Stargazers in the northern half of the world may be able to view a brightening

Bob Huggins has agreed to a three-game suspension and a $1 million pay cut after he used a homophobic slur during a radio show

Tom Brady and Leonardo DiCaprio are not interacting in the pictures, but they look at ease with each other's presence

Charissa Thompson says she 'never lied' in spite of her confession she 'made up reports sometimes'.

The ex-president lambasts a case that could see him lose control of Trump Tower and other properties.

Shane McMillanwas previously convicted of assaulting a correctional officer at a federal penitentiary in Louisiana in 2006

There is no evidence to suggest using Facebook is detrimental to wellbeing, Oxford scientists have said, challenging the view that the social media platform is linked to psychological harm. Researchers from the University of Oxford’s Oxford Internet Institute analysed data from nearly a million people across 72 countries over 12 years – in the largest study of its kind – to understand more about the impact of Facebook on wellbeing. Professor Andrew Przybylski, who co-led the research published in the journal Royal Society Open Science, said: “We examined the best available data carefully – and found they did not support the idea that Facebook membership is related to harm – quite the opposite. “In fact, our analysis indicates Facebook is possibly related to positive well-being.” The research looked at Facebook data from 2008 to 2019, going back to when the platform was in its early stages. “We examined 72 countries’ per capita active Facebook users in males and females in two age brackets, 13-34 years and 35+ years,” the researchers said. The results also showed the association between using Facebook and wellbeing was slightly more positive for males as well as for younger people. It was generally the case that there were positive associations between country-level Facebook uptake and mental wellbeing Prof Peter Etchells Writing in the research paper, the authors said: “Although reports of negative psychological outcomes associated with social media are common in academic and popular writing, evidence for harms is, on balance, more speculative than conclusive.” Professor Matti Vuorre, also of the Oxford Internet Institute, who co-led the study, said: “Our findings should help guide the debate surrounding social media towards more empirical research foundations. “We need more transparent collaborative research between independent scientists and the technology industry to better determine how, when and why modern online platforms might be affecting their users.” Commenting on the study, Peter Etchells, professor of psychology and science communication at Bath Spa University, said: “This is a fascinating study that attempts to link Facebook uptake with measures of mental wellbeing in a broad-strokes manner, using data from over 70 countries. “Contrary to popular sentiment, the researchers didn’t find a negative association between the two; instead, it was generally the case that there were positive associations between country-level Facebook uptake and mental wellbeing. “To my mind, the value in this study lies in proof of principle – it demonstrates that it’s possible to leverage industry data to address meaningful questions about how digital technology interacts with our mental health.” But Prof Etchells said there were some caveats associated with the findings – which the study authors have addressed. He said: “This is a descriptive study, and as such cannot tell us anything about causation – that is, we don’t know how, if, or to what extent, changes in Facebook adoption drive changes in mental wellbeing. “Wellbeing is a complex phenomenon, and even in the context of social media use, we need to be careful drawing any firm conclusions by looking at how people use a single platform such as Facebook.” Read More Charity boss speaks out over ‘traumatic’ encounter with royal aide Ukraine war’s heaviest fight rages in east - follow live Ozzy Osbourne PlayStation tweet which failed to reveal link to Sony banned Harry and Meghan ring young online innovators after funding awards James Bulger’s mother condemns ‘disgusting’ AI clips on TikTok of murdered son

House Republicans raged against former president Donald Trump’s fourth indictment in Georgia, saying that it was politically targeted. Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who voted to object to the 2020 election results, said “Americans see through this desperate sham.” Republican Conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik, who replaced Rep Liz Cheney after Ms Cheney’s repeated critiques of Mr Trump, said Mr Trump “will defeat these bogus charges and win back the White House in 2024.” But for the most part, Senate Republican leadership stayed silent amid the news of Mr Trump’s latest indictment. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Whip John Thune, Senate Republican Conference Chairman John Barasso and many other senior Republican leaders in the Senate remained mum. Some of the Senate’s most ardent conservatives did speak out, including Sen Lindsey Graham (R-SC). Tthe top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee said on Fox News that Mr Trump’s fate “should be decided at the ballot box and not in a bunch of liberal jurisdictions trying to put the man in jail.” Sen Ted Cruz (R-TX), who led efforts in the Senate to overturn the 2020 election results, told Sean Hannity on Monday evening that he was “pissed.” But for the most part, Senate Republican leadership stayed quiet. When asked on Fox News about the indictment, Sen Joni Ernst (R-IA) brushed off the question of Mr Trump’s indictment. “I honestly think that Iowans are becoming desensitised to this,” said Ms Ernst, who at one time was vetted to be Mr Trump’s running mate and won re-election in 2020 when Mr Trump won Iowa a second time. “I don't even know that they are paying attention to it. It’s the third indictment. It’s the fourth indictment.” Ms Ernst parroted the oft-repeated line by Republicans that Mr Trump’s indictments show that the US justice system had two tiers. “One if your name is Trump, and there is one if your name is Biden,” she said. “But again, it seems to be politically motivated so much that Iowans just throw up their hands anymore.” Sen Steve Daines (R-MT), who endorsed Mr Trump earlier this year, slammed the indictment. “The latest indictment of President Trump is brought by a rogue DA who is following in the footsteps of the rogue DOJ, further cementing the two systems of justice in America today,” he posted on X, formerly known as Twitter. Mr Daines leads the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which is responsible for defending Republican incumbents and flipping Democratically-held Senate seats in swing states. “The justice system should be—it must be—blind, not weaponized against political opponents.” The contrasting approaches between House and Senate GOP leadership parallel how Republicans approached Mr Trump and his attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. While 139 House Republicans, including members of House Republican leadership such as now-House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, Mr McCarthy and Ms Stefanik voted to overturn the 2020 presidential election results, only eight Republican senators, led by Mr Cruz and Sen Josh Hawley (R-MO) voted to object to the election results. Meanwhile, House Republicans condemned Ms Cheney and now-former Rep Adam Kinzinger for their participation in the January 6 select committee. No Republicans faced serious consequences from leadership for voting to impeach Mr Trump for inciting the January 6 riot. Similarly, while Mr McCarthy previously said that Mr Trump “bears responsibility” for the attack despite not voting to impeach him, he has largely welcomed Mr Trump’s support. Conversely, after the impeachment trial in the Senate, Mr McConnell condemned Mr Trump. “There's no question — none — that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day,” he said. But Mr McConnell said so after he decided against voting to convict the former president. Read More ‘I’m pissed’: Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz lead Republican reaction to Trump’s fourth indictment Trump claims mystery press conference report clears him of Georgia election charges: Live updates Trump charged with racketeering by Fulton County grand jury: Live updates The damning phone call that may have led to the downfall of Trump and his cronies Prosecutors in the Hunter Biden case deny defense push to keep gun charge agreement in place

China has reported its exports and imports both fell in September from a year earlier as global demand remained muted

Donald Trump was equal turns defiant and self-pitying in his first major public event since being indicted earlier this week on charges he conspired to overturn the 2020 election and deprive voters of their civil rights in the process, claiming the charges against him were illegitimate but would help his campaign. “It’s not going to make any impact. Every time they file an indictment, we go way up in the polls,” Mr Trump said Friday at the Alabama Republican Party’s 2023 summer meeting in Montgomery. “We need one more indictment and this election is closed out, nobody has even a chance,” he added. At the same time, Mr Trump hammered the special counsel overseeing the case, accusing “deranged Jack Smith” of pursuing “an outrageous criminalisation of political speech.” “It’s not fair and it’s probably not legal what they’re doing,” Mr Trump argued. “They want to interfere in my campaign.” Prosecutors allege that Mr Trump and a group of co-conspirators knew they had lost the 2020 election, but tried to manipulate the process and be declared the winners anyway, infringing on US voter rights in the process. “The only civil rights that have been violated in this manner are my civil rights,” Mr Trump said at the event. Even though Donald Trump faces increasing legal jeopardy – two federal indictments, plus another major case from the Manhattan district attorney and a looming potential indictment in Georgia over election meddling – his campaign for the White House looks relatively unimpacted even as Mr Trump could be the first former president to be imprisoned. According to a New York Times poll on Thursday, Donald Trump and Joe Biden are at a dead heat when it comes to support from registered voters, each maintaining 43 per cent. Within the Republican field, Mr Trump has a comfortable lead over his opponents, even as rivals like Mike Pence have seized on the recent indictment to criticise the former president. A recent poll found that Donald Trump is still comfortably leading the pack of GOP hopefuls ahead of 2024, with 54 per cent support compared to his nearest rival, Florida governor Ron DeSantis, who only had 17 per cent. Read More Moment Trump’s own lawyer ‘admits’ to indictment charge live on TV Ron DeSantis says Trump’s claims of stolen 2020 election weren’t ‘true’ Trump strikes threatening tone after arraignment: ‘ IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU!’ Texas man who threatened poll workers and Arizona officials is sentenced to 3 1/2 years Trump strikes threatening tone: ‘ IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU!’ Giuliani must clarify his ‘puzzling’ court filing in Georgia defamation case

Some regions of India are bracing for more torrential rain, raising the risk of further causalities after natural

Weeks before the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade last year, Oklahoma’s Republican governor vowed to “outlaw” abortion in the state entirely, and pledged to sign any legislation that promised to do just that. Governor Kevin Stitt signed several anti-abortion bills into law, including a measure that outlaws abortion at roughly six weeks of pregnancy, and another banning all abortions with exceptions only to save the patient’s life in a medical emergency or if the pregnancy is the result of rape, sexual assault or incest that has been reported to law enforcement. On 31 May, the highest court in the state struck down both of them. But abortion access remains out of reach for most patients in the state, after that same court upheld a far-reaching abortion ban from more than 100 years ago earlier this year. A state law from 1910 makes it a felony punishable up to five years in prison for anyone to perform or help someone seek an abortion unless to save the patient’s life. “This ruling, while providing clarity in emergency situations, does not change the landscape of care significantly,” Emily Wales, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, said in a statement. Oklahoma was the first state in the US to successfully outlaw abortion despite a constitutional right to abortion care that was affirmed by Roe v Wade. But in March, the state’s Supreme Court ruled that the state’s constitution “creates an inherent right of a pregnant woman to terminate a pregnancy when necessary to preserve her life,” though the court declined to weigh in on whether the constitution protects abortion access in other circumstances. The court also ruled that doctors should be able to use their own medical judgment to determine whether to provide an abortion when a patient’s life is at risk “due to the pregnancy itself or due to a medical condition that the woman is either currently suffering from or likely to suffer from during the pregnancy.” But it also preserved the 1910 law, a 113-year-old ban on abortion care that threatens providers with prison. The court’s decision on 31 May reaffirmed its decision recognising a right to abortion care in life-threatening cases, and struck down two the overlapping bans. In the months after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which struck down a constitutional right to abortion care, clinics in Oklahoma have been forced to close, and patients have traveled thousands of miles for legal abortion care in a region surrounded by states where abortion is severely restricted or effectively outlawed. Even in cases of emergencies, there appears to be no hospital in Oklahoma that provides “clear, consistent policies for emergency obstetric care to pregnant patients,” according to an April report from Physicians for Human Rights, Oklahoma Call for Reproductive Justice and the Center for Reproductive Rights. Oklahoma hospitals “offered opaque, contradictory, and incorrect information about abortion availability and approval processes in obstetric emergencies, as well as little reassurance that clinicians’ medical judgment and pregnant patients’ needs would be prioritized,” according to the report. Only two out of 24 hospitals described providing legal support for providers in such situations, and representatives for three hospitals claimed their facilities do not provide abortions at all, the report found. Abortion rights advocates welcomed the court’s decision on 31 May, which abortion rights advocates said will at least allow doctors to clearly rely on their own medical judgment to provide care when a patient’s life is in jeopardy. “After months of uncertainty and chaos, Oklahomans should finally be able to access the life-saving care they need in their home state,” according to Dr Alan Braid, an abortion provider and plaintiff in the case challenging the overlapping abortion bans. “Heartbreakingly, we were forced to close our Tulsa clinic due to Oklahoma’s abortion bans, but I will continue to serve patients in the region at clinics in Illinois and New Mexico,” he added. “While we are relieved the court upheld the right to abortion in medical emergencies, this does not diminish the fact that care remains out of reach for the majority of Oklahomans,” according to Ms Wales. Following the state Supreme Court decision on 31 May, Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond clarified that “except for certain circumstances outlined in that statute, abortion is still unlawful in the state of Oklahoma” because of the 1910 law. Governor Stitt accused the court of using “activism to create a right to an abortion in Oklahoma.” “This court has once more over-involved itself in the state’s democratic process, and has interceded to undo legislation created by the will of the people,” he said in a statement. Within the last year, more than a dozen states – including most of the entire US South – have outlawed abortion care for most pregnancies. Read More ACLU sues Nebraska over combined law targeting abortion and gender-affirming care: ‘Egregious overreach’ South Carolina judge halts six-week abortion ban as state Supreme Court set to review new law Doctor who provided abortion care to 10-year-old rape survivor reprimanded in case that drew national scrutiny Anti-abortion laws harm patients facing dangerous and life-threatening complications, report finds