimension. Reports suggest Washington is considering inviting air forces of the group's allies for training at the Andersen Air Force Base in Guam The Guam base is a key US military facility in the Pacific and may also be China's first target if hostilities escalate between the two countries. Last month, the Chinese Air Force released a propaganda video that simulated an attack on the base. But eagle-eyed fact-checkers were quick to point out how Chinese stole clips from Hollywood movies to make this fake video. In recent months, China has made its intentions clear. It is indulging in more fights and staking a claim on more territories. The time is right for all the four nations to move beyond being a symbolic alliance. It must set out clear objectives and each ally must commit to tangible contributions. They could start by naming China as the common enemy first.

Quad: A potential force to counter China needs to move beyond symbolism

To counter China's assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific region, India, the US, Japan and Australia's collective alliance known as 'Quad' agreed to increase coordination for the creation of a free and open Indo-Pacific.&nbsp;

Japan said the Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne affirmed bolstering a free, open and rules-based international order in a statement released after the meeting in Tokyo.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/at-quad-fms-meet-jaishankar-calls-for-respect-for-territorial-integrity-and-sovereignty-332905">At Quad FMs meet, Jaishankar calls for respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty</a>

The four countries also vowed to coordinate in ensuring peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific, the statement said as was reported by Kyodo news agency.&nbsp;

The 'Quad' meeting took place amid China's growing expansionism ambitions in the Indo-Pacific, South China Sea and in eastern Ladakh.

PM Suga in his address said a free and open Indo-Pacific is "widely recognised by the international community as a vision of peace and prosperity of this region," and that his administration's basic policy is to "further continue advancing our members to this end."

"The international community is facing multiple and various challenges. This is exactly why right now is the time that we must further deepen our coordination with as many countries as possible that share our vision," the Japanese PM said.&nbsp;

India's Jaishankar in his opening remarks said since all the members are vibrant and pluralistic democracy, they remain committed to "upholding the rules-based international order, underpinned by the rule of law, transparency, freedom of navigation in the international seas, respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty and peaceful resolution of disputes."&nbsp;

"Our objective remains advancing the security and the economic interests of all countries having legitimate and vital interests in the region," Jaishankar said.

To counter China's assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific region, India, the US, Japan and Australia's collective alliance known as 'Quad' agreed to increase coordination for the creation of a free and open Indo-Pacific.

To counter China's assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific region, India, the US, Japan and Australia's collective alliance known as 'Quad' agreed to increase coordination for the creation of a free and open Indo-Pacific. Japan said the Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne affirmed bolstering a free, open and rules-based international order in a statement released after the meeting in Tokyo. Also read | At Quad FMs meet, Jaishankar calls for respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty The four countries also vowed to coordinate in ensuring peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific, the statement said as was reported by Kyodo news agency. The 'Quad' meeting took place amid China's growing expansionism ambitions in the Indo-Pacific, South China Sea and in eastern Ladakh. PM Suga in his address said a free and open Indo-Pacific is "widely recognised by the international community as a vision of peace and prosperity of this region," and that his administration's basic policy is to "further continue advancing our members to this end." "The international community is facing multiple and various challenges. This is exactly why right now is the time that we must further deepen our coordination with as many countries as possible that share our vision," the Japanese PM said. India's Jaishankar in his opening remarks said since all the members are vibrant and pluralistic democracy, they remain committed to "upholding the rules-based international order, underpinned by the rule of law, transparency, freedom of navigation in the international seas, respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty and peaceful resolution of disputes." "Our objective remains advancing the security and the economic interests of all countries having legitimate and vital interests in the region," Jaishankar said.

To counter China's assertiveness, Quad calls for 'free' and 'open' Indo-Pacific

Africa has become the battlefield for global powers. China, India, US, EU, Israel are fighting it out in the continent. Who is winning? and What's it in for Africa. WION's Palki Sharma tells you all about the race for Africa.

Gravitas Plus: The race for Africa

It's a "total loss," admitted Californian winemaker Dario Sattui, as he inspected the wildfire damage to his Castello di Amorosa winery in the Napa Valley wine region. On Sunday night, flames from the Glass fire destroyed wine-storage chamber, a fermentation room, a bottling facility and offices at Sattui's Castello di Amorosa winery, but its distinctive castle complex and tasting room remained unscathed.

California winery owner loses his "dream castle" to wildfires in Napa Valley

US presidential debates 2020 - The United States presidential election is inching closer every minute, and the fierce battle between incumbent Republican Donald Trump and the Democrat rival Joe Biden is picking up pace.

Recently, Trump demanded a drug test from “sleepy Joe Biden”, claiming there is no other explanation for Biden to appear the way he does at all events. Naturally, Trump also offered to get himself tested for any drug consumption. But, it looks like none of that is on the cards.&nbsp;

US presidential debates: "No drug tests"

No drug tests have been conducted or will be conducted before the first debate between the two leaders kicks off on Tuesday. Additionally, no handshakes will be permitted, and the candidates will directly dive into the debate.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/trump-vs-biden-what-to-expect-from-the-first-presidential-debate-gravitas-331280/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

On Monday, Trump claimed that Biden has refused to undergo drug testing. “Joe Biden just announced that he will not agree to a drug test,”&nbsp;Trump had tweeted. He topped with a classic Trump remark - “Gee! I wonder why?”

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/us-elections-2020-biden-compares-trump-to-nazi-goebbels-ready-for-personal-attacks-330560" hreflang="en">US elections 2020: Biden compares Trump to Nazi Goebbels; ready for personal attacks</a>

A lot of the Trump campaigning has surrounded Joe Biden’s alleged drug consumption. Trump has repeatedly touted Biden as physically and mentally unfit for the presidency.&nbsp; Trump’s allies have also claimed that Biden is performing well because of performance enhancing drugs.

“He’s almost - no. I have no comment,” Biden had said while referring to the viability of a drug test.

In fact, Biden’s official campaign told Politico, “If the president thinks his best case is made in urine, he can have at it.”

The debate is set to be moderated by Fox News’ Chris Wallace.

US presidential debates: Six major points of contention

According to the Commission on Presidential Debate, six major topics will be touched upon during the first debate - COVID-19, economy, race and violence, the Supreme Court, the track records of both the candidates, and the integrity of the elections.

The debate will begin at 9 PM US Eastern Time Tuesday/6.30 AM IST Wednesday, and will last for approximately 1.5 hours.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/us-elections-2020-trump-mocks-joe-biden-for-staying-indoors-330381" hreflang="en">US elections 2020: Trump mocks Joe Biden for 'staying indoors'</a>

Both the contenders will make their cases at the Case Western Reserve University and Cleveland Clinic in Cleveland, Ohio.

The 90-minute debate will have no breaks for commercials, and will have six 15-minute segments each. No opening statements will be made, with the first question going to President Trump.

Given the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, the podiums will be placed farther apart than usual, with no hand-shaking in place. CNN reported that only 60-70 people are expected to be in the live audience.

US presidential debates 2020 - The United States presidential election is inching closer every minute, and the fierce battle between incumbent Republican Donald Trump and the Democrat rival Joe Biden is picking up pace.

US presidential debates 2020 - The United States presidential election is inching closer every minute, and the fierce battle between incumbent Republican Donald Trump and the Democrat rival Joe Biden is picking up pace. Recently, Trump demanded a drug test from “sleepy Joe Biden”, claiming there is no other explanation for Biden to appear the way he does at all events. Naturally, Trump also offered to get himself tested for any drug consumption. But, it looks like none of that is on the cards. US presidential debates: "No drug tests" No drug tests have been conducted or will be conducted before the first debate between the two leaders kicks off on Tuesday. Additionally, no handshakes will be permitted, and the candidates will directly dive into the debate. On Monday, Trump claimed that Biden has refused to undergo drug testing. “Joe Biden just announced that he will not agree to a drug test,” Trump had tweeted. He topped with a classic Trump remark - “Gee! I wonder why?” Also read: US elections 2020: Biden compares Trump to Nazi Goebbels; ready for personal attacks A lot of the Trump campaigning has surrounded Joe Biden’s alleged drug consumption. Trump has repeatedly touted Biden as physically and mentally unfit for the presidency. Trump’s allies have also claimed that Biden is performing well because of performance enhancing drugs. “He’s almost - no. I have no comment,” Biden had said while referring to the viability of a drug test. In fact, Biden’s official campaign told Politico, “If the president thinks his best case is made in urine, he can have at it.” The debate is set to be moderated by Fox News’ Chris Wallace. US presidential debates: Six major points of contention According to the Commission on Presidential Debate, six major topics will be touched upon during the first debate - COVID-19, economy, race and violence, the Supreme Court, the track records of both the candidates, and the integrity of the elections. The debate will begin at 9 PM US Eastern Time Tuesday/6.30 AM IST Wednesday, and will last for approximately 1.5 hours. Also read: US elections 2020: Trump mocks Joe Biden for 'staying indoors' Both the contenders will make their cases at the Case Western Reserve University and Cleveland Clinic in Cleveland, Ohio. The 90-minute debate will have no breaks for commercials, and will have six 15-minute segments each. No opening statements will be made, with the first question going to President Trump. Given the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, the podiums will be placed farther apart than usual, with no hand-shaking in place. CNN reported that only 60-70 people are expected to be in the live audience.

Handshakes? Drug tests? What to expect from the first round of US presidential debates

President Donald Trump's campaign is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on lawyers to litigate voting by mail, including in the battleground state of Pennsylvania, Federal Election Commission (FEC) data showed.

The campaign paid more than $250,000 to Porter Wright Morris &amp; Arthur, the law firm representing it in lawsuits over the use of drop boxes and other changes to Pennsylvania's mail-balloting procedures, according to the data.

In the Nov. 3 elections, more voters are expected to cast their ballots by mail instead of in person because of the novel coronavirus pandemic&nbsp;but Republican Trump has repeatedly linked mail-in voting to voter fraud without providing evidence.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/US-elections-USA-Trump-Biden-Donald-Trump-Joe-Biden-handshakes-drug-tests-what-to-expect-from-the-first-round-of-us-presidential-debates-331162" hreflang="en">Handshakes? Drug tests? What to expect from the first round of US presidential debates</a>

More than 200 election-related lawsuits have been filed, many of them focusing on mail-in ballots, which Democrats are more likely to use, according to some opinion polls.

Porter Wright did not respond to requests for comment. Trump campaign spokeswoman Thea McDonald declined to comment.

The Trump campaign in August paid out over $980,000 for legal services that month compared to about $332,000 in July, FEC data showed. It has spent over $3.9 million on legal services between March, when Biden began to emerge as the leading Democratic presidential contender, and August, according to the data.

Democratic candidate Joe Biden's campaign by comparison spent about $660,000 on legal services during that period, the data showed. Nearly $472,000, went to the campaign's outside general counsel firm Covington &amp; Burling, home to former Obama administration Attorney General Eric Holder.

Biden spokesman Michael Gwin said in an email Tuesday that the campaign has "built a top notch legal team to support our campaign in critical ways, including through an unprecedentedly large voter protection effort focused on ensuring access to the ballot box."

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled on Sept. 17 that state officials could accept mail-in ballots up to three days after Nov. 3, as long as they were mailed by Election Day.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/dont-create-china-problem-to-create-drama-warns-china-daily-ahead-of-trump-biden-us-election-debate-331146">Trump-Biden: Don't create China problem to create drama, warns China daily</a>

Pennsylvania Republicans indicated in court filings this week that they would ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

Porter Wright represents state Republicans in that lawsuit, which was filed against Pennsylvania by the state Democratic party, and in a separate lawsuit brought by the Trump campaign in Pittsburgh federal court over mail-in voting.

Porter Wright - which has most of its offices in election battleground states Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio - was in August the Trump campaign's second-highest paid firm. The top paid firm was Jones Day, the campaign's outside general counsel.

Jones Day, which also has attorneys working on the Pennsylvania litigation, court records show, got nearly $350,000 in August - its biggest monthly payment from the Trump campaign this year, according to FEC data.

Jones Day did not respond to request for comment.

Reuters analyzed the campaign's spending on lawyers using reports submitted to the FEC on Sept. 20, which cover spending up to Aug. 31. Those reports do not include spending by political action committees.

The legal services funding data isn't broken down to show what litigation money was spent on, but it can be parsed by which law firm was paid, how much a firm received and when.

Porter Wright began receiving payments from the Trump campaign in June 2020, when it filed the Pittsburgh federal lawsuit. The Trump campaign paid the firm $25,000 in June and about $37,000 in July, FEC data shows.

Trump has declined to commit&nbsp;to a peaceful transfer of power if he loses the election to Biden and has said he expects the election battle&nbsp;to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Biden campaign has added top lawyers to its staff and established a "special litigation" team as it braces for potential legal fights. Those additions include former Obama administration attorneys and Marc Elias, a top elections lawyer at Perkins Coie, the Democratic Party's go-to law firm.

Covington spokesman David Schaefer confirmed the firm is serving as the Biden campaign's outside counsel but declined further comment.

President Donald Trump's campaign is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on lawyers to litigate voting by mail, including in the battleground state of Pennsylvania, Federal Election Commission (FEC) data showed.

President Donald Trump's campaign is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on lawyers to litigate voting by mail, including in the battleground state of Pennsylvania, Federal Election Commission (FEC) data showed. The campaign paid more than $250,000 to Porter Wright Morris & Arthur, the law firm representing it in lawsuits over the use of drop boxes and other changes to Pennsylvania's mail-balloting procedures, according to the data. In the Nov. 3 elections, more voters are expected to cast their ballots by mail instead of in person because of the novel coronavirus pandemic but Republican Trump has repeatedly linked mail-in voting to voter fraud without providing evidence. Also read: Handshakes? Drug tests? What to expect from the first round of US presidential debates More than 200 election-related lawsuits have been filed, many of them focusing on mail-in ballots, which Democrats are more likely to use, according to some opinion polls. Porter Wright did not respond to requests for comment. Trump campaign spokeswoman Thea McDonald declined to comment. The Trump campaign in August paid out over $980,000 for legal services that month compared to about $332,000 in July, FEC data showed. It has spent over $3.9 million on legal services between March, when Biden began to emerge as the leading Democratic presidential contender, and August, according to the data. Democratic candidate Joe Biden's campaign by comparison spent about $660,000 on legal services during that period, the data showed. Nearly $472,000, went to the campaign's outside general counsel firm Covington & Burling, home to former Obama administration Attorney General Eric Holder. Biden spokesman Michael Gwin said in an email Tuesday that the campaign has "built a top notch legal team to support our campaign in critical ways, including through an unprecedentedly large voter protection effort focused on ensuring access to the ballot box." The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled on Sept. 17 that state officials could accept mail-in ballots up to three days after Nov. 3, as long as they were mailed by Election Day. Also read: Trump-Biden: Don't create China problem to create drama, warns China daily Pennsylvania Republicans indicated in court filings this week that they would ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. Porter Wright represents state Republicans in that lawsuit, which was filed against Pennsylvania by the state Democratic party, and in a separate lawsuit brought by the Trump campaign in Pittsburgh federal court over mail-in voting. Porter Wright - which has most of its offices in election battleground states Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio - was in August the Trump campaign's second-highest paid firm. The top paid firm was Jones Day, the campaign's outside general counsel. Jones Day, which also has attorneys working on the Pennsylvania litigation, court records show, got nearly $350,000 in August - its biggest monthly payment from the Trump campaign this year, according to FEC data. Jones Day did not respond to request for comment. Reuters analyzed the campaign's spending on lawyers using reports submitted to the FEC on Sept. 20, which cover spending up to Aug. 31. Those reports do not include spending by political action committees. The legal services funding data isn't broken down to show what litigation money was spent on, but it can be parsed by which law firm was paid, how much a firm received and when. Porter Wright began receiving payments from the Trump campaign in June 2020, when it filed the Pittsburgh federal lawsuit. The Trump campaign paid the firm $25,000 in June and about $37,000 in July, FEC data shows. Trump has declined to commit to a peaceful transfer of power if he loses the election to Biden and has said he expects the election battle to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court. The Biden campaign has added top lawyers to its staff and established a "special litigation" team as it braces for potential legal fights. Those additions include former Obama administration attorneys and Marc Elias, a top elections lawyer at Perkins Coie, the Democratic Party's go-to law firm. Covington spokesman David Schaefer confirmed the firm is serving as the Biden campaign's outside counsel but declined further comment.

Trump ups spending on lawyers as US election legal battles heat up

With the latest spike, over 7 million people have tested positive for novel coronavirus across the United States on Thursday, a figure which is 20 per cent of the total number of cases across the world.&nbsp;

This grim milestone, according to a Reuters tally, comes days after the US topped over 200,000 Covid-19 fatalities, which is way higher than any other country.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/large-genetic-study-finds-novel-coronavirus-strain-more-contagious-329875">Large genetic study finds novel coronavirus strain more contagious</a>

In recent days, over 700 people are dying in the country of Covid-19.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/covid-19-was-created-in-the-wuhan-laboratory-professor-giuseppe-tritto-330053">COVID-19 was created in the Wuhan laboratory: Professor Giuseppe Tritto</a>

The deadly virus has now shifted its base to the Midwest states of the country except Ohio as they have confirmed more infections in the last four weeks as compared with the earlier four weeks.&nbsp;

South Dakota had the highest percentage increase of 166 per cent with 8,129 new cases, while North Dakota’s new infections doubled to 8,752 when compared to the same time in August.

A Reuters analysis found that half of the 50 states in the US have reported a spike in positive cases this month.&nbsp;

The new rise in the US came last week after seeing a decline for eight successive weeks, surge experts attribute to reopening schools and universities along with various parties that were held to mark the Labour Day.

 
&nbsp;

With the latest spike, over 7 million people have tested positive for novel coronavirus across the United States on Thursday, a figure which is 20 per cent of the total number of cases across the world.

With the latest spike, over 7 million people have tested positive for novel coronavirus across the United States on Thursday, a figure which is 20 per cent of the total number of cases across the world. This grim milestone, according to a Reuters tally, comes days after the US topped over 200,000 Covid-19 fatalities, which is way higher than any other country. Also read | Large genetic study finds novel coronavirus strain more contagious In recent days, over 700 people are dying in the country of Covid-19. Also read | COVID-19 was created in the Wuhan laboratory: Professor Giuseppe Tritto The deadly virus has now shifted its base to the Midwest states of the country except Ohio as they have confirmed more infections in the last four weeks as compared with the earlier four weeks. South Dakota had the highest percentage increase of 166 per cent with 8,129 new cases, while North Dakota’s new infections doubled to 8,752 when compared to the same time in August. A Reuters analysis found that half of the 50 states in the US have reported a spike in positive cases this month. The new rise in the US came last week after seeing a decline for eight successive weeks, surge experts attribute to reopening schools and universities along with various parties that were held to mark the Labour Day.

Coronavirus: Cases top 7 million as Midwest states battle uptick

India on Wednesday said it is "proud" to endorse the US initiative on a joint statement on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that recognises the many differences in national traditions and yet reaffirms fundamental freedoms and rights for all.

A joint statement, issued by the US, on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) said, "On the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations, We, the above listed signatories of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, established and adopted in 1948, recommit ourselves today to the Declaration and its foundational ideal that certain principles are so fundamental as to apply to all human beings, everywhere, at all times."

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/at-unga-jinping-claimed-china-is-not-expansionist-these-facts-tell-otherwise-329724">At UNGA, Jinping claimed China is not 'expansionist'. These facts tell otherwise!</a>

"India is proud to endorse the US initiative on the Joint Statement on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights," India's Permanent Mission to the UN tweeted.

 
Other nations joining the US on the statement include Bahrain, Brazil, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Maldives, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

"We recognise the many differences in our cultural, political, legal, religious, and other traditions, yet reaffirm fundamental freedoms and rights for all, and reassert our commitment to honouring the dignity of all persons that is the basis for our commitments under the UDHR,"&nbsp;the joint statement said.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a "milestone document" in the history of human rights.

Drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world, the Declaration was proclaimed by the UN General Assembly in Paris in December 1948 as a common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations. It set out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected.

The contribution of Indian reformer and educator Hansa Jivraj Mehta in ensuring a more gender sensitive language in the landmark Universal Declaration of Human Rights is widely lauded. But for Mehta's insistence, it could very well have been that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights may have been only the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man.

Mehta had served as the Indian delegate to the UN Commission on Human Rights from 1947 to 1948. She is widely credited with making a significant change in the language of Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by replacing the phrase "All men are born free and equal"&nbsp;to "All human beings are born free and equal".

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a video message that "we must defend unalienable rights today, because the International Human Rights Project is in crisis. Authoritarian governments from China to Iran to Venezuela are depriving our fellow human beings of their basic rights.

He added that many multinational organisations have lost their way, focusing on partisan policy preferences while failing to defend fundamental rights.

"Even many well intentioned people assert new and novel rights that often conflict. To uphold universal human rights we should look to the framers of the UDHR, who identified a clear set of principles that apply to all people everywhere, and at all times. They stood unwaveringly in defense of the dignity of every human being."

India on Wednesday said it is "proud" to endorse the US initiative on a joint statement on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that recognises the many differences in national traditions and yet reaffirms fundamental freedoms and rights for all.

India on Wednesday said it is "proud" to endorse the US initiative on a joint statement on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that recognises the many differences in national traditions and yet reaffirms fundamental freedoms and rights for all. A joint statement, issued by the US, on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) said, "On the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations, We, the above listed signatories of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, established and adopted in 1948, recommit ourselves today to the Declaration and its foundational ideal that certain principles are so fundamental as to apply to all human beings, everywhere, at all times." Also read | At UNGA, Jinping claimed China is not 'expansionist'. These facts tell otherwise! "India is proud to endorse the US initiative on the Joint Statement on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights," India's Permanent Mission to the UN tweeted. Other nations joining the US on the statement include Bahrain, Brazil, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Maldives, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. "We recognise the many differences in our cultural, political, legal, religious, and other traditions, yet reaffirm fundamental freedoms and rights for all, and reassert our commitment to honouring the dignity of all persons that is the basis for our commitments under the UDHR," the joint statement said. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a "milestone document" in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world, the Declaration was proclaimed by the UN General Assembly in Paris in December 1948 as a common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations. It set out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected. The contribution of Indian reformer and educator Hansa Jivraj Mehta in ensuring a more gender sensitive language in the landmark Universal Declaration of Human Rights is widely lauded. But for Mehta's insistence, it could very well have been that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights may have been only the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man. Mehta had served as the Indian delegate to the UN Commission on Human Rights from 1947 to 1948. She is widely credited with making a significant change in the language of Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by replacing the phrase "All men are born free and equal" to "All human beings are born free and equal". US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a video message that "we must defend unalienable rights today, because the International Human Rights Project is in crisis. Authoritarian governments from China to Iran to Venezuela are depriving our fellow human beings of their basic rights. He added that many multinational organisations have lost their way, focusing on partisan policy preferences while failing to defend fundamental rights. "Even many well intentioned people assert new and novel rights that often conflict. To uphold universal human rights we should look to the framers of the UDHR, who identified a clear set of principles that apply to all people everywhere, and at all times. They stood unwaveringly in defense of the dignity of every human being."

India 'proud' to endorse US initiative on joint statement on Universal Declaration of Human Rights 

Mourners quietly filed past the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's flag-draped coffin outside the white marble court building on Wednesday as the United States began three days of tributes to the liberal icon.

Hundreds of people lined up outside the court for a chance to pay their respects to the pioneering women's rights advocate, who died on Friday at age 87. Inside the court, Ginsburg's fellow justices celebrated her life in a private ceremony.

"Her voice in court and in our conference room was soft. But when she spoke, people listened," Chief Justice John Roberts said.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/trump-to-nominate-a-woman-to-replace-ginsburg-stating-he-likes-women-more-328748" hreflang="en">Trump to nominate a woman to replace Ginsburg stating he likes 'women more'</a>

Ginsburg's casket was then moved under the neoclassical court building's massive Corinthian columns for a public viewing due to last two days.

"It's almost like I felt the hand of God on my shoulder saying you have got to come and pay your respects to this person who was a fierce champion of women's voices and women's rights," said Cecelia Ryan, 64, who drove 12 hours from suburban Chicago.

President Donald Trump is moving quickly to nominate Ginsburg's replacement, and his fellow Republicans in the Senate say they could hold a vote before the Nov. 3 election. That would seal a 6-3 conservative majority on the court.

"I'm gay and I feel she has done more for equal rights than anyone else," said Christopher Balma, 47, who waited in line to file past the casket, which was surrounded by flowers.

"I'm terrified" now that Ginsburg is no longer on the court, Balma said.

Ginsburg ruled in favor of LGBT rights in several important cases including the landmark 2015 decision that legalized gay marriage nationwide.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/supreme-court-judge-ruth-bader-ginsburg-dies-at-87-wanted-to-see-trump-lose-in-us-elections-328526" hreflang="en">Supreme Court judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies at 87; wanted to see Trump lose in US elections</a>

Her popularity prompted officials to set aside two days for public viewing, rather than the one day allowed for other justices, said Barbara Perry, the director of presidential studies at the University of Virginia's Miller Center.

"She became a pop icon in the last decade," Perry said.

Ginsburg will on Friday become the first woman to lie in state in the U.S. Capitol when her casket is placed in National Statuary Hall.

The Capitol held a similar ceremony for civil-rights pioneer Rosa Parks in 2005, but she lay "in honor" as she did not hold government or military office.

Both historic events for Ginsburg, however, come with modifications due to the coronavirus pandemic. The Capitol ceremony will be limited to invited guests only, and at the courthouse social distancing and face coverings will be required.

Flowers and other offerings are forbidden on the court's plaza or its great flight of steps.

With the courthouse closed to the public, the justices are due to hear oral arguments by teleconference next month. Ginsburg's courtroom chair and the bench in front of it were draped with black wool crepe to mark the occasion, a tradition that dates back at least to 1873. A black drape also hung over the courtroom doors.

Dozens of her former clerks stood at attention when the coffin arrived at the courthouse.

"On a personal level, she was such an amazing person. She had a mind like a steel trap," said Jill Alexander, 59, whose husband served as a clerk for Ginsburg when she was an appeals-court judge.

Ginsburg's coffin rested on the Lincoln catafalque, a pine board platform draped in black cloth that was used to support President Abraham Lincoln's coffin when he lay in state in the Capitol's Rotunda after his assassination in 1865.

Public viewing runs until 10 p.m. on Wednesday and between 9 a.m. until 10 p.m. on Thursday. A private interment service is planned for next week at Arlington National Cemetery. Ginsburg's husband, Martin Ginsburg, was buried there in 2010.

Mourners quietly filed past the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's flag-draped coffin outside the white marble court building on Wednesday as the United States began three days of tributes to the liberal icon.

Mourners quietly filed past the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's flag-draped coffin outside the white marble court building on Wednesday as the United States began three days of tributes to the liberal icon. Hundreds of people lined up outside the court for a chance to pay their respects to the pioneering women's rights advocate, who died on Friday at age 87. Inside the court, Ginsburg's fellow justices celebrated her life in a private ceremony. "Her voice in court and in our conference room was soft. But when she spoke, people listened," Chief Justice John Roberts said. Also read: Trump to nominate a woman to replace Ginsburg stating he likes 'women more' Ginsburg's casket was then moved under the neoclassical court building's massive Corinthian columns for a public viewing due to last two days. "It's almost like I felt the hand of God on my shoulder saying you have got to come and pay your respects to this person who was a fierce champion of women's voices and women's rights," said Cecelia Ryan, 64, who drove 12 hours from suburban Chicago. President Donald Trump is moving quickly to nominate Ginsburg's replacement, and his fellow Republicans in the Senate say they could hold a vote before the Nov. 3 election. That would seal a 6-3 conservative majority on the court. "I'm gay and I feel she has done more for equal rights than anyone else," said Christopher Balma, 47, who waited in line to file past the casket, which was surrounded by flowers. "I'm terrified" now that Ginsburg is no longer on the court, Balma said. Ginsburg ruled in favor of LGBT rights in several important cases including the landmark 2015 decision that legalized gay marriage nationwide. Also read: Supreme Court judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies at 87; wanted to see Trump lose in US elections Her popularity prompted officials to set aside two days for public viewing, rather than the one day allowed for other justices, said Barbara Perry, the director of presidential studies at the University of Virginia's Miller Center. "She became a pop icon in the last decade," Perry said. Ginsburg will on Friday become the first woman to lie in state in the U.S. Capitol when her casket is placed in National Statuary Hall. The Capitol held a similar ceremony for civil-rights pioneer Rosa Parks in 2005, but she lay "in honor" as she did not hold government or military office. Both historic events for Ginsburg, however, come with modifications due to the coronavirus pandemic. The Capitol ceremony will be limited to invited guests only, and at the courthouse social distancing and face coverings will be required. Flowers and other offerings are forbidden on the court's plaza or its great flight of steps. With the courthouse closed to the public, the justices are due to hear oral arguments by teleconference next month. Ginsburg's courtroom chair and the bench in front of it were draped with black wool crepe to mark the occasion, a tradition that dates back at least to 1873. A black drape also hung over the courtroom doors. Dozens of her former clerks stood at attention when the coffin arrived at the courthouse. "On a personal level, she was such an amazing person. She had a mind like a steel trap," said Jill Alexander, 59, whose husband served as a clerk for Ginsburg when she was an appeals-court judge. Ginsburg's coffin rested on the Lincoln catafalque, a pine board platform draped in black cloth that was used to support President Abraham Lincoln's coffin when he lay in state in the Capitol's Rotunda after his assassination in 1865. Public viewing runs until 10 p.m. on Wednesday and between 9 a.m. until 10 p.m. on Thursday. A private interment service is planned for next week at Arlington National Cemetery. Ginsburg's husband, Martin Ginsburg, was buried there in 2010.

Mourners pay respects to Ginsburg at US Supreme Court

With President Donald Trump poised to nominate a U.S. Supreme Court justice to fill the vacancy created by the death of liberal icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a new 6-3 conservative majority could be emboldened to roll back abortion rights.

The ultimate objective for U.S. conservative activists for decades has been to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide. But short of that, there are other options the court has in curtailing abortion rights.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/in-major-ruling-us-supreme-court-strikes-down-strict-louisiana-abortion-law-309474" hreflang="en">In major ruling, US Supreme Court strikes down strict Louisiana abortion law</a>

Republican-led states including Ohio, Georgia, Missouri, Arkansas and Alabama have passed a variety of abortion restrictions in recent years. Some that seek to ban abortion at an early stage of pregnancy are still being litigated in lower courts and could reach the justices relatively soon.

Abortion is one the most divisive issues in the United States. Conservative opposition to it has been a driving force behind Republicans, including Trump, making a high priority of judicial appointments in recent years.

"Roe v. Wade is on the line in a way it never has been before," said Julie Rikelman, a lawyer with the Center for Reproductive Rights, which regularly challenges abortion restrictions.

Even if Roe is not overturned, "we could be in a situation where the court is upholding even more restrictions on abortion," Rikelman added.

Trump has said he intends to announce his nomination on Saturday, with conservative appeals court judges Amy Coney Barrett and Barbara Lagoa considered the frontrunners to be named to succeed Ginsburg, who was a strong defender of abortion rights. Ginsburg died on Friday at age 87.

The leadership of the Republican-controlled Senate is poised to move forward with the nomination even as Trump seeks re-election on Nov. 3.

Even though the court had a 5-4 conservative majority before Ginsburg's death, some activists on the right were concerned about Chief Justice John Robert's incremental approach. Roberts angered conservatives by siding with the court's liberals in June when the court ruled 5-4 to strike down a Louisiana abortion restriction involving a requirement imposed on doctors who perform the procedure.

Roberts, who wrote a separate opinion explaining his views, signaled he may back other abortion restrictions in future cases but said he felt compelled to strike down Louisiana's law because the justices just four years earlier had invalidated a similar law in Texas.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/us-election-2020-trump-and-biden-battle-for-an-advantage-in-brewing-fight-329526" hreflang="en">US election 2020: Trump and Biden battle for an advantage in brewing fight</a>

Trump vowed during the 2016 presidential campaign to appoint justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade. He already has appointed conservatives Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh to the court. Both voted to uphold the Louisiana law.

Anti-abortion groups are pushing for Trump to pick Barrett, a conservative Roman Catholic who he appointed to the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017. Although she has not yet ruled directly on abortion as a judge, Barrett has twice signaled opposition to rulings that struck down abortion-related restrictions.

Abortion rights activists have voiced concern that Barrett would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade.

STATE-BY-STATE EFFORTS

Broadly speaking, Republican-controlled states have enacted two types of abortion laws: measures that would impose burdensome regulations on abortion providers and those that would ban abortions during the early stages of pregnancy.

The latter laws in particular directly challenge Roe v. Wade and a subsequent 1992 ruling that upheld it. Those two rulings made clear that women have a constitutional right to obtain an abortion at least up until the point when the fetus is viable outside the womb, usually around 24 weeks or soon after.

Legal challenges to laws recently enacted in conservative states that directly challenge the Roe precedent by banning abortion outright or in early stages of pregnancy are still being litigated in lower courts.

One appeal pending at the Supreme Court that the justices will discuss whether to hear in the coming months is Mississippi's bid to revive a law that bans abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

In a separate case the court could act upon at any time, the Trump administration has asked the justices to put on hold a federal judge's decision to block during the coronavirus pandemic a U.S. Food and Drug Administration rule requiring women to visit a hospital or clinic to obtain a drug used for medication-induced abortions.

Clarke Forsythe, a lawyer with the Americans United for Life anti-abortion group that has urged Barrett's appointment, said he expects the Supreme Court to "continue with an incremental approach" even if Trump's nominee is confirmed, in part because of Roberts' opinion in the Louisiana case.

But Jennifer Dalven, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, which backs abortion rights, said that with only four votes among the justices needed to take up a case, a newly emboldened conservative wing could force Roberts' hand and take up a more direct challenge to Roe.

"Now," Dalven said, "Chief Justice Roberts and his concern for the integrity for the court and his potential for being an incrementalist is not enough."

With President Donald Trump poised to nominate a U.S. Supreme Court justice to fill the vacancy created by the death of liberal icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a new 6-3 conservative majority could be emboldened to roll back abortion rights.

With President Donald Trump poised to nominate a U.S. Supreme Court justice to fill the vacancy created by the death of liberal icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a new 6-3 conservative majority could be emboldened to roll back abortion rights. The ultimate objective for U.S. conservative activists for decades has been to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide. But short of that, there are other options the court has in curtailing abortion rights. Also read: In major ruling, US Supreme Court strikes down strict Louisiana abortion law Republican-led states including Ohio, Georgia, Missouri, Arkansas and Alabama have passed a variety of abortion restrictions in recent years. Some that seek to ban abortion at an early stage of pregnancy are still being litigated in lower courts and could reach the justices relatively soon. Abortion is one the most divisive issues in the United States. Conservative opposition to it has been a driving force behind Republicans, including Trump, making a high priority of judicial appointments in recent years. "Roe v. Wade is on the line in a way it never has been before," said Julie Rikelman, a lawyer with the Center for Reproductive Rights, which regularly challenges abortion restrictions. Even if Roe is not overturned, "we could be in a situation where the court is upholding even more restrictions on abortion," Rikelman added. Trump has said he intends to announce his nomination on Saturday, with conservative appeals court judges Amy Coney Barrett and Barbara Lagoa considered the frontrunners to be named to succeed Ginsburg, who was a strong defender of abortion rights. Ginsburg died on Friday at age 87. The leadership of the Republican-controlled Senate is poised to move forward with the nomination even as Trump seeks re-election on Nov. 3. Even though the court had a 5-4 conservative majority before Ginsburg's death, some activists on the right were concerned about Chief Justice John Robert's incremental approach. Roberts angered conservatives by siding with the court's liberals in June when the court ruled 5-4 to strike down a Louisiana abortion restriction involving a requirement imposed on doctors who perform the procedure. Roberts, who wrote a separate opinion explaining his views, signaled he may back other abortion restrictions in future cases but said he felt compelled to strike down Louisiana's law because the justices just four years earlier had invalidated a similar law in Texas. Also read: US election 2020: Trump and Biden battle for an advantage in brewing fight Trump vowed during the 2016 presidential campaign to appoint justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade. He already has appointed conservatives Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh to the court. Both voted to uphold the Louisiana law. Anti-abortion groups are pushing for Trump to pick Barrett, a conservative Roman Catholic who he appointed to the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017. Although she has not yet ruled directly on abortion as a judge, Barrett has twice signaled opposition to rulings that struck down abortion-related restrictions. Abortion rights activists have voiced concern that Barrett would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. STATE-BY-STATE EFFORTS Broadly speaking, Republican-controlled states have enacted two types of abortion laws: measures that would impose burdensome regulations on abortion providers and those that would ban abortions during the early stages of pregnancy. The latter laws in particular directly challenge Roe v. Wade and a subsequent 1992 ruling that upheld it. Those two rulings made clear that women have a constitutional right to obtain an abortion at least up until the point when the fetus is viable outside the womb, usually around 24 weeks or soon after. Legal challenges to laws recently enacted in conservative states that directly challenge the Roe precedent by banning abortion outright or in early stages of pregnancy are still being litigated in lower courts. One appeal pending at the Supreme Court that the justices will discuss whether to hear in the coming months is Mississippi's bid to revive a law that bans abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. In a separate case the court could act upon at any time, the Trump administration has asked the justices to put on hold a federal judge's decision to block during the coronavirus pandemic a U.S. Food and Drug Administration rule requiring women to visit a hospital or clinic to obtain a drug used for medication-induced abortions. Clarke Forsythe, a lawyer with the Americans United for Life anti-abortion group that has urged Barrett's appointment, said he expects the Supreme Court to "continue with an incremental approach" even if Trump's nominee is confirmed, in part because of Roberts' opinion in the Louisiana case. But Jennifer Dalven, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union, which backs abortion rights, said that with only four votes among the justices needed to take up a case, a newly emboldened conservative wing could force Roberts' hand and take up a more direct challenge to Roe. "Now," Dalven said, "Chief Justice Roberts and his concern for the integrity for the court and his potential for being an incrementalist is not enough."

Trump-appointed justice could signal major Supreme Court shift on abortion

The United States set a one-day record with over 1 million coronavirus diagnostic tests being performed, but the country needs 6 million to 10 million a day to bring outbreaks under control, according to various experts.

The country performed 1,061,411 tests on Saturday, according to data from The COVID Tracking Project, a volunteer-run effort to track the outbreak.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-prepares-to-count-over-13-billion-people-amid-coronavirus-pandemic-329094">China prepares to count over 1.3 billion people amid coronavirus pandemic</a>

The record comes after testing has fallen for several weeks. The United States tested on average 650,000 people a day in the week ended Sept. 13, down from a peak in late July of over 800,000 people a day.

Since the start of the pandemic, testing shortages have hampered efforts to curb the spread of the virus.

At one point during the summer, Houston residents lined up in cars and waited hours for tests, even sleeping in their vehicles overnight. Miami saw similar lines.

Once tested, people may have to wait up to two weeks to learn if they have the virus, which has killed nearly 200,000 Americans and infected more than 6.7 million. Such delays defeat the purpose of trying to prevent further infections.

In March, President Donald Trump said "anyone who wants a test, gets a test." That goal has yet to be achieved.

At the heart of the crisis is a reliance by labs on automated testing equipment that locks them into using proprietary chemical kits and other tools made by a handful of manufacturers.

The Food and Drug Administration has granted emergency use authorization to several saliva tests, which require no swabs and use readily available reagents.

The United States has also authorized pooled testing, a method that tests samples from several people at once and can expand testing capacity.

However, pooled testing is only more efficient in areas with limited outbreaks. In mid-September, 27 of 50 states had positive test rates above 5%, according to a Reuters analysis, including South Dakota at 17%.

The World Health Organization considers positivity rates above 5% concerning. 
&nbsp;

The United States set a one-day record with over 1 million coronavirus diagnostic tests being performed, but the country needs 6 million to 10 million a day to bring outbreaks under control, according to various experts.

The United States set a one-day record with over 1 million coronavirus diagnostic tests being performed, but the country needs 6 million to 10 million a day to bring outbreaks under control, according to various experts. The country performed 1,061,411 tests on Saturday, according to data from The COVID Tracking Project, a volunteer-run effort to track the outbreak. Also read | China prepares to count over 1.3 billion people amid coronavirus pandemic The record comes after testing has fallen for several weeks. The United States tested on average 650,000 people a day in the week ended Sept. 13, down from a peak in late July of over 800,000 people a day. Since the start of the pandemic, testing shortages have hampered efforts to curb the spread of the virus. At one point during the summer, Houston residents lined up in cars and waited hours for tests, even sleeping in their vehicles overnight. Miami saw similar lines. Once tested, people may have to wait up to two weeks to learn if they have the virus, which has killed nearly 200,000 Americans and infected more than 6.7 million. Such delays defeat the purpose of trying to prevent further infections. In March, President Donald Trump said "anyone who wants a test, gets a test." That goal has yet to be achieved. At the heart of the crisis is a reliance by labs on automated testing equipment that locks them into using proprietary chemical kits and other tools made by a handful of manufacturers. The Food and Drug Administration has granted emergency use authorization to several saliva tests, which require no swabs and use readily available reagents. The United States has also authorized pooled testing, a method that tests samples from several people at once and can expand testing capacity. However, pooled testing is only more efficient in areas with limited outbreaks. In mid-September, 27 of 50 states had positive test rates above 5%, according to a Reuters analysis, including South Dakota at 17%. The World Health Organization considers positivity rates above 5% concerning.

US sets new record of testing one million people in 24 hours

The US will break with almost every other UN security council member state including its closest allies by declaring UN sanctions back in effect on Iran.

US threatens to take new measures against Iran

The Trump administration has agreed to give in-person details on the threats encountered by the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/us-election">presidential elections </a>to key members of Congress.&nbsp;

Earlier, the administration had said that they will only provide such briefings in writing.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-election-tracker-from-drugs-to-fake-art-everything-is-making-news-328012">US election tracker: From drugs to fake art, everything is making news</a>

Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe has given his consensus to brief the Senate and House intelligence committees, according to the heads of these groups, reported news agency AP.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-election-2020-donald-trump-says-top-health-expert-was-confused-about-vaccine-but-not-him-328048">Trump says top health expert was 'confused' about vaccine, but not him</a>

It comes after a furore by Democrats and a few Republicans over the importance of these briefings as the threat of a Russian interference loom after similar attempts were made in 2016.&nbsp;

Acting Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the panel, in a joint statement on Wednesday, said that Ratcliffe had reaffirmed that they will receive “briefings, including in-person, on all oversight topics".

House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff also said Ratcliffe's office confirmed the briefings on Wednesday "after extensive public criticism".

A person familiar with the development said the briefings would be held behind closed doors.&nbsp;

Mentioning leaks in one such meeting held earlier this year, Ratcliffe in August said that the most of these briefings would be held in writing instead of going live.&nbsp;

The Trump administration has agreed to give in-person details on the threats encountered by the presidential elections to key members of Congress. Earlier, the administration had said that they will only provide such briefings in writing.

The Trump administration has agreed to give in-person details on the threats encountered by the presidential elections to key members of Congress. Earlier, the administration had said that they will only provide such briefings in writing. Also read | US election tracker: From drugs to fake art, everything is making news Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe has given his consensus to brief the Senate and House intelligence committees, according to the heads of these groups, reported news agency AP. Also read | Trump says top health expert was 'confused' about vaccine, but not him It comes after a furore by Democrats and a few Republicans over the importance of these briefings as the threat of a Russian interference loom after similar attempts were made in 2016. Acting Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the panel, in a joint statement on Wednesday, said that Ratcliffe had reaffirmed that they will receive “briefings, including in-person, on all oversight topics". House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff also said Ratcliffe's office confirmed the briefings on Wednesday "after extensive public criticism". A person familiar with the development said the briefings would be held behind closed doors. Mentioning leaks in one such meeting held earlier this year, Ratcliffe in August said that the most of these briefings would be held in writing instead of going live.

Trump administration agrees on US election intelligence brief to Congress

As the US inches closer to the day of voting, climate change is increasingly becoming a hot topic for debates. There are wildfires raging through California, Oregon and the state of Washington, moulding the narrative of presidential campaigns.&nbsp;

4.5 million acres of land has burnt since August, 6,200 homes and structures have been destroyed, and 3 million more homes are at risk of being ravaged. 36 people have died so far. And 64,000 people have been forced to evacuate. Additionally, the air quality has worsened.

Both Joe Biden and Donald Trump have laid out their vision to tackle this natural disaster.

Donald Trump

Donald Trump has never really been a believer in climate change, and has often called it a hoax. But he landed in Sacramento, California for a briefing about the wildfires, where officials from other political backgrounds were also present. This included Gavin Newsom, the Governor of California, and Wade Crowfoot, the Secretary of California’s natural resources agency.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/us-election-2020-biden-calls-trump-a-climate-arsonist-vows-to-create-environmental-jobs-327592" hreflang="en">US election 2020: Biden calls Trump a 'climate arsonist,' vows to create environmental jobs</a>

The two men urged Trump to understand the science behind these wildfires.

“If we ignore that science and sort of put our head in the sand and think it's all about vegetation management, we're not going to succeed together protecting Californians”, Crowfoot said.

“It'll start getting cooler. You just watch”, Trump then said.

Crowfoot went on to say, "I wish science agreed with you." Trump fired back with “I don't think science knows”.

Trump had also earlier claimed that COVID-19 would disappear as months get hotter. He is now hopeful that the fires will disappear when things start getting cooler.

Joe Biden

Joe Biden thinks Donald Trump is the one setting these fires. Speaking in Delaware, Biden called Trump a "climate arsonist".

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-donald-trump-vs-science-327801/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

“If you give a climate arsonist four more years in the white house, why would anyone be surprised if we have more of America ablaze? If you give a climate denier four more years in the White House, why would anyone be surprised when more of America is underwater? We need a president who respects science, who understands that the damage from climate change is already here. Unless we take urgent action, it will soon be more catastrophic”, Biden said.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/us-elections-2020-joe-bidens-campaign-app-reportedly-gave-users-access-to-personal-details-of-millions-327711" hreflang="en">Joe Biden's campaign app reportedly gave users access to personal details of millions</a>

However, his speech was interrupted by bugs multiple times. Another bug has found in Biden’s campaign. According to a security researcher at App Analyst, a privacy bug in Joe Biden's campaign app may have exposed the personal information of millions of Americans.

A feature in the “Vote Joe” app allows users to sync their contacts with the app to see if their friends &amp; family have also registered to vote.

When it finds a match, the app displays the person's name, age, birthdate and a list of recent elections they voted in. This particular feature can provide a person's information by simply creating a contact with that person's full name, irrespective of their phone number or email ID.

The Democratic Party says this bug has been fixed, but questions are being raised on whether this bug was intentionally placed.

Campaigning woes

Meanwhile, the Trump campaign too is struggling with a fair share of controversies. The latest one is gaining mileage through a hashtag.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/us-election-2020-joe-biden-or-donald-trump-whose-chances-are-looking-better-right-now-327545" hreflang="en">US Election 2020: Joe Biden or Donald Trump, whose chances are looking better right now?</a>

#PedoTrump has been trending in the US, it was first used by 'meidas-touch [dot] com’, a left-wing political organisation. It put out a video along with this hashtag: A compilation of brief snippets from Trump's relationship with convicted pedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein.

It included trump's statements on Epstein: How he was a lot of fun to be with, and how he liked beautiful women on the younger side. There were also remarks that Trump made about his daughters Tiffany and Ivanka. The video has gone viral and has received more than 2 million views.

As the US inches closer to the day of voting, climate change is increasingly becoming a hot topic for debates. There are wildfires raging through California, Oregon and the state of Washington, moulding the narrative of presidential campaigns.

As the US inches closer to the day of voting, climate change is increasingly becoming a hot topic for debates. There are wildfires raging through California, Oregon and the state of Washington, moulding the narrative of presidential campaigns. 4.5 million acres of land has burnt since August, 6,200 homes and structures have been destroyed, and 3 million more homes are at risk of being ravaged. 36 people have died so far. And 64,000 people have been forced to evacuate. Additionally, the air quality has worsened. Both Joe Biden and Donald Trump have laid out their vision to tackle this natural disaster. Donald Trump Donald Trump has never really been a believer in climate change, and has often called it a hoax. But he landed in Sacramento, California for a briefing about the wildfires, where officials from other political backgrounds were also present. This included Gavin Newsom, the Governor of California, and Wade Crowfoot, the Secretary of California’s natural resources agency. Also read: US election 2020: Biden calls Trump a 'climate arsonist,' vows to create environmental jobs The two men urged Trump to understand the science behind these wildfires. “If we ignore that science and sort of put our head in the sand and think it's all about vegetation management, we're not going to succeed together protecting Californians”, Crowfoot said. “It'll start getting cooler. You just watch”, Trump then said. Crowfoot went on to say, "I wish science agreed with you." Trump fired back with “I don't think science knows”. Trump had also earlier claimed that COVID-19 would disappear as months get hotter. He is now hopeful that the fires will disappear when things start getting cooler. Joe Biden Joe Biden thinks Donald Trump is the one setting these fires. Speaking in Delaware, Biden called Trump a "climate arsonist". × “If you give a climate arsonist four more years in the white house, why would anyone be surprised if we have more of America ablaze? If you give a climate denier four more years in the White House, why would anyone be surprised when more of America is underwater? We need a president who respects science, who understands that the damage from climate change is already here. Unless we take urgent action, it will soon be more catastrophic”, Biden said. Also read: Joe Biden's campaign app reportedly gave users access to personal details of millions However, his speech was interrupted by bugs multiple times. Another bug has found in Biden’s campaign. According to a security researcher at App Analyst, a privacy bug in Joe Biden's campaign app may have exposed the personal information of millions of Americans. A feature in the “Vote Joe” app allows users to sync their contacts with the app to see if their friends & family have also registered to vote. When it finds a match, the app displays the person's name, age, birthdate and a list of recent elections they voted in. This particular feature can provide a person's information by simply creating a contact with that person's full name, irrespective of their phone number or email ID. The Democratic Party says this bug has been fixed, but questions are being raised on whether this bug was intentionally placed. Campaigning woes Meanwhile, the Trump campaign too is struggling with a fair share of controversies. The latest one is gaining mileage through a hashtag. Also read: US Election 2020: Joe Biden or Donald Trump, whose chances are looking better right now? #PedoTrump has been trending in the US, it was first used by 'meidas-touch [dot] com’, a left-wing political organisation. It put out a video along with this hashtag: A compilation of brief snippets from Trump's relationship with convicted pedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein. It included trump's statements on Epstein: How he was a lot of fun to be with, and how he liked beautiful women on the younger side. There were also remarks that Trump made about his daughters Tiffany and Ivanka. The video has gone viral and has received more than 2 million views.

US Election 2020: Where do Trump and Biden stand on climate change?

The splitting headaches began when smoke from wildfires rolled in around Tim Hunt's suburban Seattle home. Next came a debilitating fatigue.

As deadly wildfires rage across the U.S. West, Hunt and others are struggling with some of the world's worst air pollution.

"I get out of bed to eat and drink water, and go back to bed," said the 64-year-old retired software engineer, who suffered lung damage in 2017 from a bad case of the flu. "It’s like there’s not enough oxygen in the air."

Enormous plumes of ash and smoke have spread from the region, where nearly 5 million acres were ablaze on Tuesday, compounding the public health crisis of the coronavirus pandemic.

In California, levels of lung-polluting particulate matter have jumped far beyond the summertime norm, bathing skies in eerie tones of orange and sepia.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/trump-dismisses-climate-concerns-blames-poor-forest-management-for-western-wildfires-327587" hreflang="en">Trump dismisses climate concerns, blames 'poor' forest management for Western wildfires</a>

Hospitals in hard-hit Oregon report a 10% increase in emergency room visits for breathing problems. Doctors are being inundated with calls from worried patients.

"It's really putting a burden on our asthmatic patients," said Dr. Paul Williams, an allergy and immunology specialist in Everett, Washington. "They're calling us more often and they're requiring additional medications."

Air pollution, in the case of wildfire measured by the amount of fine particulate matter swirling in the air, is considered a serious health hazard linked to diseases including asthma, lung cancer, heart disease and early death.

Pollution has hit historic levels in five Oregon cities - Portland, Eugene, Bend, Medford and Klamath Falls, the state said Tuesday.

"I can't see out my window past two cars," said Dr. Gopal Allada, a pulmonologist who teaches at Oregon Health &amp; Science University School of Medicine. Allada's office is swamped with calls from patients experiencing breathing problems and asking for advice on what to do about symptoms that include coughing, wheezing, throat irritation, headache and racing heartbeat.

"We're just trying to field the calls," Allada said. "I would have loved to have had more people answering phones."

In Washington where Hunt lives, the air quality on Tuesday ranged from unhealthy to hazardous at every site monitored by the state.

Residents were stuffing towels in door cracks or sleeping in face masks to cope.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/dozens-remain-missing-as-wildfires-torch-millions-of-acres-in-us-west-327272" hreflang="en">Dozens remain missing as wildfires torch millions of acres in US West</a>

Particulate matter smaller than 2.5 micrometers, known as PM2.5, is the key measure for harmful air pollution. The particles are smaller than the width of a human hair, small enough to burrow deep into a person's lungs and even find its way into the bloodstream.

Wildfire smoke mostly carries particulates from burning trees and plants, which are already harmful.

But smoke from devastated communities can also contain toxic chemicals from burned plastic and other manmade materials in cars and buildings such as asbestos, synthetic rubber compounds and heavy metals. These can then pollute not only air but nearby waterways or soils.

A Reuters analysis of California air quality data showed moderate to hazardous air quality on Sunday and Monday at all but about 20 of more than 120 sites monitored by environmental officials, even as some smoke started to abate. About 40 sites, including San Luis Obispo along the Pacific Coast and large swaths of the agricultural Central Valley and Sierra Nevada foothills, had higher levels of pollutants than usual for six days running, state data showed.

In San Francisco, an area usually spared poor air because of its proximity to the San Francisco Bay and Pacific Ocean, levels of PM2.5 pollution have been three times California's standard limit of 35 micrograms per cubic meter for at least six days.

"I can't recall a time when we've had this amount of smoke for this long a time," said Sylvia Vanderspek, chief of the Air Quality Planning Branch of the California Air Resources Board.

COMPOUNDING COVID-19

The worldwide COVID-19 pandemic is also complicating efforts to help people at risk for lung and breathing problems, said Dr. Afif El-Hasan, a pediatrician in Southern California who volunteers with the American Lung Association.

Wildfire pollution can make people more susceptible to COVID-19, he said, and the best masks for filtering smoke are the same N-95 face coverings desperately needed by doctors and nurses treating COVID patients, making medical professionals hesitant to recommend that patients buy them.

It has also been difficult to help people find respite from the bad air, other than to recommend staying home and indoors.

"Normally when we give air quality alerts we say where people can go," said Dylan Darling, a spokesman for the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. "Often the Oregon coast can provide refuge or the mountains. But right now there is not a place that’s good to go for fresh air."

The splitting headaches began when smoke from wildfires rolled in around Tim Hunt's suburban Seattle home. Next came a debilitating fatigue. As deadly wildfires rage across the U.

The splitting headaches began when smoke from wildfires rolled in around Tim Hunt's suburban Seattle home. Next came a debilitating fatigue. As deadly wildfires rage across the U.S. West, Hunt and others are struggling with some of the world's worst air pollution. "I get out of bed to eat and drink water, and go back to bed," said the 64-year-old retired software engineer, who suffered lung damage in 2017 from a bad case of the flu. "It’s like there’s not enough oxygen in the air." Enormous plumes of ash and smoke have spread from the region, where nearly 5 million acres were ablaze on Tuesday, compounding the public health crisis of the coronavirus pandemic. In California, levels of lung-polluting particulate matter have jumped far beyond the summertime norm, bathing skies in eerie tones of orange and sepia. Also read: Trump dismisses climate concerns, blames 'poor' forest management for Western wildfires Hospitals in hard-hit Oregon report a 10% increase in emergency room visits for breathing problems. Doctors are being inundated with calls from worried patients. "It's really putting a burden on our asthmatic patients," said Dr. Paul Williams, an allergy and immunology specialist in Everett, Washington. "They're calling us more often and they're requiring additional medications." Air pollution, in the case of wildfire measured by the amount of fine particulate matter swirling in the air, is considered a serious health hazard linked to diseases including asthma, lung cancer, heart disease and early death. Pollution has hit historic levels in five Oregon cities - Portland, Eugene, Bend, Medford and Klamath Falls, the state said Tuesday. "I can't see out my window past two cars," said Dr. Gopal Allada, a pulmonologist who teaches at Oregon Health & Science University School of Medicine. Allada's office is swamped with calls from patients experiencing breathing problems and asking for advice on what to do about symptoms that include coughing, wheezing, throat irritation, headache and racing heartbeat. "We're just trying to field the calls," Allada said. "I would have loved to have had more people answering phones." In Washington where Hunt lives, the air quality on Tuesday ranged from unhealthy to hazardous at every site monitored by the state. Residents were stuffing towels in door cracks or sleeping in face masks to cope. Also read: Dozens remain missing as wildfires torch millions of acres in US West Particulate matter smaller than 2.5 micrometers, known as PM2.5, is the key measure for harmful air pollution. The particles are smaller than the width of a human hair, small enough to burrow deep into a person's lungs and even find its way into the bloodstream. Wildfire smoke mostly carries particulates from burning trees and plants, which are already harmful. But smoke from devastated communities can also contain toxic chemicals from burned plastic and other manmade materials in cars and buildings such as asbestos, synthetic rubber compounds and heavy metals. These can then pollute not only air but nearby waterways or soils. A Reuters analysis of California air quality data showed moderate to hazardous air quality on Sunday and Monday at all but about 20 of more than 120 sites monitored by environmental officials, even as some smoke started to abate. About 40 sites, including San Luis Obispo along the Pacific Coast and large swaths of the agricultural Central Valley and Sierra Nevada foothills, had higher levels of pollutants than usual for six days running, state data showed. In San Francisco, an area usually spared poor air because of its proximity to the San Francisco Bay and Pacific Ocean, levels of PM2.5 pollution have been three times California's standard limit of 35 micrograms per cubic meter for at least six days. "I can't recall a time when we've had this amount of smoke for this long a time," said Sylvia Vanderspek, chief of the Air Quality Planning Branch of the California Air Resources Board. COMPOUNDING COVID-19 The worldwide COVID-19 pandemic is also complicating efforts to help people at risk for lung and breathing problems, said Dr. Afif El-Hasan, a pediatrician in Southern California who volunteers with the American Lung Association. Wildfire pollution can make people more susceptible to COVID-19, he said, and the best masks for filtering smoke are the same N-95 face coverings desperately needed by doctors and nurses treating COVID patients, making medical professionals hesitant to recommend that patients buy them. It has also been difficult to help people find respite from the bad air, other than to recommend staying home and indoors. "Normally when we give air quality alerts we say where people can go," said Dylan Darling, a spokesman for the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. "Often the Oregon coast can provide refuge or the mountains. But right now there is not a place that’s good to go for fresh air."

Headaches and hospital visits rise as wildfire smoke blankets western US

united-states

United States, News on United States, stories on United States, articles on United States, United States stories at Wion, United States news, United States latest news

united states