Donald Trump, the President of the United States of America recently held his first post-coronavirus election rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma.&nbsp;The rally was touted as the reinvigoration of his presidential campaign.&nbsp;However, it was marred with a much lower turnout than expected.

<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-how-tiktok-sabotaged-trumps-rally-307823/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

According to Trump’s campaign management, one million requests had been made to attend the rally. However, people questioned the claim once they saw the turnout.

K-pop saves the day?

Turns out, courtesy of K-pop (South Korean pop music) fans and TikTok personalities had registered for his rally online, but with no intention of going at all.&nbsp;

Healthcare professionals were worried of a spike in coronavirus infection rates.&nbsp;Trump had decided to cancel an outdoor speech because he had expected a much bigger turnout.

Only 6,200 people had turned up for the rally, with the venue - BOK Center’s large section - with a capacity of 19,000 remaining unoccupied.

TikTok users and K-pop fans confessed to being the reason behind the inflated attendance at Trump's first political rally in months.

During the speech, Trump spent 104 minutes explaining how violent attempts were being made to takeover the White House.

He further told his supporters why he wants coronavirus testing to be slowed down, and claimed to know 19 different versions of the coronavirus.

"A wacko"

He also recently referred to ex-aide John Bolton as “incapable, a wacko, grossly incompetent, and a liar”.

An upcoming book by John Bolton alleges that Trump sought China's help to ensure his re-election as the US president. It’s called “The room where it happened: A White House memoir”.

Trump says this book contains classified information and threatens national security and tried blocking the book's release by seeking a temporary restraining order against its publication.

But the US judiciary has turned down his request, and the book is expected to release next week, in a series of events that could affect the chances of his re-election

Donald Trump, the President of the United States of America recently held his first post-coronavirus election rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The rally was touted as the reinvigoration of his presidential campaign.

Donald Trump, the President of the United States of America recently held his first post-coronavirus election rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The rally was touted as the reinvigoration of his presidential campaign. However, it was marred with a much lower turnout than expected. × According to Trump’s campaign management, one million requests had been made to attend the rally. However, people questioned the claim once they saw the turnout. K-pop saves the day? Turns out, courtesy of K-pop (South Korean pop music) fans and TikTok personalities had registered for his rally online, but with no intention of going at all. Healthcare professionals were worried of a spike in coronavirus infection rates. Trump had decided to cancel an outdoor speech because he had expected a much bigger turnout. Only 6,200 people had turned up for the rally, with the venue - BOK Center’s large section - with a capacity of 19,000 remaining unoccupied. TikTok users and K-pop fans confessed to being the reason behind the inflated attendance at Trump's first political rally in months. During the speech, Trump spent 104 minutes explaining how violent attempts were being made to takeover the White House. He further told his supporters why he wants coronavirus testing to be slowed down, and claimed to know 19 different versions of the coronavirus. "A wacko" He also recently referred to ex-aide John Bolton as “incapable, a wacko, grossly incompetent, and a liar”. An upcoming book by John Bolton alleges that Trump sought China's help to ensure his re-election as the US president. It’s called “The room where it happened: A White House memoir”. Trump says this book contains classified information and threatens national security and tried blocking the book's release by seeking a temporary restraining order against its publication. But the US judiciary has turned down his request, and the book is expected to release next week, in a series of events that could affect the chances of his re-election

One million requests? Trump's Tulsa rally was sabotaged by K-pop fans and TikTok users

Social media companies are increasingly regulating political speech in the United States and their biggest and common target is President Donald Trump.

On Thursday, Trump tweeted a video, showing two toddlers, one black and one white, running around. Through the video, he wanted to show how the American media allegedly twists the facts on racism.&nbsp;

But this video was doctored and it carried a fake headline wrongly attributed to CNN. Twitter has flagged this tweet by President Donald Trump, with a warning that it contained ''manipulated media'' designed to mislead people. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/twitter-labels-trump-tweet-about-racist-baby-as-manipulated-307017">Also Read: Twitter labels Trump tweet about 'racist baby' as 'manipulated'</a>

Another social media giant Facebook has removed a number of posts and ads run by Donald Trump’s re-election campaign that featured a symbol used by the Nazis for violating its “policy against organised hate”.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-are-facebook-twitter-uniting-against-trump-307193/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

"We removed these posts and ads for violating our policy against organized hate. Our policy prohibits using a banned hate group's symbol to identify political prisoners without the context that condemns or discusses the symbol," Andy Stone, a Facebook spokesperson said. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/technology/facebook-takes-down-trump-ads-for-violating-its-policy-against-organised-hate-306951">Also Read:&nbsp;Facebook takes down Trump ads for violating its policy against 'organised hate'</a>

These events mark another flashpoint in the increasingly contentious debate on political disinformation.

Facebook and Twitter have massive reach and they've become engines of the narrative. Both social media companies have the potential to influence political outcomes. Censorship is a double-edged sword, and Twitter and Facebook must call out both sides for harmful content. 
 
&nbsp;

Social media companies are increasingly regulating political speech in the United States and their biggest and common target is President Donald Trump. On Thursday, Trump tweeted a video, showing two toddlers, one black and one white, running around.

Social media companies are increasingly regulating political speech in the United States and their biggest and common target is President Donald Trump. On Thursday, Trump tweeted a video, showing two toddlers, one black and one white, running around. Through the video, he wanted to show how the American media allegedly twists the facts on racism. But this video was doctored and it carried a fake headline wrongly attributed to CNN. Twitter has flagged this tweet by President Donald Trump, with a warning that it contained ''manipulated media'' designed to mislead people. Also Read: Twitter labels Trump tweet about 'racist baby' as 'manipulated' Another social media giant Facebook has removed a number of posts and ads run by Donald Trump’s re-election campaign that featured a symbol used by the Nazis for violating its “policy against organised hate”. "We removed these posts and ads for violating our policy against organized hate. Our policy prohibits using a banned hate group's symbol to identify political prisoners without the context that condemns or discusses the symbol," Andy Stone, a Facebook spokesperson said. Also Read: Facebook takes down Trump ads for violating its policy against 'organised hate' These events mark another flashpoint in the increasingly contentious debate on political disinformation. Facebook and Twitter have massive reach and they've become engines of the narrative. Both social media companies have the potential to influence political outcomes. Censorship is a double-edged sword, and Twitter and Facebook must call out both sides for harmful content.

Social media companies must ensure unbiased policing

Tying a political opponent to a geopolitical enemy, it's the oldest trick in the book. A trick which sounds something like this - Biden and Beijing, Beijing and Biden -&nbsp;both are bad.

Both want each other badly, let us beautifully bash them and be the bosses again - this is Donald Trump's strategy to stay on in the White House.

A strategy aimed at turning a weakness into a strength. Donald Trump has failed in fighting the pandemic. For him, there's more to gain in attacking China and Joe Biden right now, than promoting his own leadership.

Offense, they say, is the best form of defence. America is facing its worst economic downturn since the great depression. Wuhan virus cases in the US are way past the 1 million mark and 63,000 lives have been lost.

For Donald Trump attack is the only defence left So he's attacking China which gave America a virus that has disrupted its roaring economy and he's attacking Joe Biden who is being a "sleepy joe" and apparently has a long record of appeasing China. Here is a point of view about these two adversaries of the US president.

Adversary No-1 - China. We have established repeatedly, that China is no saint. It has much to answer for. China is apparently trying to woo American states. It is planning to extend a helping hand to states and pit them against the Trump administration.

The Global Times - China's foremost peddler of propaganda carried a report on March 19, it was penned by their Editor-in-Chief Hu-Xijin. A man who is said to be in "good standing" of the Chinese Communist party. Anything he writes can very well be considered China's official policy.

His report titled "Co-operate with US states on virus fight, not the Federal government". It lays out a framework for China on how to counter the US government. It's a two-pronged strategy.

Prioritize the most vulnerable states in America, there are many and prioritize the Blue states, the states run by the Democrats, there are at least 15 of them currently.

Prioritize them by doing what? By giving a cold shoulder to the federal government by making governors and mayors work with Beijing and not Washington by giving purchase orders to these states before the Federal government and by selective export of non-defective equipment to these states.

In simpler words by creating more adversaries for Trump within his own country. He has many already, and well deserved ones. Joe Biden is an adversary who could replace Donald Trump or so he would like. He's now the real frontrunner in the race to the White House. Joe Biden's ratings have shot up. In a head-to-head matchup,&nbsp;Joe Biden beats Trump by 49 per cent to 41 per cent.&nbsp;

Independents favour Biden over Trump 44 per cent to 35 per cent. He tops Trump by a similar margin on healthcare - 53 per cent to 40 per cent.

But Mr Biden isn't celebrating. He's firefighting against a sexual assault allegation. That quintessential feature of American elections. These allegations date back to the 1990s.

They have been leveled by a woman called Tara Reade, a former staffer in Biden's Senate office for nine months. Reade was one of the seven women who came forward in 2019 to say that Biden had made them feel inappropriate.

That he tried to forcefully touch and kiss her. Joe Biden issued a statement this evening. He says the allegations are untrue. He says that "this never happened" 
and he is scheduled to appear on television on Saturday to discuss the allegations.

Donald Trump is in luck his adversaries are scoring self goals. A political rival caught in old controversies and a geo-political foe suffering a major trust deficit.

Tying a political opponent to a geopolitical enemy, it's the oldest trick in the book. A trick which sounds something like this - Biden and Beijing, Beijing and Biden - both are bad.

Tying a political opponent to a geopolitical enemy, it's the oldest trick in the book. A trick which sounds something like this - Biden and Beijing, Beijing and Biden - both are bad. Both want each other badly, let us beautifully bash them and be the bosses again - this is Donald Trump's strategy to stay on in the White House. A strategy aimed at turning a weakness into a strength. Donald Trump has failed in fighting the pandemic. For him, there's more to gain in attacking China and Joe Biden right now, than promoting his own leadership. Offense, they say, is the best form of defence. America is facing its worst economic downturn since the great depression. Wuhan virus cases in the US are way past the 1 million mark and 63,000 lives have been lost. For Donald Trump attack is the only defence left So he's attacking China which gave America a virus that has disrupted its roaring economy and he's attacking Joe Biden who is being a "sleepy joe" and apparently has a long record of appeasing China. Here is a point of view about these two adversaries of the US president. Adversary No-1 - China. We have established repeatedly, that China is no saint. It has much to answer for. China is apparently trying to woo American states. It is planning to extend a helping hand to states and pit them against the Trump administration. The Global Times - China's foremost peddler of propaganda carried a report on March 19, it was penned by their Editor-in-Chief Hu-Xijin. A man who is said to be in "good standing" of the Chinese Communist party. Anything he writes can very well be considered China's official policy. His report titled "Co-operate with US states on virus fight, not the Federal government". It lays out a framework for China on how to counter the US government. It's a two-pronged strategy. Prioritize the most vulnerable states in America, there are many and prioritize the Blue states, the states run by the Democrats, there are at least 15 of them currently. Prioritize them by doing what? By giving a cold shoulder to the federal government by making governors and mayors work with Beijing and not Washington by giving purchase orders to these states before the Federal government and by selective export of non-defective equipment to these states. In simpler words by creating more adversaries for Trump within his own country. He has many already, and well deserved ones. Joe Biden is an adversary who could replace Donald Trump or so he would like. He's now the real frontrunner in the race to the White House. Joe Biden's ratings have shot up. In a head-to-head matchup, Joe Biden beats Trump by 49 per cent to 41 per cent. Independents favour Biden over Trump 44 per cent to 35 per cent. He tops Trump by a similar margin on healthcare - 53 per cent to 40 per cent. But Mr Biden isn't celebrating. He's firefighting against a sexual assault allegation. That quintessential feature of American elections. These allegations date back to the 1990s. They have been leveled by a woman called Tara Reade, a former staffer in Biden's Senate office for nine months. Reade was one of the seven women who came forward in 2019 to say that Biden had made them feel inappropriate. That he tried to forcefully touch and kiss her. Joe Biden issued a statement this evening. He says the allegations are untrue. He says that "this never happened" and he is scheduled to appear on television on Saturday to discuss the allegations. Donald Trump is in luck his adversaries are scoring self goals. A political rival caught in old controversies and a geo-political foe suffering a major trust deficit.

Target Beijing & Biden - Trump strategy to stay in White House

The American leaders seem to be concerned about the Presidential elections, more than getting the country out of coronavirus crisis.

The narrative around making China pay is being used in the battle for the US Presidency.

Campaign videos are being rolled out by both Democrats and Republicans. Duelling ads are using the statements of Donald Trump and Joe Biden against each other.

There's a debate on who called out China first, and who's calling out China the loudest.

The United States is still the worst-affected country. More than 759,000 cases and over 40,000 deaths have been reported in the US so far, but there's no end to petty politics.

Furthermore, the American media says that the US President is giving a communal spin to the virus. The accusation is that he pitting mosques against churches.

A few days back, Donald Trump retweeted&nbsp;writer Paul Sperry,&nbsp;who questioned the Democrats over their alleged bias. "Let's see if authorities enforce social-distancing orders for mosques during Ramadan, like they did for churches during easter."&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Let's see if authorities enforce the social-distancing orders for mosques during Ramadan (April 23-May 23) like they did churches during Easter
— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) <a href="https://twitter.com/paulsperry_/status/1250259845380542464?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 15, 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>

Now, when Trump was questioned about this, he said, "They love mosques, and I'm all in favour of that. but, i would say there could be a difference. and we'll have to see what will happen. because I've seen a great disparity in this country".

The White House must substantiate Trump's claims. Hypothetical situations and statements can do a lot in stoking unrest and derailing the coronavirus fight.

&nbsp;

The American leaders seem to be concerned about the Presidential elections, more than getting the country out of coronavirus crisis. The narrative around making China pay is being used in the battle for the US Presidency.

The American leaders seem to be concerned about the Presidential elections, more than getting the country out of coronavirus crisis. The narrative around making China pay is being used in the battle for the US Presidency. Campaign videos are being rolled out by both Democrats and Republicans. Duelling ads are using the statements of Donald Trump and Joe Biden against each other. There's a debate on who called out China first, and who's calling out China the loudest. The United States is still the worst-affected country. More than 759,000 cases and over 40,000 deaths have been reported in the US so far, but there's no end to petty politics. Furthermore, the American media says that the US President is giving a communal spin to the virus. The accusation is that he pitting mosques against churches. A few days back, Donald Trump retweeted writer Paul Sperry, who questioned the Democrats over their alleged bias. "Let's see if authorities enforce social-distancing orders for mosques during Ramadan, like they did for churches during easter." Let's see if authorities enforce the social-distancing orders for mosques during Ramadan (April 23-May 23) like they did churches during Easter — Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) April 15, 2020 × Now, when Trump was questioned about this, he said, "They love mosques, and I'm all in favour of that. but, i would say there could be a difference. and we'll have to see what will happen. because I've seen a great disparity in this country". The White House must substantiate Trump's claims. Hypothetical situations and statements can do a lot in stoking unrest and derailing the coronavirus fight.

The race to the White House is now 'China-centric'

Democratic candidate Michael Bloomberg dropped out of the US primaries ending his run for the 2020 US presidential race to challenge Donald Trump.

The high profile billionaire on his way out endorsed&nbsp;party frontrunner Joe Biden for the White House.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/joe-biden-seizes-momentum-in-us-presidential-race-with-strong-super-tuesday-284205">Also Read:&nbsp;Biden seizes momentum in US presidential race with strong Super Tuesday</a>

"Three months ago, I entered the race to defeat Donald Trump. Today, I'm leaving for the same reason," Bloomberg said in a statement, adding,"defeating Trump starts with uniting behind the candidate with the best shot to do it. It's clear that is my friend and a great American,&nbsp;Joe Biden."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Three months ago, I entered the race to defeat Donald Trump. Today, I'm leaving for the same reason. Defeating Trump starts with uniting behind the candidate with the best shot to do it. It's clear that is my friend and a great American, <a href="https://twitter.com/JoeBiden?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@JoeBiden</a>. <a href="https://t.co/cNJDIQHS75">pic.twitter.com/cNJDIQHS75</a>
— Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) <a href="https://twitter.com/MikeBloomberg/status/1235224092439187460?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 4, 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>

"I'm immensely proud of the campaign we ran. I'm deeply grateful to all the Americans who voted for me, and to our dedicated staff and volunteers," he said.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
I'm immensely proud of the campaign we ran. I'm deeply grateful to all the Americans who voted for me, and to our dedicated staff and volunteers. I want you to stay engaged, active, and committed to our issues. I will be right there with you. And together, we will get it done.
— Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) <a href="https://twitter.com/MikeBloomberg/status/1235224303060254720?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 4, 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>

"I want you to stay engaged, active, and committed to our issues. I will be right there with you. And together, we will get it done," the US tycoon said.

Democratic candidate Michael Bloomberg dropped out of the US primaries ending his run for the 2020 US presidential race to challenge Donald Trump. The high profile billionaire on his way out endorsed party frontrunner Joe Biden for the White House.

Democratic candidate Michael Bloomberg dropped out of the US primaries ending his run for the 2020 US presidential race to challenge Donald Trump. The high profile billionaire on his way out endorsed party frontrunner Joe Biden for the White House. Also Read: Biden seizes momentum in US presidential race with strong Super Tuesday "Three months ago, I entered the race to defeat Donald Trump. Today, I'm leaving for the same reason," Bloomberg said in a statement, adding,"defeating Trump starts with uniting behind the candidate with the best shot to do it. It's clear that is my friend and a great American, Joe Biden." Three months ago, I entered the race to defeat Donald Trump. Today, I'm leaving for the same reason. Defeating Trump starts with uniting behind the candidate with the best shot to do it. It's clear that is my friend and a great American, @JoeBiden. pic.twitter.com/cNJDIQHS75 — Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) March 4, 2020 × "I'm immensely proud of the campaign we ran. I'm deeply grateful to all the Americans who voted for me, and to our dedicated staff and volunteers," he said. I'm immensely proud of the campaign we ran. I'm deeply grateful to all the Americans who voted for me, and to our dedicated staff and volunteers. I want you to stay engaged, active, and committed to our issues. I will be right there with you. And together, we will get it done. — Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) March 4, 2020 × "I want you to stay engaged, active, and committed to our issues. I will be right there with you. And together, we will get it done," the US tycoon said.

Michael Bloomberg drops out of US presidential race, endorses Joe Biden

Amy Klobuchar has abandoned her campaign to become the Democratic presidential nominee.&nbsp;She along with Pete Buttigieg will now be endorsing former vice-president and once rival Joe Biden.

<div>Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/biden-revives-white-house-hopes-with-south-carolina-victory-283523">Biden revives White House hopes with South Carolina victory</a></div>

<div>&nbsp;</div>

<div>Klobuchar survived the crowded democratic field, going all the way to the primaries.</div>

However, her performance had been on the decline after witnessing a surge in the New Hampshire primary.

<div>Also see: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/pete-buttigieg-drops-out-of-democratic-presidential-race-283617">Pete Buttigieg drops out of Democratic Presidential race</a></div>

<div>&nbsp;</div>

<div>In fact, she was relegated to a distant sixth spot in the recent South Carolina primary.</div>

Klobuchar rose to national prominence after her tough questioning of Trump's supreme court pick Brett Kavanaugh during a 2018 Senate judiciary hearing.

With Klobuchar's withdrawal, the Democrats have been left with five candidates ahead of the Super Tuesday.

Amy Klobuchar has abandoned her campaign to become the Democratic presidential nominee. She along with Pete Buttigieg will now be endorsing former vice-president and once rival Joe Biden.

Amy Klobuchar has abandoned her campaign to become the Democratic presidential nominee. She along with Pete Buttigieg will now be endorsing former vice-president and once rival Joe Biden. Also read: Biden revives White House hopes with South Carolina victory Klobuchar survived the crowded democratic field, going all the way to the primaries. However, her performance had been on the decline after witnessing a surge in the New Hampshire primary. Also see: Pete Buttigieg drops out of Democratic Presidential race In fact, she was relegated to a distant sixth spot in the recent South Carolina primary. Klobuchar rose to national prominence after her tough questioning of Trump's supreme court pick Brett Kavanaugh during a 2018 Senate judiciary hearing. With Klobuchar's withdrawal, the Democrats have been left with five candidates ahead of the Super Tuesday.

Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar ends 2020 presidential bid

US President Donald Trump's re-election campaign said on Wednesday that it had filed a libel suit against New York Times, accusing it of intentionally publishing false and defamatory opinion piece which claimed Trump's "overarching deal" with Russia in the 2016 elections.

Responding to the questions on the suit during White House press conference, Trump said that the news organisation "got a lot wrong over the last number of years".&nbsp;

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-asks-new-york-times-to-disclose-sources-that-us-is-ramping-up-cyber-attacks-on-russia-228519">Donald Trump asks New York Times to disclose sources that US is ramping up cyber attacks on Russia</a>

"If you read it, you'll see it's beyond an opinion. That's not an opinion. That's something much more than an opinion. They did a bad thing. And there'll be more coming."

The lawsuit is on the opinion published in the New York Times on March 27, 2017 by Max Frankel, with a headline: "The Real Trump-Russia Quid Pro Quo”. A subhead from the opinion piece said: "The campaign and the Kremlin had an overarching deal: help beat Hillary Clinton for a new pro-Russian foreign policy."&nbsp;

The opinion added: “Collusion – or a lack of it – turns out to have been the rhetorical trap that ensnared President Trump’s pursuers.”

“There was no need for detailed electoral collusion between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin’s oligarchy because they had an overarching deal: the quid of help in the campaign against Hillary Clinton for the quo of a new pro-Russian foreign policy, starting with relief from the Obama administration’s burdensome economic sanctions. The Trumpites knew about the quid and held out the prospect of the quo.”

The New York Times knowingly "published false and defamatory statements" against Trump, the draft copy of the suit said. &nbsp;

"The Times' own previous reporting had confirmed the falsity of these statements. But The Times published these statements anyway, knowing them to be false, and knowing it would misinform and mislead its own readers," it said, blaming the media organisation's "extreme bias against and animosity toward the campaign", and "exuberance to improperly influence the presidential election in November 2020".&nbsp;

Replying to the suit, a New York Times spokesperson said: "The Trump campaign has turned to the courts to try to punish an opinion writer for having an opinion they find unacceptable. Fortunately, the law protects the right of Americans to express their judgements and conclusions, especially about events of public importance. We look forward to vindicating that right in this case."

US President Donald Trump's re-election campaign said on Wednesday that it had filed a libel suit against New York Times, accusing it of intentionally publishing false and defamatory opinion piece which claimed Trump's "overarching deal" with Russia in the 2016 elections.

US President Donald Trump's re-election campaign said on Wednesday that it had filed a libel suit against New York Times, accusing it of intentionally publishing false and defamatory opinion piece which claimed Trump's "overarching deal" with Russia in the 2016 elections. Responding to the questions on the suit during White House press conference, Trump said that the news organisation "got a lot wrong over the last number of years". Also read: Donald Trump asks New York Times to disclose sources that US is ramping up cyber attacks on Russia "If you read it, you'll see it's beyond an opinion. That's not an opinion. That's something much more than an opinion. They did a bad thing. And there'll be more coming." The lawsuit is on the opinion published in the New York Times on March 27, 2017 by Max Frankel, with a headline: "The Real Trump-Russia Quid Pro Quo”. A subhead from the opinion piece said: "The campaign and the Kremlin had an overarching deal: help beat Hillary Clinton for a new pro-Russian foreign policy." The opinion added: “Collusion – or a lack of it – turns out to have been the rhetorical trap that ensnared President Trump’s pursuers.” “There was no need for detailed electoral collusion between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin’s oligarchy because they had an overarching deal: the quid of help in the campaign against Hillary Clinton for the quo of a new pro-Russian foreign policy, starting with relief from the Obama administration’s burdensome economic sanctions. The Trumpites knew about the quid and held out the prospect of the quo.” The New York Times knowingly "published false and defamatory statements" against Trump, the draft copy of the suit said. "The Times' own previous reporting had confirmed the falsity of these statements. But The Times published these statements anyway, knowing them to be false, and knowing it would misinform and mislead its own readers," it said, blaming the media organisation's "extreme bias against and animosity toward the campaign", and "exuberance to improperly influence the presidential election in November 2020". Replying to the suit, a New York Times spokesperson said: "The Trump campaign has turned to the courts to try to punish an opinion writer for having an opinion they find unacceptable. Fortunately, the law protects the right of Americans to express their judgements and conclusions, especially about events of public importance. We look forward to vindicating that right in this case."

Trump campaign sues New York Times over Russia opinion piece

Today, we lament the loss of the media's credibility, but the fact is that it has often been questioned in the past too.

The line between News and propaganda is a fine one. When states target News outfits in a proxy battle, then it's time to revisit the rules.

Let's discuss how the media can tread this fine line in the age of nationalistic politics and trigger happy diplomacy? How can the media safeguard its Independence?

Is the media really independent or is it a handmaiden of political powers? Is it only corporate or government ownership that compromises the media? or do obvious political biases play a role?

There's a lot of ground to cover, as always we start with some figures - just 9 per cent of the world's population live in countries where journalists can operate freely and independently.

This is according to a report by reporters without borders, in the rest of the world, strongmen are rising and press freedoms are eroding.

Media outlets face an existential crisis - both in monetary and moral terms. It's a tough balancing act, if you don't question the powers that be, you're not doing your job.

But if you criticise them, you lose access or in extreme cases your licence to operate.&nbsp;

Two years ago, Thailand's Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha found a new way to dodge tricky questions from the press - he installed a cardboard cutout at a press conference.

Three years back, Czech president Milos Zeman waved a mock rifle at journalists - again at a press conference. Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has a reputation of threatening and abusing journalists.

And who can forget this fiery exchange between US President Donald Trump and a CNN correspondent. The American government revoked his press credentials for quizzing Trump.

Jim Acosta won back access to the white house in court. It's a sign of the times - in the age of nationalism, leaders are more confrontational, they see the press as a party to political battles.

And they take on the press as they would take on the Opposition - political leanings, and not objectivity, dictate media coverage. And media outlets face the consequences of such compromises.

Attacking state-owned media is now a legitimate tool of diplomatic retaliation - America leads the world here. It first declared Russian state media as foreign agents, now it is targetting Chinese organisations. &nbsp;

The Trump administration says it is cracking down on propaganda machinery of rival states - there is some merit to that argument.

Around the world, the press has now begun to wear their political leanings on their sleeves. News stories turn into hit jobs or politically motivated campaigns.

It's becoming harder to distinguish news from comment, fact from fiction and reports from opinion. Governments are arming themselves with state media machinery to counter negative reportage and set the narrative.

In the age of social media, leaders have found ways to bypass the gatekeepers of mass media and communicate directly with the people.&nbsp;

Any story, opinion or thought that doesn't fit the official narrative is challenged - the result is stronger scrutiny of journalists and more barriers in their path.

These are challenging times for the global press and branding journalists as state agents is another low. 
 
&nbsp;

Today, we lament the loss of the media's credibility, but the fact is that it has often been questioned in the past too. The line between News and propaganda is a fine one.

Today, we lament the loss of the media's credibility, but the fact is that it has often been questioned in the past too. The line between News and propaganda is a fine one. When states target News outfits in a proxy battle, then it's time to revisit the rules. Let's discuss how the media can tread this fine line in the age of nationalistic politics and trigger happy diplomacy? How can the media safeguard its Independence? Is the media really independent or is it a handmaiden of political powers? Is it only corporate or government ownership that compromises the media? or do obvious political biases play a role? There's a lot of ground to cover, as always we start with some figures - just 9 per cent of the world's population live in countries where journalists can operate freely and independently. This is according to a report by reporters without borders, in the rest of the world, strongmen are rising and press freedoms are eroding. Media outlets face an existential crisis - both in monetary and moral terms. It's a tough balancing act, if you don't question the powers that be, you're not doing your job. But if you criticise them, you lose access or in extreme cases your licence to operate. Two years ago, Thailand's Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha found a new way to dodge tricky questions from the press - he installed a cardboard cutout at a press conference. Three years back, Czech president Milos Zeman waved a mock rifle at journalists - again at a press conference. Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has a reputation of threatening and abusing journalists. And who can forget this fiery exchange between US President Donald Trump and a CNN correspondent. The American government revoked his press credentials for quizzing Trump. Jim Acosta won back access to the white house in court. It's a sign of the times - in the age of nationalism, leaders are more confrontational, they see the press as a party to political battles. And they take on the press as they would take on the Opposition - political leanings, and not objectivity, dictate media coverage. And media outlets face the consequences of such compromises. Attacking state-owned media is now a legitimate tool of diplomatic retaliation - America leads the world here. It first declared Russian state media as foreign agents, now it is targetting Chinese organisations. The Trump administration says it is cracking down on propaganda machinery of rival states - there is some merit to that argument. Around the world, the press has now begun to wear their political leanings on their sleeves. News stories turn into hit jobs or politically motivated campaigns. It's becoming harder to distinguish news from comment, fact from fiction and reports from opinion. Governments are arming themselves with state media machinery to counter negative reportage and set the narrative. In the age of social media, leaders have found ways to bypass the gatekeepers of mass media and communicate directly with the people. Any story, opinion or thought that doesn't fit the official narrative is challenged - the result is stronger scrutiny of journalists and more barriers in their path. These are challenging times for the global press and branding journalists as state agents is another low.

WION Edit: Attacking the media, a tool for diplomatic retaliation?

US President Donald Trump got into a Twitter war with Democratic candidate Michael Bloomberg calling him "mini Mike" with "a 5’4” mass of dead energy who does not want to be on the debate stage with these professional politicians."

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-senate-curbs-trumps-ability-to-wage-war-with-iran-280607">Also Read:&nbsp;US Senate curbs Trump's ability to wage war with Iran</a>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Mini Mike is a 5’4” mass of dead energy who does not want to be on the debate stage with these professional politicians. No boxes please. He hates Crazy Bernie and will, with enough money, possibly stop him. Bernie’s people will go nuts!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1227946304057364481?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 13, 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>

"No boxes please. He hates crazy Bernie and will, with enough money, possibly stop him. Bernie’s people will go nuts!"

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Mini Mike Bloomberg is a LOSER who has money but can’t debate and has zero presence, you will see. He reminds me of a tiny version of Jeb “Low Energy” Bush, but Jeb has more political skill and has treated the Black community much better than Mini! <a href="https://t.co/qIef5VhjDr">https://t.co/qIef5VhjDr</a>
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1227943796681400320?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 13, 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>

The US president went a step further saying: "Mini Mike Bloomberg is a LOSER who has money but can’t debate and has zero presence, you will see. He reminds me of a tiny version of Jeb “Low Energy” Bush, but Jeb has more political skill and has treated the Black community much better than Mini!"

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Mini Mike Bloomberg is a LOSER who has money but can’t debate and has zero presence, you will see. He reminds me of a tiny version of Jeb “Low Energy” Bush, but Jeb has more political skill and has treated the Black community much better than Mini! <a href="https://t.co/qIef5VhjDr">https://t.co/qIef5VhjDr</a>
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1227943796681400320?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 13, 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>

Bloomberg was quick to retort on Twitter&nbsp;saying "we know many of the same people in New York. Behind your back they laugh at you &amp; call you a carnival barking clown."

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/another-wall-goes-up-for-trump-this-time-in-india-280580">Also Read:&nbsp;Another wall goes up for Trump, this time in India</a>

"They know you inherited a fortune &amp; squandered it with stupid deals and incompetence," the Democratic candidate said on Twitter, asserting, "I have the record &amp; the resources to defeat you. And I will."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
.<a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDonaldTrump</a> - we know many of the same people in NY. Behind your back they laugh at you &amp; call you a carnival barking clown. They know you inherited a fortune &amp; squandered it with stupid deals and incompetence. 
 
I have the record &amp; the resources to defeat you. And I will. <a href="https://t.co/fO4azmZaUg">https://t.co/fO4azmZaUg</a>
— Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) <a href="https://twitter.com/MikeBloomberg/status/1227951551068721154?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 13, 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>

Several hours later after US attorney general William Barr blasted Trump's tweet saying "I think it's time to stop the tweeting about Department of Justice criminal cases," Bloomberg waded into controversy saying on Twitter: "If it's any consolation, Trump's tweets make it impossible for him to do his job, too."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
If it's any consolation, Trump's tweets make it impossible for him to do his job, too. <a href="https://t.co/0bgL7BT6Pg">https://t.co/0bgL7BT6Pg</a>
— Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) <a href="https://twitter.com/MikeBloomberg/status/1228079580617019393?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 13, 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>

Bloomberg's latest shot at Trump comes as Democrats are fighting in the primaries to win the battle of delegates in the runup to the US polls in November. Bloomberg entered the race quite late and has been campaigning on social media with reports indicating he may&nbsp;go head-to-head with candidates next month.

US President Donald Trump got into a Twitter war with Democratic candidate Michael Bloomberg calling him "mini Mike" with "a 5’4” mass of dead energy who does not want to be on the debate stage with these professional politicians.

US President Donald Trump got into a Twitter war with Democratic candidate Michael Bloomberg calling him "mini Mike" with "a 5’4” mass of dead energy who does not want to be on the debate stage with these professional politicians." Also Read: US Senate curbs Trump's ability to wage war with Iran Mini Mike is a 5’4” mass of dead energy who does not want to be on the debate stage with these professional politicians. No boxes please. He hates Crazy Bernie and will, with enough money, possibly stop him. Bernie’s people will go nuts! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 13, 2020 × "No boxes please. He hates crazy Bernie and will, with enough money, possibly stop him. Bernie’s people will go nuts!" Mini Mike Bloomberg is a LOSER who has money but can’t debate and has zero presence, you will see. He reminds me of a tiny version of Jeb “Low Energy” Bush, but Jeb has more political skill and has treated the Black community much better than Mini! https://t.co/qIef5VhjDr — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 13, 2020 × The US president went a step further saying: "Mini Mike Bloomberg is a LOSER who has money but can’t debate and has zero presence, you will see. He reminds me of a tiny version of Jeb “Low Energy” Bush, but Jeb has more political skill and has treated the Black community much better than Mini!" Mini Mike Bloomberg is a LOSER who has money but can’t debate and has zero presence, you will see. He reminds me of a tiny version of Jeb “Low Energy” Bush, but Jeb has more political skill and has treated the Black community much better than Mini! https://t.co/qIef5VhjDr — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 13, 2020 × Bloomberg was quick to retort on Twitter saying "we know many of the same people in New York. Behind your back they laugh at you & call you a carnival barking clown." Also Read: Another wall goes up for Trump, this time in India "They know you inherited a fortune & squandered it with stupid deals and incompetence," the Democratic candidate said on Twitter, asserting, "I have the record & the resources to defeat you. And I will." .@realDonaldTrump - we know many of the same people in NY. Behind your back they laugh at you & call you a carnival barking clown. They know you inherited a fortune & squandered it with stupid deals and incompetence. I have the record & the resources to defeat you. And I will. https://t.co/fO4azmZaUg — Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) February 13, 2020 × Several hours later after US attorney general William Barr blasted Trump's tweet saying "I think it's time to stop the tweeting about Department of Justice criminal cases," Bloomberg waded into controversy saying on Twitter: "If it's any consolation, Trump's tweets make it impossible for him to do his job, too." If it's any consolation, Trump's tweets make it impossible for him to do his job, too. https://t.co/0bgL7BT6Pg — Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) February 13, 2020 × Bloomberg's latest shot at Trump comes as Democrats are fighting in the primaries to win the battle of delegates in the runup to the US polls in November. Bloomberg entered the race quite late and has been campaigning on social media with reports indicating he may go head-to-head with candidates next month.

Trump, Bloomberg clash on Twitter over 'loser' row

The results of the Iowa caucuses, the first voting contest of the US 2020 presidential election season, have been delayed "due to Inconsistencies"

Results from Iowa caucuses delayed due to Inconsistencies

With Iowa caucus, people from the United States and across the world will get a sense of who are losing their chances to be a possible final contender to challenge US President Donald Trump for the Presidency. There will be important wins, and also, heartbreaks from what this time is known as a very 'crowded' race of Democratic challengers. On February 3, Iowa caucus will be held and even though, the state might not be a good predictor of the overall trends because of being less diverse, candidates will certainly gain and lose momentum for the primaries and caucuses ahead. For Democrats, Iowa is definitely significant as its last four nominees have all won caucuses from this part. At this juncture, let's look at which democratic candidate is leading the race of nomination and the ones who can catch up.

1. Joe Biden

Joe Biden, who was the Vice President during the Obama administration, started the Democratic Presidential race as the frontrunner. He still leads in most of the polls. In the last democratic debate, Biden also avoided sharp attacks from his Democratic rivals and was able to successfully elaborate his plans on foreign policy and health care, which worked in his favour. Biden is still voters’ first choice among other Democratic contenders, with support ranging from 20 to 35 per cent as per various polls. He is also popular among black voters, who remain crucial supporters of Democrats.

2. &nbsp;Bernie Sanders

Despite being the oldest candidate, Bernie Sanders' persuasive and energetic campaign has shed away the health-related concerns in the minds of voters, at least for now. Sanders and the other liberal candidate's, Elizabeth Warren, spar was the talking point during the January debate wherein Sanders flatly denied that he told Warren that a woman could not beat Trump in 2016 elections. This controversy didn't manage to cause any harm to Sanders and he took on Biden for supporting the war in Iraq in 2002-03. Sanders also reiterated his 'Medicare-for-all' policy. He became the first-choice Democratic candidate for the US elections after the debate as he garnered 20 per cent support as compared to Biden's 19 per cent, as per Ipsos poll released on January 16. According to most polls, Sanders has improved his position from last few months and is now in No 2 spot in the Democratic race after Biden. The gap between Biden and Sanders is also narrowing.

3. Elizabeth Warren

Elizabeth Warren was undoubtedly the best performer in the January debate. In the debate, Warren was once again articulate in her arguments and convincing on the healthcare policy. Warren also reiterated that Sanders doubted women’s electability in the 2016 polls and pointed out that women on the stage (she and Amy Klobuchar) never lost any election. Despite her consistent performance, Warren is still behind her leftist rival Sanders in terms of public support. The good thing with Warren is that she has plans for most of the things, ranging from anti-corruption law, foreign policy to child-care and education.

Warren is currently Americans third choice and her popularity has taken a hit since October, when she came very close to Biden, as per surveys by IPSOS, ABC News and Fox News show. However, a poll by YouGov suggests Warren is ahead of Sanders by a whisker and the trends also predict a close fight between Democrats liberal flag-bearers.

4. Michael Bloomberg

The latest and one of the oldest entrants in the Democratic race is in the list of top five candidates despite not participating in any debate yet. Interestingly, when the other candidates were debating in Iowa, Bloomberg’s campaign was busy tweeting live to grab the spotlight. One of the major reasons for the billionaire and three-time New York mayor’s rise in support is advertisements in TV, radio and digital platforms, for which he already spent $248 million. Bloomberg currently holds number 4 spot ahead of Pete Buttigieg, with voters backing ranging from 7 to 10 per cent, as per polls by ABC News, YouGov and Ipsos. &nbsp;

5. Pete Buttigieg

Buttigieg’s profile speaks for itself: a Harvard graduate, military veteran, very young and a charismatic speaker. The 38-year-old openly gay contender has done most things right, but still is way behind the top three candidates. Buttigieg’s performance in the last debate was neither disappointing nor exemplary, but he failed to grab the spotlight. After the debate, Buttigieg’s support remains stagnant or declining, oscillating from 4 to 9 per cent, which is a blow to his nomination’s chances.

6. Amy Klobuchar

Amy Klobuchar’s campaign has found some momentum from the strong performance in the last debate. She took on Sanders and Warren on healthcare and emphasised that her experience in Senate is more suitable for the Presidency than Buttigieg who was a naval intelligence officer in Afghanistan. Klobuchar’s campaign focussed on tackling climate change, some of which include big investments in green infrastructure, and cutting down emissions. So far, most of the polls show Klobuchar trailing behind the top tier candidates and her campaign needs the push in order to garner the 15 per cent required support from Iowa. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp;

With Iowa caucus, people from the United States and across the world will get a sense of who are losing their chances to be a possible final contender to challenge US President Donald Trump for the Presidency.

With Iowa caucus, people from the United States and across the world will get a sense of who are losing their chances to be a possible final contender to challenge US President Donald Trump for the Presidency. There will be important wins, and also, heartbreaks from what this time is known as a very 'crowded' race of Democratic challengers. On February 3, Iowa caucus will be held and even though, the state might not be a good predictor of the overall trends because of being less diverse, candidates will certainly gain and lose momentum for the primaries and caucuses ahead. For Democrats, Iowa is definitely significant as its last four nominees have all won caucuses from this part. At this juncture, let's look at which democratic candidate is leading the race of nomination and the ones who can catch up. 1. Joe Biden Joe Biden, who was the Vice President during the Obama administration, started the Democratic Presidential race as the frontrunner. He still leads in most of the polls. In the last democratic debate, Biden also avoided sharp attacks from his Democratic rivals and was able to successfully elaborate his plans on foreign policy and health care, which worked in his favour. Biden is still voters’ first choice among other Democratic contenders, with support ranging from 20 to 35 per cent as per various polls. He is also popular among black voters, who remain crucial supporters of Democrats. 2. Bernie Sanders Despite being the oldest candidate, Bernie Sanders' persuasive and energetic campaign has shed away the health-related concerns in the minds of voters, at least for now. Sanders and the other liberal candidate's, Elizabeth Warren, spar was the talking point during the January debate wherein Sanders flatly denied that he told Warren that a woman could not beat Trump in 2016 elections. This controversy didn't manage to cause any harm to Sanders and he took on Biden for supporting the war in Iraq in 2002-03. Sanders also reiterated his 'Medicare-for-all' policy. He became the first-choice Democratic candidate for the US elections after the debate as he garnered 20 per cent support as compared to Biden's 19 per cent, as per Ipsos poll released on January 16. According to most polls, Sanders has improved his position from last few months and is now in No 2 spot in the Democratic race after Biden. The gap between Biden and Sanders is also narrowing. 3. Elizabeth Warren Elizabeth Warren was undoubtedly the best performer in the January debate. In the debate, Warren was once again articulate in her arguments and convincing on the healthcare policy. Warren also reiterated that Sanders doubted women’s electability in the 2016 polls and pointed out that women on the stage (she and Amy Klobuchar) never lost any election. Despite her consistent performance, Warren is still behind her leftist rival Sanders in terms of public support. The good thing with Warren is that she has plans for most of the things, ranging from anti-corruption law, foreign policy to child-care and education. Warren is currently Americans third choice and her popularity has taken a hit since October, when she came very close to Biden, as per surveys by IPSOS, ABC News and Fox News show. However, a poll by YouGov suggests Warren is ahead of Sanders by a whisker and the trends also predict a close fight between Democrats liberal flag-bearers. 4. Michael Bloomberg The latest and one of the oldest entrants in the Democratic race is in the list of top five candidates despite not participating in any debate yet. Interestingly, when the other candidates were debating in Iowa, Bloomberg’s campaign was busy tweeting live to grab the spotlight. One of the major reasons for the billionaire and three-time New York mayor’s rise in support is advertisements in TV, radio and digital platforms, for which he already spent $248 million. Bloomberg currently holds number 4 spot ahead of Pete Buttigieg, with voters backing ranging from 7 to 10 per cent, as per polls by ABC News, YouGov and Ipsos. 5. Pete Buttigieg Buttigieg’s profile speaks for itself: a Harvard graduate, military veteran, very young and a charismatic speaker. The 38-year-old openly gay contender has done most things right, but still is way behind the top three candidates. Buttigieg’s performance in the last debate was neither disappointing nor exemplary, but he failed to grab the spotlight. After the debate, Buttigieg’s support remains stagnant or declining, oscillating from 4 to 9 per cent, which is a blow to his nomination’s chances. 6. Amy Klobuchar Amy Klobuchar’s campaign has found some momentum from the strong performance in the last debate. She took on Sanders and Warren on healthcare and emphasised that her experience in Senate is more suitable for the Presidency than Buttigieg who was a naval intelligence officer in Afghanistan. Klobuchar’s campaign focussed on tackling climate change, some of which include big investments in green infrastructure, and cutting down emissions. So far, most of the polls show Klobuchar trailing behind the top tier candidates and her campaign needs the push in order to garner the 15 per cent required support from Iowa. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US Presidential elections 2020: Which Democratic contender stands where

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/.../india-to-tweak-proposed-content-regulations-to- ease-burden-on-some-sources-272997">Facebook</a>&nbsp;Inc said on Thursday it was making&nbsp;some&nbsp;changes to its approach to&nbsp;political&nbsp;ads, including allowing&nbsp;users&nbsp;to turn off certain ad-targeting tools, but the updates stop far short of critics' demands and what rival companies have pledged to do.

The world's biggest social network has vowed to curb&nbsp;political&nbsp;manipulation of its platform, after failing to counter alleged Russian interference and the misuse of user data by defunct&nbsp;political&nbsp;consulting firm <a href="https://www.wionews.com/.../brazil-fines-facebook-16-million-for-improper- sharing-of-user-data-271120">Cambridge Analytica</a> in 2016.

But&nbsp;ahead&nbsp;of the&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/.../three-swing-district-democrats-back-joe-bidens- presidential-bid-272511">US&nbsp;presidential&nbsp;election</a>&nbsp;in November 2020,&nbsp;Facebook&nbsp;is struggling to quell criticism of its relatively hands-off&nbsp;ads&nbsp;policies. In particular, it has come under fire after it exempted politicians'&nbsp;ads&nbsp;from fact-checking standards applied to other content on its network.

Facebook&nbsp;said that in addition to rolling out a tool enabling individual&nbsp;users&nbsp;to choose to&nbsp;see&nbsp;fewer&nbsp;political&nbsp;and social issue&nbsp;ads&nbsp;on&nbsp;Facebook&nbsp;and its photo-sharing app Instagram, it will also make more ad audience data publicly available.

Also Read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/facebook-executive-says-it-helped-put-trump-in-white-house-272838">Facebook executive says it helped put Trump in White House</a>

In contrast, Twitter Inc banned&nbsp;political&nbsp;ads&nbsp;in October, while Alphabet Inc's Google said it would stop letting advertisers target&nbsp;election&nbsp;ads&nbsp;using data such as public voter records and general&nbsp;political&nbsp;affiliations.

Other online platforms like Spotify, Pinterest and TikTok have also issued bans.

In a blog post,&nbsp;Facebook's director of product management Rob Leathern said the company considered imposing limits like Google's but decided against them as internal data indicated most&nbsp;ads&nbsp;run by&nbsp;US&nbsp;presidential candidates are broadly targeted, at audiences larger than 250,000 people.

"We have based (our policies) on the principle that people should be able to hear from those who wish to lead them, warts and all," Leathern wrote.

The expanded ad audience data features will be rolled out in the first quarter of this year and&nbsp;Facebook&nbsp;plans to deploy the&nbsp;political&nbsp;ads&nbsp;control&nbsp;starting in the United States early this summer, eventually expanding this preference to more locations.

Another change will be to allow&nbsp;users&nbsp;to choose to stop&nbsp;seeing&nbsp;ads&nbsp;based on an advertiser's "Custom Audience" and that will apply to all types of advertising, not only&nbsp;political&nbsp;ads.

The "Custom Audiences" feature lets advertisers upload lists of personal data they maintain, like email addresses and phone numbers.&nbsp;Facebook&nbsp;then matches that information to user accounts and shows the advertiser's content to those people.

However,&nbsp;Facebook&nbsp;will not give&nbsp;users&nbsp;a blanket option to turn off the feature, meaning they will have to opt-out of&nbsp;seeing&nbsp;ads&nbsp;for each advertiser one by one, a spokesman told Reuters.

The change will also not affect ad targeting via&nbsp;Facebook's Lookalike Audiences tool, which uses the same uploads&nbsp;of personal data to direct&nbsp;ads&nbsp;at people with similar characteristics to those on the lists, the spokesman said.

Leathern said in the post the company would make new information publicly available about the audience size of&nbsp;political&nbsp;ads&nbsp;in the company's Ad Library, showing approximately&nbsp;how&nbsp;many people the advertisers aimed to reach.

The changes follow a New York Times report this week of an internal memo by senior&nbsp;Facebook&nbsp;executive Andrew Bosworth, who told employees the company had a duty not to tilt the scales against&nbsp;US&nbsp;President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/.../could-iran-us-tensions-mean-troubled-waters- ahead-in-the-strait-of-hormuz-273207">Donald Trump</a>'s re-election&nbsp;campaign.

Bosworth, a close confidant of Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg who subsequently made his post public, wrote that he believed&nbsp;Facebook&nbsp;was responsible for Trump's&nbsp;election&nbsp;in 2016, but not because of misinformation or Trump's work with Cambridge Analytica.

Rather, he said, the Trump campaign used&nbsp;Facebook's advertising tools most effectively.

&nbsp;

Facebook Inc said on Thursday it was making some changes to its approach to political ads, including allowing users to turn off certain ad-targeting tools, but the updates stop far short of critics' demands and what rival companies have pledged to do.

Facebook Inc said on Thursday it was making some changes to its approach to political ads, including allowing users to turn off certain ad-targeting tools, but the updates stop far short of critics' demands and what rival companies have pledged to do. The world's biggest social network has vowed to curb political manipulation of its platform, after failing to counter alleged Russian interference and the misuse of user data by defunct political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica in 2016. But ahead of the US presidential election in November 2020, Facebook is struggling to quell criticism of its relatively hands-off ads policies. In particular, it has come under fire after it exempted politicians' ads from fact-checking standards applied to other content on its network. Facebook said that in addition to rolling out a tool enabling individual users to choose to see fewer political and social issue ads on Facebook and its photo-sharing app Instagram, it will also make more ad audience data publicly available. Also Read: Facebook executive says it helped put Trump in White House In contrast, Twitter Inc banned political ads in October, while Alphabet Inc's Google said it would stop letting advertisers target election ads using data such as public voter records and general political affiliations. Other online platforms like Spotify, Pinterest and TikTok have also issued bans. In a blog post, Facebook's director of product management Rob Leathern said the company considered imposing limits like Google's but decided against them as internal data indicated most ads run by US presidential candidates are broadly targeted, at audiences larger than 250,000 people. "We have based (our policies) on the principle that people should be able to hear from those who wish to lead them, warts and all," Leathern wrote. The expanded ad audience data features will be rolled out in the first quarter of this year and Facebook plans to deploy the political ads control starting in the United States early this summer, eventually expanding this preference to more locations. Another change will be to allow users to choose to stop seeing ads based on an advertiser's "Custom Audience" and that will apply to all types of advertising, not only political ads. The "Custom Audiences" feature lets advertisers upload lists of personal data they maintain, like email addresses and phone numbers. Facebook then matches that information to user accounts and shows the advertiser's content to those people. However, Facebook will not give users a blanket option to turn off the feature, meaning they will have to opt-out of seeing ads for each advertiser one by one, a spokesman told Reuters. The change will also not affect ad targeting via Facebook's Lookalike Audiences tool, which uses the same uploads of personal data to direct ads at people with similar characteristics to those on the lists, the spokesman said. Leathern said in the post the company would make new information publicly available about the audience size of political ads in the company's Ad Library, showing approximately how many people the advertisers aimed to reach. The changes follow a New York Times report this week of an internal memo by senior Facebook executive Andrew Bosworth, who told employees the company had a duty not to tilt the scales against US President Donald Trump's re-election campaign. Bosworth, a close confidant of Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg who subsequently made his post public, wrote that he believed Facebook was responsible for Trump's election in 2016, but not because of misinformation or Trump's work with Cambridge Analytica. Rather, he said, the Trump campaign used Facebook's advertising tools most effectively.

Ahead of US election, Facebook gives users some control over how they see political ads

Some vying for the Democratic presidential nomination are loud and proud about their friendship with him. Others claim ideological kinship. And still others are taking distance from his record to stand out.

But one thing is for sure: Barack Obama is not saying anything -- well, much of anything.

The 58-year-old former president, who left power nearly three years ago with his popularity soaring, is quietly watching to see who in his party will duke it out with Donald Trump on November 3, 2020.

Beyond his positions on health care or immigration or education, numerous White House hopefuls have made reference to Obama's style -- a certain class in the way he exercised his power that is in stark contrast to the attitude of the billionaire Republican who succeeded him.

With less than three months to go before the first Democrats make their choice in the Iowa caucuses, the race is still entirely up in the air.

The next Democratic primary debate is set for Wednesday in Atlanta with 10 candidates on the stage and eager to score points -- <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/joe-biden-to-kick-off-us-presidential-bid-with-speech-to-union-workers-214499">Joe Biden</a>, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Tulsi Gabbard, Andrew Yang and Tom Steyer.

At this point, it's impossible to predict who will ultimately claim the party's nomination.

And the list of those who dream of wresting the Oval Office from Trump just keeps getting longer.

Billionaire former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg is once again flirting with a run, and former Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick threw his hat in the ring this week.

The late entrance by Patrick, one of the first black governors in US history who is close to Obama, fueled speculation about the doubts that the ex-president may have about the ability of the candidates already in the race, including his vice president Biden, to take out Trump.

'My friend Barack'

Many of the questions indeed focus on Biden, who has been saddled with the moniker "Sleepy Joe" by Trump. While he remains one of the favourites, observers fear the 76-year-old from Delaware cannot go the distance.

On the campaign trail, Biden never misses a chance to highlight his close relationship with his "friend Barack," and their eight years in power.

Biden is no stranger to campaign politics, and when he launched his latest White House bid, he underscored the fact that he had specifically asked Obama not to back him from the outset... even though the former president had never indicated he would do so.

"President Obama has no plans to weigh in on the primary at this point -- preferring instead to let the candidates make their cases directly to voters," a source close to the former president told AFP.

But the 44th president of the United States has, unsurprisingly, ideas about how his party should approach the election to ensure that Trump is limited to just one term in office.

Little by little, he is positioning himself. In remarks Friday night to donors at the Democracy Alliance in Washington, he offered a few hints about how he sees the upcoming battle for 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

'Tested' candidate&nbsp;

While he insisted on the need for new ideas from the party about reducing income inequality and other key issues, he issued a very clear warning about the temptation to take a sharp turn to the political left.

"Even as we push the envelope and we are bold in our vision, we also have to be rooted in reality," he said.

"The average American doesn't think we have to completely tear down the system and remake it," he added, noting that the United States was "a country that is less revolutionary than it is interested in improvement."

He called on the party faithful -- and by extension, its presidential candidates -- to be mindful that Democrats, independents and even moderate Republicans "are not driven by the same views that are reflected on certain, you know, left-leaning Twitter feeds, or the activist wing of our party."

He did not name names, but Warren and Sanders -- who have called for nothing short of a "political revolution -- certainly come to mind.

Obama appeared to want to reassure the many Democrats who fear that the crowded primary will end up being counterproductive, given that the incumbent Trump is all ready to run with a massive campaign war chest.

"For those who get stressed about robust primaries, I just have to remind you that I had a very robust primary," he said, recalling his at times acrimonious 2008 battle with Hillary Clinton.

"I'm confident that at the end of the process, we will have a candidate that has been tested."&nbsp;

Some vying for the Democratic presidential nomination are loud and proud about their friendship with him. Others claim ideological kinship. And still others are taking distance from his record to stand out.

Some vying for the Democratic presidential nomination are loud and proud about their friendship with him. Others claim ideological kinship. And still others are taking distance from his record to stand out. But one thing is for sure: Barack Obama is not saying anything -- well, much of anything. The 58-year-old former president, who left power nearly three years ago with his popularity soaring, is quietly watching to see who in his party will duke it out with Donald Trump on November 3, 2020. Beyond his positions on health care or immigration or education, numerous White House hopefuls have made reference to Obama's style -- a certain class in the way he exercised his power that is in stark contrast to the attitude of the billionaire Republican who succeeded him. With less than three months to go before the first Democrats make their choice in the Iowa caucuses, the race is still entirely up in the air. The next Democratic primary debate is set for Wednesday in Atlanta with 10 candidates on the stage and eager to score points -- Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Tulsi Gabbard, Andrew Yang and Tom Steyer. At this point, it's impossible to predict who will ultimately claim the party's nomination. And the list of those who dream of wresting the Oval Office from Trump just keeps getting longer. Billionaire former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg is once again flirting with a run, and former Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick threw his hat in the ring this week. The late entrance by Patrick, one of the first black governors in US history who is close to Obama, fueled speculation about the doubts that the ex-president may have about the ability of the candidates already in the race, including his vice president Biden, to take out Trump. 'My friend Barack' Many of the questions indeed focus on Biden, who has been saddled with the moniker "Sleepy Joe" by Trump. While he remains one of the favourites, observers fear the 76-year-old from Delaware cannot go the distance. On the campaign trail, Biden never misses a chance to highlight his close relationship with his "friend Barack," and their eight years in power. Biden is no stranger to campaign politics, and when he launched his latest White House bid, he underscored the fact that he had specifically asked Obama not to back him from the outset... even though the former president had never indicated he would do so. "President Obama has no plans to weigh in on the primary at this point -- preferring instead to let the candidates make their cases directly to voters," a source close to the former president told AFP. But the 44th president of the United States has, unsurprisingly, ideas about how his party should approach the election to ensure that Trump is limited to just one term in office. Little by little, he is positioning himself. In remarks Friday night to donors at the Democracy Alliance in Washington, he offered a few hints about how he sees the upcoming battle for 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. 'Tested' candidate While he insisted on the need for new ideas from the party about reducing income inequality and other key issues, he issued a very clear warning about the temptation to take a sharp turn to the political left. "Even as we push the envelope and we are bold in our vision, we also have to be rooted in reality," he said. "The average American doesn't think we have to completely tear down the system and remake it," he added, noting that the United States was "a country that is less revolutionary than it is interested in improvement." He called on the party faithful -- and by extension, its presidential candidates -- to be mindful that Democrats, independents and even moderate Republicans "are not driven by the same views that are reflected on certain, you know, left-leaning Twitter feeds, or the activist wing of our party." He did not name names, but Warren and Sanders -- who have called for nothing short of a "political revolution -- certainly come to mind. Obama appeared to want to reassure the many Democrats who fear that the crowded primary will end up being counterproductive, given that the incumbent Trump is all ready to run with a massive campaign war chest. "For those who get stressed about robust primaries, I just have to remind you that I had a very robust primary," he said, recalling his at times acrimonious 2008 battle with Hillary Clinton. "I'm confident that at the end of the process, we will have a candidate that has been tested."

In White House race, who is Obama's political heir?

Ever since India gained Independence in 1947, its relationship with the United States of America has been reserved, at best. Today, with the beginnings of the presidential election campaign underway in the United States, over 20 Democratic candidates are vying for a nomination bid. Some of the powerhouses include Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

However, despite some of these candidates specifically announcing collaboration with Indians (like Booker), President Trump is by far the best American President as far as India is concerned. Even though he is jabbing India on trade and has implemented a stringent immigration policy, Trump's strong stances greatly benefit India in several key areas, and at a time when our country is developing rather rapidly. Let's take a look.

China

No Democratic candidate or nominee will take Trump's hard-line attitude on China and terrorism. Trump's views on both work to India's advantage over the next five years.

Trump's 'trade-teasing' with India has hurt the Indian economy, no doubt, but when you put it into perspective, it's not that big of a deal. Modi knows this. Take a look at this perspective. The trade deficit that the US has with India is approximately one-twelfth of what the US has with China. Therefore, Beijing is on a very high red-alert on Trump's trade moves as compared to India. This explains Modi's calm and collected attitude to Trump's trade teasing. Moreover, President Trump has openly criticised China multiple times as a currency manipulator. He has even called China America's "foe". India can take advantage of this stance, especially as a preferred defence partner.

Terrorism

Speaking of defence, President Trump has publicly stated that Pakistan is a breeding ground for terrorists. He has made stringent policies on Muslims in the United States (at airport security, for example) and has a hard stance on terrorism. If elected, a Democrat will undoubtedly ease their stance on Pakistan. However, India most greatly benefits from Trump's rigid stance, especially after the Balakot strikes.

The US and India's shared disdain for Pakistan-based terrorists along with strong foreign policy focus on counter-terrorism will strengthen military ties and could also eventually work to ease out trade tensions should they increase.

Additionally, at the recent G20 Summit, Modi expressed his concern on losing 11 per cent of India's oil needs from Iran due to the US sanctions compliance. The two countries agreed that strong bilateral ties must exist between them to ensure regional and global peace in this region. India could use this to its advantage, especially to get back its energy needs.

Economy

Economically, Trump's unsurprising, hard-right Republican stance is the most beneficial to India's quickly growing GDP. Unlike the Democrats, Trump jumps on energy, manufacturing, oil &amp; gas, FDI, renewable energy and corporation development. All of these facets are areas where India is looking to expand. In addition, America is one of India's biggest investors when it comes to foreign direct investment. At the G20 meeting, Trump said that some "very big trade deals... in terms of developing 5G technology would be announced in the future with India". This will very much benefit India as we are the second largest global market for 5G and will determine how the global trend will sway.

Likewise, the 'Make in India' programme was also appreciated and welcomed by Trump. On multiple occasions, Modi and Trump also recognised space, trade, energy and security to collaborate on. Trump left the meeting stating that relations with India have "never been better".

He's absolutely right.

Immigration 
&nbsp; 
Despite Trump making this difficult, he is still better than a Democrat. Whereas Democratic candidates like Booker, Harris, Sanders and Warren will likely ease the process for Indians who want H1-B visas, they have not articulated how they will do this. This makes it doubtful that they will be able to reverse the process quickly.

President Trump has stated that Indian talent is amazing. Throughout his presidency, he has actively aimed at attracting Indian youth and entrepreneurs; this gives young Indians a loophole of sorts through American immigration roadblocks. Over the next five years, PM Modi will be able to leverage young Indian talent as Trump will increasingly seek it. Why? Over the past few years, a significant number of American multi-national companies have moved their Asian bases from China to India. And that mandates the need for local, skilled Indian talent to fill jobs. This means more employment generated in India and a potential increase in the already occurring reverse brain-gain to India. A win-win for India.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Ever since India gained Independence in 1947, its relationship with the United States of America has been reserved, at best. Today, with the beginnings of the presidential election campaign underway in the United States, over 20 Democratic candidates are vying for a nomination bid.

Ever since India gained Independence in 1947, its relationship with the United States of America has been reserved, at best. Today, with the beginnings of the presidential election campaign underway in the United States, over 20 Democratic candidates are vying for a nomination bid. Some of the powerhouses include Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. However, despite some of these candidates specifically announcing collaboration with Indians (like Booker), President Trump is by far the best American President as far as India is concerned. Even though he is jabbing India on trade and has implemented a stringent immigration policy, Trump's strong stances greatly benefit India in several key areas, and at a time when our country is developing rather rapidly. Let's take a look. China No Democratic candidate or nominee will take Trump's hard-line attitude on China and terrorism. Trump's views on both work to India's advantage over the next five years. Trump's 'trade-teasing' with India has hurt the Indian economy, no doubt, but when you put it into perspective, it's not that big of a deal. Modi knows this. Take a look at this perspective. The trade deficit that the US has with India is approximately one-twelfth of what the US has with China. Therefore, Beijing is on a very high red-alert on Trump's trade moves as compared to India. This explains Modi's calm and collected attitude to Trump's trade teasing. Moreover, President Trump has openly criticised China multiple times as a currency manipulator. He has even called China America's "foe". India can take advantage of this stance, especially as a preferred defence partner. Terrorism Speaking of defence, President Trump has publicly stated that Pakistan is a breeding ground for terrorists. He has made stringent policies on Muslims in the United States (at airport security, for example) and has a hard stance on terrorism. If elected, a Democrat will undoubtedly ease their stance on Pakistan. However, India most greatly benefits from Trump's rigid stance, especially after the Balakot strikes. The US and India's shared disdain for Pakistan-based terrorists along with strong foreign policy focus on counter-terrorism will strengthen military ties and could also eventually work to ease out trade tensions should they increase. Additionally, at the recent G20 Summit, Modi expressed his concern on losing 11 per cent of India's oil needs from Iran due to the US sanctions compliance. The two countries agreed that strong bilateral ties must exist between them to ensure regional and global peace in this region. India could use this to its advantage, especially to get back its energy needs. Economy Economically, Trump's unsurprising, hard-right Republican stance is the most beneficial to India's quickly growing GDP. Unlike the Democrats, Trump jumps on energy, manufacturing, oil & gas, FDI, renewable energy and corporation development. All of these facets are areas where India is looking to expand. In addition, America is one of India's biggest investors when it comes to foreign direct investment. At the G20 meeting, Trump said that some "very big trade deals... in terms of developing 5G technology would be announced in the future with India". This will very much benefit India as we are the second largest global market for 5G and will determine how the global trend will sway. Likewise, the 'Make in India' programme was also appreciated and welcomed by Trump. On multiple occasions, Modi and Trump also recognised space, trade, energy and security to collaborate on. Trump left the meeting stating that relations with India have "never been better". He's absolutely right. Immigration Despite Trump making this difficult, he is still better than a Democrat. Whereas Democratic candidates like Booker, Harris, Sanders and Warren will likely ease the process for Indians who want H1-B visas, they have not articulated how they will do this. This makes it doubtful that they will be able to reverse the process quickly. President Trump has stated that Indian talent is amazing. Throughout his presidency, he has actively aimed at attracting Indian youth and entrepreneurs; this gives young Indians a loophole of sorts through American immigration roadblocks. Over the next five years, PM Modi will be able to leverage young Indian talent as Trump will increasingly seek it. Why? Over the past few years, a significant number of American multi-national companies have moved their Asian bases from China to India. And that mandates the need for local, skilled Indian talent to fill jobs. This means more employment generated in India and a potential increase in the already occurring reverse brain-gain to India. A win-win for India. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Trump's strong stances greatly benefit India. Here's how

The first Democratic presidential debate is in the books, and 10 of the 20 candidates who qualified for the proceedings have had their say - in one-minute chunks.