Secretary of State Mike Pompeo blamed Russia for the massive cyberattack against multiple US agencies and thousands of individual federal and private entities.

Pompeo says Russians engaged in the massive cyberattack

Women's World Cup winner Megan Rapinoe has said her inclusion in FIFA's "Women's World11" team of the year despite playing so little is a sign that the women's game needs more visibility and exposure.

Rapinoe, who was named best player at the 2019 World Cup and finished top scorer, said she appreciated being included in the team of the year but pointed out she had not played since March, when the coronavirus pandemic disrupted global sport.

The winger said on Twitter she appreciated being chosen by her fellow professionals but other players deserved more recognition this year.

"We have so many phenomenal female players around the world and all of us need to do what we can to recognise them," she said.

She added that her inclusion "sheds light on the fact that to push our game forward we need continued investment ... to give more female players the opportunity to be seen on TV in their home countries and globally while performing for club and country".

Rapinoe, who won FIFA's The Best award last year and gained extra attention for her criticism of U.S. President Donald Trump, chose not to play for her club OL Reign when the U.S. women's season resumed in June.

But she said she was excited to return to playing next year, when the United States will be playing in the Olympic Games in Tokyo.

"The future of our game is so bright, the potential is limitless, and our commitment to pushing it forward from every possible angle has to match that," she added.

"Again, I am honoured and flattered to have been recognised by my peers for this honour, and look forward to getting back out on the field in 2021!"

Women's World Cup winner Megan Rapinoe has said her inclusion in FIFA's "Women's World11" team of the year despite playing so little is a sign that the women's game needs more visibility and exposure.

Women's World Cup winner Megan Rapinoe has said her inclusion in FIFA's "Women's World11" team of the year despite playing so little is a sign that the women's game needs more visibility and exposure. Rapinoe, who was named best player at the 2019 World Cup and finished top scorer, said she appreciated being included in the team of the year but pointed out she had not played since March, when the coronavirus pandemic disrupted global sport. The winger said on Twitter she appreciated being chosen by her fellow professionals but other players deserved more recognition this year. "We have so many phenomenal female players around the world and all of us need to do what we can to recognise them," she said. She added that her inclusion "sheds light on the fact that to push our game forward we need continued investment ... to give more female players the opportunity to be seen on TV in their home countries and globally while performing for club and country". Rapinoe, who won FIFA's The Best award last year and gained extra attention for her criticism of U.S. President Donald Trump, chose not to play for her club OL Reign when the U.S. women's season resumed in June. But she said she was excited to return to playing next year, when the United States will be playing in the Olympic Games in Tokyo. "The future of our game is so bright, the potential is limitless, and our commitment to pushing it forward from every possible angle has to match that," she added. "Again, I am honoured and flattered to have been recognised by my peers for this honour, and look forward to getting back out on the field in 2021!"

Megan Rapinoe questions her inclusion in FIFA team of year

The Commerce Department is expected to add around 80 additional companies and affiliates to the so-called entity list, nearly all of them Chinese.

U.S. to blacklist dozens of Chinese firms including SMIC

A panel of outside advisers to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Thursday (December 17) overwhelmingly endorsed emergency use of Moderna coronavirus vaccine, virtually assuring a second option for protecting against COVID-19 for a pandemic ravaged nation.

FDA expert panel endorses Moderna coronavirus vaccine

US congressional negotiators on Wednesday were "closing in on" a $900 billion COVID-19 aid bill that will include a new round of stimulus checks and extended unemployment benefits, lawmakers and congressional aides said.

US Congress 'closing in' on $900 billion COVID-19 aid bill

US experts will meet Thursday to decide whether to recommend approval of Moderna's Covid-19 vaccine for emergency use.

Moderna vaccine inches closer to emergency use approval in United States

President Tayyip Erdogan said on Wednesday U.S. sanctions imposed on Turkey over its purchase of Russian defence systems were a "hostile attack" on its sovereign rights and defence industry, and the move was bound to fail.

Erdogan says US sanctions an attack on ally Turkey's rights

As Democrats look to the incoming Biden administration to reverse much of President Donald Trump’s work, the conservative imprint he has left on the federal courts is only deepening.

Much attention in recent months has focused on the Supreme Court and its newly appointed justice, Amy Coney Barrett. But an analysis of decisions by the country’s appellate bench — where nearly all contested federal litigation ends — shows the transformation of the judiciary under Trump.

Early this year, The New York Times reviewed more than 10,000 published decisions and dissents during the first three years of the Trump administration. It found that the president’s picks for the appeals courts were more likely than past Republican appointees to disagree with peers selected by Democrats and more likely to agree with their Republican colleagues, suggesting they were more consistently conservative.

An updated analysis of more than 1,700 opinions published over the first six months of the year shows that the trend has intensified as the judges have established a larger body of work.

“It’s more polarized,” said Joshua Fischman, a law professor at the University of Virginia. “We’ve seen a huge conservative shift. A lot of these judges are very young, and they’ll be there for a long time.”

Trump has named 53 of the 165 judges on the nation’s regional appeals courts, lifetime appointments that will have a vast and enduring effect. Most cases on the courts are decided unanimously by three-person panels, and dissent is relatively rare. But as a group, his selections were nearly four times as likely to clash with colleagues appointed by Democratic presidents as those appointed by Republicans. Judges nominated by Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush showed the same tendency, but to half the extent.

The judges who exhibited the pattern included some who had been under consideration for the Supreme Court and some who had deep political connections on Capitol Hill. One had done legal work for Trump’s 2016 campaign and later, as acting head of the Justice Department’s civil division, was in charge of defending high-profile presidential policies that came under attack in the courts.

Yet while Trump has made clear that he expects loyalty from his judicial appointees, they have ruled against him in lawsuits that his campaign brought regarding the 2020 election. Most notably, Barrett last week joined her fellow justices in denying an effort by Texas to overturn the Biden victory in four battleground states.

At the appeals level, Judge Stephanos Bibas of the 3rd Circuit, nominated in 2017, wrote a blistering decision last month rejecting the Trump campaign’s election challenge in Pennsylvania. And Judge Andrew L. Brasher of the 11th Circuit, appointed this year, wrote an opinion this month rebuffing the campaign’s effort to bypass the lower federal court and decertify Georgia’s election results.

Fischman said that to rule differently would have been to flout the law. “It’s completely against judicial culture,” he said. “They just could not be taken seriously as judges if they sided with Trump here.”

Bibas and Brasher serve on courts that Trump has flipped toward conservative majorities. While Bibas was not among the most disputatious of the appointees, according to the analysis, he dissented in a significant gun-rights case in which two Democratic appointees upheld New Jersey’s limit on large-capacity magazines.

“We must treat the right to keep and bear arms like other enumerated rights,” he wrote. “We may not water it down and balance it away based on our own sense of wise policy.”

Barrett — who until October served in Indiana on the 7th Circuit, where there is a particular culture of agreement — also followed the pattern, striking out against Democratic-named colleagues over 7% of the time and against Republican appointees 2.5% of the time, the analysis showed.

In one such case, she disagreed that a man who had admitted to killing his wife was denied the right to a lawyer when a judge questioned him. (Her position later held sway when the case was considered by a full slate of 7th Circuit judges.)

On the District of Columbia Circuit, Judge Neomi Rao, confirmed to the bench just last year, has already made waves. Of four cases with published opinions that she participated in alongside two Democratic appointees, she dissented three times, the analysis showed. In June, she wrote the majority opinion ordering a lower-court judge to dismiss the case against Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser.

In a case decided in May, Judge Joel M. Carson III of the 10th Circuit dissented as his Democratic-appointed peers ruled against a challenge to the Trump administration’s ban on bump stocks, the attachments that allow semi-automatic rifles to fire in sustained bursts. That case is now under consideration by the full circuit.

And this month, Judge Lawrence J.C. VanDyke broke from his colleagues on the 9th Circuit, objecting as they ruled against the Trump administration and called an immigration policy favoring wealthy immigrants for green cards “arbitrary and capricious.” VanDyke was among the handful of Trump nominees at the appellate level whose qualifications were questioned by the American Bar Association.

Not all the judges fit the pattern: Many serve on courts with a majority of Republican appointees, and some belong to circuits with a stronger culture of consensus. But The Times found that Trump appointees were more likely to be involved in a case featuring dissent even when those factors were accounted for.

The analysis examined how often and with whom the judges agreed but not the ideological content of their opinions. Though the cases sometimes touched on big policy debates — abortion, gun rights, policing — they more often concerned matters like employment disputes and criminal and immigration court appeals.

The Trump administration’s work in swiftly filling vacant judgeships has depended heavily on Republicans in the Senate, particularly Mitch McConnell, the majority leader. He has encouraged eligible federal judges to retire to create more openings and has led a confirmation process in which Republicans shunned compromise and sought unbending conservatives and reliable political allies to populate the bench.

As of this month, if pending nominations are taken into account, President-elect Joe Biden stands to inherit fewer than 25 openings across the federal judiciary, compared with the more than 100 that carried over to Trump from Barack Obama's administration.

Democratic senators on the Judiciary Committee have appealed to Lindsey Graham, its Republican chairman through the end of the year, asking him not to proceed with any more nominations before Biden is sworn in.

But even with a Democrat in the White House, the Republicans will be in a position to continue their push for conservative appointees, or at least block liberal ones, unless Democrats gain control of the Senate by winning both seats in next month’s special election in Georgia.

“A lot of what we’ve done over the last four years will be undone sooner or later by the next election,” McConnell said in October as Barrett was confirmed. “They won’t be able to do much about this for a long time to come.”

As Democrats look to the incoming Biden administration to reverse much of President Donald Trump’s work, the conservative imprint he has left on the federal courts is only deepening.

As Democrats look to the incoming Biden administration to reverse much of President Donald Trump’s work, the conservative imprint he has left on the federal courts is only deepening. Much attention in recent months has focused on the Supreme Court and its newly appointed justice, Amy Coney Barrett. But an analysis of decisions by the country’s appellate bench — where nearly all contested federal litigation ends — shows the transformation of the judiciary under Trump. Early this year, The New York Times reviewed more than 10,000 published decisions and dissents during the first three years of the Trump administration. It found that the president’s picks for the appeals courts were more likely than past Republican appointees to disagree with peers selected by Democrats and more likely to agree with their Republican colleagues, suggesting they were more consistently conservative. An updated analysis of more than 1,700 opinions published over the first six months of the year shows that the trend has intensified as the judges have established a larger body of work. “It’s more polarized,” said Joshua Fischman, a law professor at the University of Virginia. “We’ve seen a huge conservative shift. A lot of these judges are very young, and they’ll be there for a long time.” Trump has named 53 of the 165 judges on the nation’s regional appeals courts, lifetime appointments that will have a vast and enduring effect. Most cases on the courts are decided unanimously by three-person panels, and dissent is relatively rare. But as a group, his selections were nearly four times as likely to clash with colleagues appointed by Democratic presidents as those appointed by Republicans. Judges nominated by Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush showed the same tendency, but to half the extent. The judges who exhibited the pattern included some who had been under consideration for the Supreme Court and some who had deep political connections on Capitol Hill. One had done legal work for Trump’s 2016 campaign and later, as acting head of the Justice Department’s civil division, was in charge of defending high-profile presidential policies that came under attack in the courts. Yet while Trump has made clear that he expects loyalty from his judicial appointees, they have ruled against him in lawsuits that his campaign brought regarding the 2020 election. Most notably, Barrett last week joined her fellow justices in denying an effort by Texas to overturn the Biden victory in four battleground states. At the appeals level, Judge Stephanos Bibas of the 3rd Circuit, nominated in 2017, wrote a blistering decision last month rejecting the Trump campaign’s election challenge in Pennsylvania. And Judge Andrew L. Brasher of the 11th Circuit, appointed this year, wrote an opinion this month rebuffing the campaign’s effort to bypass the lower federal court and decertify Georgia’s election results. Fischman said that to rule differently would have been to flout the law. “It’s completely against judicial culture,” he said. “They just could not be taken seriously as judges if they sided with Trump here.” Bibas and Brasher serve on courts that Trump has flipped toward conservative majorities. While Bibas was not among the most disputatious of the appointees, according to the analysis, he dissented in a significant gun-rights case in which two Democratic appointees upheld New Jersey’s limit on large-capacity magazines. “We must treat the right to keep and bear arms like other enumerated rights,” he wrote. “We may not water it down and balance it away based on our own sense of wise policy.” Barrett — who until October served in Indiana on the 7th Circuit, where there is a particular culture of agreement — also followed the pattern, striking out against Democratic-named colleagues over 7% of the time and against Republican appointees 2.5% of the time, the analysis showed. In one such case, she disagreed that a man who had admitted to killing his wife was denied the right to a lawyer when a judge questioned him. (Her position later held sway when the case was considered by a full slate of 7th Circuit judges.) On the District of Columbia Circuit, Judge Neomi Rao, confirmed to the bench just last year, has already made waves. Of four cases with published opinions that she participated in alongside two Democratic appointees, she dissented three times, the analysis showed. In June, she wrote the majority opinion ordering a lower-court judge to dismiss the case against Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser. In a case decided in May, Judge Joel M. Carson III of the 10th Circuit dissented as his Democratic-appointed peers ruled against a challenge to the Trump administration’s ban on bump stocks, the attachments that allow semi-automatic rifles to fire in sustained bursts. That case is now under consideration by the full circuit. And this month, Judge Lawrence J.C. VanDyke broke from his colleagues on the 9th Circuit, objecting as they ruled against the Trump administration and called an immigration policy favoring wealthy immigrants for green cards “arbitrary and capricious.” VanDyke was among the handful of Trump nominees at the appellate level whose qualifications were questioned by the American Bar Association. Not all the judges fit the pattern: Many serve on courts with a majority of Republican appointees, and some belong to circuits with a stronger culture of consensus. But The Times found that Trump appointees were more likely to be involved in a case featuring dissent even when those factors were accounted for. The analysis examined how often and with whom the judges agreed but not the ideological content of their opinions. Though the cases sometimes touched on big policy debates — abortion, gun rights, policing — they more often concerned matters like employment disputes and criminal and immigration court appeals. The Trump administration’s work in swiftly filling vacant judgeships has depended heavily on Republicans in the Senate, particularly Mitch McConnell, the majority leader. He has encouraged eligible federal judges to retire to create more openings and has led a confirmation process in which Republicans shunned compromise and sought unbending conservatives and reliable political allies to populate the bench. As of this month, if pending nominations are taken into account, President-elect Joe Biden stands to inherit fewer than 25 openings across the federal judiciary, compared with the more than 100 that carried over to Trump from Barack Obama's administration. Democratic senators on the Judiciary Committee have appealed to Lindsey Graham, its Republican chairman through the end of the year, asking him not to proceed with any more nominations before Biden is sworn in. But even with a Democrat in the White House, the Republicans will be in a position to continue their push for conservative appointees, or at least block liberal ones, unless Democrats gain control of the Senate by winning both seats in next month’s special election in Georgia. “A lot of what we’ve done over the last four years will be undone sooner or later by the next election,” McConnell said in October as Barrett was confirmed. “They won’t be able to do much about this for a long time to come.”

As Trump leaves the White House, his imprint on the judiciary deepens

A group of US states is planning to take aim at Google with an antitrust lawsuit, saying the internet giant abused its power when ranking its own offerings in search results.

Politico reported Tuesday that a complaint led by attorneys general from Colorado and Nebraska could be filed as early as Thursday.

Amazon, TripAdvisor, Yelp and other internet firms that involve recommending products or services have complained that Google favours its own offerings in general search results.

The suit being prepared by states will argue that Google's search engine disadvantages rivals by design.

Google called the US lawsuit "deeply flawed."

Google's long-running business model based on free services and advertising is already being put to the test in a landmark antitrust lawsuit filed by the US Justice Department.

The US government filed a blockbuster lawsuit in October accusing Google of maintaining an "illegal monopoly" in online search and advertising. The country's biggest antitrust case in decades, it opens the door to a potential breakup of the Silicon Valley titan.

The politically charged case, which could take years to play out, draws new battle lines between the US government and Big Tech, with potentially major implications for the sector.

But the government is likely to face challenges proving monopoly allegations against the tech firm, which grew into one of the world's most successful companies by leveraging its powerful search engine for a network of services such as maps, email, shopping and travel that feed its data-driven digital advertising.

Legal experts point to the fact that it may be difficult to show Google's conduct was illegal under the longstanding "consumer welfare" standard in monopoly cases because its services are largely free.

The case -- joined by 11 states, all of which have Republican attorneys general -- comes against a backdrop of fierce political backlash against Big Tech giants that have extended their dominance in recent years.

The Justice Department argues that Google has cemented its monopoly position using deals with device makers to ensure its apps and services are prominently displayed, and sometimes can't be deleted.

(with inputs from agencies)

A group of US states is planning to take aim at Google with an antitrust lawsuit, saying the internet giant abused its power when ranking its own offerings in search results.

A group of US states is planning to take aim at Google with an antitrust lawsuit, saying the internet giant abused its power when ranking its own offerings in search results. Politico reported Tuesday that a complaint led by attorneys general from Colorado and Nebraska could be filed as early as Thursday. Amazon, TripAdvisor, Yelp and other internet firms that involve recommending products or services have complained that Google favours its own offerings in general search results. The suit being prepared by states will argue that Google's search engine disadvantages rivals by design. Google called the US lawsuit "deeply flawed." Google's long-running business model based on free services and advertising is already being put to the test in a landmark antitrust lawsuit filed by the US Justice Department. The US government filed a blockbuster lawsuit in October accusing Google of maintaining an "illegal monopoly" in online search and advertising. The country's biggest antitrust case in decades, it opens the door to a potential breakup of the Silicon Valley titan. The politically charged case, which could take years to play out, draws new battle lines between the US government and Big Tech, with potentially major implications for the sector. But the government is likely to face challenges proving monopoly allegations against the tech firm, which grew into one of the world's most successful companies by leveraging its powerful search engine for a network of services such as maps, email, shopping and travel that feed its data-driven digital advertising. Legal experts point to the fact that it may be difficult to show Google's conduct was illegal under the longstanding "consumer welfare" standard in monopoly cases because its services are largely free. The case -- joined by 11 states, all of which have Republican attorneys general -- comes against a backdrop of fierce political backlash against Big Tech giants that have extended their dominance in recent years. The Justice Department argues that Google has cemented its monopoly position using deals with device makers to ensure its apps and services are prominently displayed, and sometimes can't be deleted. (with inputs from agencies)

US expands Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine rollout; reassure its safety

It's official! Joe Biden will be sworn in as the 46th U.S. President. With 306 votes, the U.S. Electoral College has confirmed Biden's victory

Gravitas: Joe Biden's victory confirmed

The first COVID-19 test that can be performed entirely at home was cleared by U.S. regulators on Tuesday, and it can be acquired without a prescription.

FDA approves first non-prescription COVID-19 test kit

United States' President Elect Joe Biden has announced his former rival Pete Buttigieg as U.S. Secretary of Transportation. This made Buttigieg the first of Biden's democratic rivals to play a role in his cabinet for the presidency.

U.S. President elect Joe Biden chooses Pete Buttigieg as U.S. Secretary of Transportation

India's oil imports from Africa & U.S., they rose sharply last month. While, from middle-east and Latin America were down. India became third-largest oil importer and consumer last month.

World Business Watch: India's oil imports from Africa & U.S. rose sharply last month

The first trucks carrying the COVID-19 vaccine for widespread use in the US pulled out of a Pfitzer manufacturing plant in Michigan on Sunday

Nurse gets New York’s first Covid-19 vaccine as US rollout begins

The electoral college has confirmed Joe Biden's victory in state by state voting in the United States. This has now closed all doors on Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the result the 2020 US Presidential election.

US Election 2020: Joe Biden wins by getting 306 electoral college votes

US Election 2020: Electoral college formalises Joe Biden's victory

Canada became the third country in the world to begin the inoculation of its citizens with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine.

On Monday, Canada began injecting its frontline workers and the elderly in nursing homes.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/canada-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine-expects-inoculations-next-week-348743/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The first person to receive the vaccine was Anita Quidangen - whose inoculation was broadcast on live TV. Quidangen works at the Rekai Centre, a non-profit nursing home for the elderly in Canada’s largest city - Toronto, and claimed that she was “excited” to be the first person to get the vaccine in the country.

Soon after she was injected, healthcare workers donning masks and white coats applauded her.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spoke about it and called it a “great relief”. 
 
"It's a great relief. Clearly, it may only be the beginning of the end but we sense nevertheless that there will be an end to this pandemic," said Justin Trudeau.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/how-canada-switzerland-stuck-a-secret-deal-with-china-348918" hreflang="en">How Canada, Switzerland stuck a secret deal with China</a> 
 
He also added that he was in no hurry to get vaccinated himself, saying priority must be given to the most vulnerable people. 
 
"We obviously have to give priority to the most vulnerable but the second I have a chance - like all healthy adults - I will do so very visibly and with enthusiasm," he said in conversation with French-language broadcaster Radio-Canada. 
 
Currently, Canada is witnessing a second wave of COVID-19, whereby businesses are forced to shut again, and social gatherings extremely limited.

So far, the country has reported 460,743 cases of COVID-19. Most cases come from Quebec, the country’s most populous province.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/how-the-vaccine-rollout-will-compare-in-britain-canada-and-the-us-349368" hreflang="en">How the vaccine rollout will compare in Britain, Canada and the US</a> 
 
"It's really good news for Canada. It's really good news for Quebec," country’s Health Minister Patty Hajdu said from the Maimonides Geriatric Center in Montreal, where inoculation also began on Monday.

According to Quebec’s Health Minister Christian Dube, 50,000 people will be vaccinated in the province by January 4. 
 
13,431 people have lost their lives to the virus in Canada, 60 per cent of which have taken place in care homes for the elderly. But it’s an improvement from the grim 80 per cent during the first wave.

On Monday, the US also began vaccinating its citizens. Last week, the UK kicked off its national programme to inoculate against COVID-19. 
&nbsp;

Canada became the third country in the world to begin the inoculation of its citizens with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. On Monday, Canada began injecting its frontline workers and the elderly in nursing homes.

Canada became the third country in the world to begin the inoculation of its citizens with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. On Monday, Canada began injecting its frontline workers and the elderly in nursing homes. The first person to receive the vaccine was Anita Quidangen - whose inoculation was broadcast on live TV. Quidangen works at the Rekai Centre, a non-profit nursing home for the elderly in Canada’s largest city - Toronto, and claimed that she was “excited” to be the first person to get the vaccine in the country. Soon after she was injected, healthcare workers donning masks and white coats applauded her. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spoke about it and called it a “great relief”. "It's a great relief. Clearly, it may only be the beginning of the end but we sense nevertheless that there will be an end to this pandemic," said Justin Trudeau. Also read: How Canada, Switzerland stuck a secret deal with China He also added that he was in no hurry to get vaccinated himself, saying priority must be given to the most vulnerable people. "We obviously have to give priority to the most vulnerable but the second I have a chance - like all healthy adults - I will do so very visibly and with enthusiasm," he said in conversation with French-language broadcaster Radio-Canada. Currently, Canada is witnessing a second wave of COVID-19, whereby businesses are forced to shut again, and social gatherings extremely limited. So far, the country has reported 460,743 cases of COVID-19. Most cases come from Quebec, the country’s most populous province. Also read: How the vaccine rollout will compare in Britain, Canada and the US "It's really good news for Canada. It's really good news for Quebec," country’s Health Minister Patty Hajdu said from the Maimonides Geriatric Center in Montreal, where inoculation also began on Monday. According to Quebec’s Health Minister Christian Dube, 50,000 people will be vaccinated in the province by January 4. 13,431 people have lost their lives to the virus in Canada, 60 per cent of which have taken place in care homes for the elderly. But it’s an improvement from the grim 80 per cent during the first wave. On Monday, the US also began vaccinating its citizens. Last week, the UK kicked off its national programme to inoculate against COVID-19.

Canada joins US, UK to inoculate people with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine

United States has imposed sanctions on Turkey on Monday over its purchase of S-400 Russian missile defence system. The outgoing Trump administration implemented penalties against the NATO ally over its 2019 purchase.

U.S. imposes sanctions on Turkey over its purchase of Russian missile defence system

While drafting the constitution, America's founders struggled with how the new nation should choose its leader and ultimately created the electoral college system.

WION Fineprint: What happens when the U.S. electoral college meets?

As hospitals prepared to receive the vaccine, the U.S. on Saturday reported its 16 millionth coronavirus case, according to federal officials.

U.S to distribute 40 million vaccine doses by 2020 end

The same group also reportedly hacked US government agencies during the Obama administration.

Suspected Russian hackers spied on U.S. treasury & commerce dept

Morocco on Thursday became the fourth Arab state this year, after the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Sudan, to announce it had agreed to normalise relations with Israel.

WION Dispatch: US adopts map of Morocco that includes disputed Western Sahara

The death toll in the United States from the coronavirus pandemic is closing on the 300,00 mark, and the total number of COVID-19 cases is expected to hit a record 16 million in the coming days as millions of doses of a new vaccine are expected to start rolling out across America.

US: COVID-19 pandemic death toll approaching 300,000 mark

A mass vaccination program is underway in the United States to bring the numbers under control in the pandemic that has upended daily life in the United States.

United States: Mass inoculation underway as COVID-19 cases soar

us-1

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

us 1