List of All Articles with Tag 'li'

President Joe Biden's deal with Iran that unlocks $6 billion in Tehran's frozen funds to bring five imprisoned Americans home is creating the kind of terrible optics and an opening for his domestic foes that a politically weakened president can ill afford.

Labor negotiations continued this week between union negotiators and representatives of the Detroit Three automakers days into a

WASHINGTON The U.S. military said on Monday it was still searching for an F-35 fighter jet after a

In October, catch this special type of solar eclipse that occurs only once every year or two.

It's quiet at the Martoba cemetery outside the Libyan city of Derna, despite the presence of dozens of volunteers. Men in white hazmat suits pour lime over the brown soil to seal the graves. Cement bricks jutting out of the heaps of dirt are the only signs of the hundreds of bodies buried underneath.

Jens Haaning was given about €67,000 by a Danish museum to create art, but sent it blank canvasses.

The coach veered off a highway at night high in the Andes mountains before plunging 200m (650ft).

The harvest moon is the full moon that falls closest to the fall equinox, and this year, it’s also a super moon.

Whether you’re after waterproof walking, springy strolls or harder hikes and punishing treks, there are plenty of boots out there which will be a perfect fit this summer. Take a look at five we tried out, to help you put your best foot forward on a summer staycation. Berghaus Women’s Expeditor Trek 2.0 Boots (£99, tiso.com) Key features: No wearing in needed, thanks to super cushioning from the EVA midsoles and OrthoLite footbed. Their split suede upper, robust, grippy soles and all-round performance makes them good value for money. They were also the easiest boots to get on and off, with a wide entry point. Verdict: These snug-fitting – but comfy – walking boots pack a punch for the price and I did a five-miler straight from the box and didn’t suffer any ill effects around the toes or the ankles. They are reasonably lightweight and fairly generous width-wise, although I could feel a slight pinch point mid-foot by the end of the first walk, which evened out the more I used them. The grip is sufficient for tricky hills and they are also waterproof, although I suspect you won’t do the suede upper any good if you’re traipsing through boggy puddles. On the whole, a great all-rounder for the price. Columbia Women’s Trailstorm Mid Waterproof Walking Shoe (£90, columbiasportswear.co.uk) Key features: Their weight – just 290g. Their versatility and good looks mean they wouldn’t look out of place under jeans, if you’re doing a short amble with a stop-off at the pub, or some easy sightseeing en route. Verdict: These super-lightweight boots – which are actually billed as a walking shoe but have some ankle cushioning – are a cross between a sturdy trainer and a light walking boot. They have the comfortable springiness of a trainer – which is great for walking on dry ground – while the grip will hold you steady on more rocky terrain. They are waterproof, withstanding a bit of summer rain, but I wouldn’t be taking them into boggy winter conditions any time soon. They’re ideal for summer, when you don’t want heavy boots for meandering along easy country paths and green fields in the sunshine. Get a size up from your regular shoe fitting and you’ll do miles in total comfort. Helly Hansen W Switchback Trail Helly Tech (£120, hellyhansen.com) Key features: Their toe and heel caps keep your feet secure and protected, they’re fully waterproof and feel sturdy, despite being relatively light. Verdict: These are impressively sturdy boots considering how light they feel, definitely not an enhanced trainer but with an understated, stylish look, which would appeal to both younger and older walkers. During a 10-miler across mixed terrain, they had a sure grip providing stability on rocky, unstable downhill slopes, while the cushioning on super hard surfaces made you feel like you were walking on cotton wool. Get yourself a size up if you want to wear thick socks with them in the winter, but the spongy, comfortable materials used around the ankle and the tongue should assure you of a blister-free trek. Merrell Moab Speed Mid GORE-TEX (£135, merrell.com) Key features: The mid-sole has extra cushioning, which protects the balls of your foot, along with a ‘rockplate’ which helps reduce the impact of unforgiving sharp rocks or stones underfoot. Verdict: With a Gore-Tex lining you can count on, I yomped through muddy fields and shallow puddles and stayed dry – it’s worth paying an extra few quid for the knowledge you won’t be squelching in your boots. In our unpredictable British summers, though, you want plenty of breathability which these boots have in spades. After trying them out on a warm spring day in thin socks, my feet emerged as dry as a bone. Eco-warriors may be impressed with the 100% recycled laces, which didn’t feel flimsy, the recycled mesh lining and 30% recycled rubber in the outsole. AKU Alterra Mid GTX (£229.90, aku.it/en) Key features: The outer sole and impressive grip helps prevent you stumbling on rocky, uneven ground, while there’s excellent protection around the ankle, yet it still feels spongy and comfortable. Verdict: The Italian specialist brand Aku says these sturdy boots are designed for medium terrain and longer rambles over mixed ground, but these were by far the toughest boots, with such impressive grippy soles that I think they’re just as suitable for winter walks. They may be a little extravagant – and a bit heavier looking – for easier summer rambles, but if you’re a hardcore hiker with aims of climbing challenging peaks this summer, these are just the job. And right on cue, Aku has brought out a new lighter weight version of the same boot, so look out for the Alterra Lite Mid GTX. Read More Charity boss speaks out over ‘traumatic’ encounter with royal aide Ukraine war’s heaviest fight rages in east - follow live Do I need to treat my garden furniture before storing it for winter? Prince William heads to New York for UN General Assembly climate week event London Fashion Week: Jourdan Dunn walks in emotional Richard Quinn show

The average Brit starts to get itchy feet in their home after five years, a study has found. Researchers revealed after living happily in their homes for years, the five-year-itch hits, resulting in property owners browsing websites and estate agent windows for their next buy. Looking online at property websites (59 per cent) and taking an interest in ‘for sale’ homes in your neighbourhood (32 per cent) are the major tell-tale signs people are considering a move. And 31 per cent admit thinking about what they can do to get their home ready to sell (31 per cent) is another indication they’re ready to make the switch. Anthony Ward Thomas, of Anthony Ward Thomas Removals, which commissioned the study of 2,000 adults, said: “Moving can be a challenging task, but it doesn’t need to be. “It’s not a surprise for 54 per cent of people, cost is the most important factor when making a move.” The research, carried out by OnePoll, found Londoners get itchy feet the quickest of any region – as they want to move less than four years in. Those in the capital aren’t as willing to stay put in their property either, as they said they could stay at their current home for another seven years at a push – compared to those in the East Midlands who would live at their current abode for more than 13 years. Other top signs people are looking to move home include getting fed up with the neighbours (24 per cent), not having enough storage space (23 per cent) and no longer enjoying spending time in your home (22 per cent). However, one of the major factors putting people off moving was the thought of shifting their stuff (55 per cent). Despite this, only 43 per cent of people who moved home previously said they used a removal company to help them. Yet 59 per cent said if they were to move now, they’d get outside help from a specialist – highlighting just how important they are. In fact, a staggering show of support, 92 per cent of those who had used a removal company said they would use one again. Among the major benefits included not having to do the heavy lifting (62 per cent), being less stressful (50 per cent) and having one less thing to worry about (45 per cent). Others included saving time (42 per cent) and not getting injured lifting heavy things (40 per cent). Anthony Ward Thomas added: “As our results show, one of the major factors which puts people off moving is having to move their belongings. “Using a professional company to help you pack up, move out and move in buys you peace of mind. “It should be any delivery firm’s number one priority to ensure every single item is looked after as if it were their own and to care about every move.” FIVE TELLTALE SIGNS YOU’VE GOT ITCHY FEET: Looking online at property websites Taking an interest in ‘for sale’ signs in your neighbourhood Getting fed up with the neighbours Not having enough storage space No longer enjoying spending time in your home TOP 5 TIPS FOR MOVING HOME, FROM ANTHONY WARD THOMAS: Make a move plan – include all tasks on it and assign them to people and/or companies helping you Clear the clutter – give yourself 5 categories: keep, sell, bin, store or giveaway Hire professionals – don’t cut costs and do a DIY move, it pays to have peace of mind Pack from the top down – start at the top and work downwards, labelling your boxes with what’s in them, where they’ve come from and where they’re going to Box of essentials – from a kettle, mugs and coffee to bedding for the first night and the kid’s iPads, pack up useful items in one box. Read More What is Cheese-pulling? New world record set for highest pull Zombie ant parasite is ‘even more cunning’ than previously thought, scientists say NASA astronaut Frank Rubio breaks US record for longest spaceflight Mother explains decision to breastfeed her four-year-old son ‘My baby’s blue eyes drew praise - but their colour was a warning sign’ What the world’s happiest children tell us about where Britain is going wrong

If you want fast service from McDonald's, avoid going during the turn over from breakfast to lunch.

Following a five-year federal investigation, a grand jury has indicted President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden on three charges connected to a gun purchase in 2018, a time period during which the president’s son has admitted to using drugs. Federal law prohibits people who use drugs from buying firearms, but questions surrounding the constitutionality of that law could throw the case into jeopardy following a landmark US Supreme Court decision that opened a wave of litigation under the court’s expansive Second Amendment lens. That’s if the case survives the political maelstrom targeting the Biden family, with congressional Republicans eager to prosecute the president’s son and impeach his father in parallel probes separate from a US Department of Justice special counsel investigation facing GOP pressure. That partisan scrutiny comes as the leading candidate for the 2024 Republican nomination for president faces four sprawling criminal trials of his own, including charges for serious crimes allegedly committed while serving as 45th president. Republican officials and campaigns are eager to draw a false equivalence and dominate airtime with investigations surrounding the younger Biden instead. Ironically, a Supreme Court decision celebrated by Republicans last year may have set a precedent that could protect Hunter Biden from prosecution. The Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibits people who use drugs from possessing firearms, a ban that applies to people who have admitted to using illegal drugs within 12 months before buying a gun, according to the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. Violating that provision could land an offender with a 15-year prison sentence. But the Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v Bruen – decided by the court’s six conservative justices – argues that such restrictions be historically consistent with the Second Amendment. As Justice Clarence Thomas wrote, “the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition.” The decision created an absurdly high new burden to test the constitutionality of restrictions and other safety measures to combat the proliferation of high-powered firearms and keep them out of the hands of people who could be a danger to themselves or others in the American era marked by daily mass shootings and surging rates of gun violence, analysts and advocates have argued. President Biden has said the decision “contradicts both common sense and the Constitution.” Within a year after that decision, more than a dozen state and federal gun laws have been challenged, with 30 per cent of civil cases and nearly 4 per cent of criminal cases citing the Bruen decision in challenges that have invalidated gun control measures, according to research in Duke Law Journal. This year, federal judges in several cases have ruled that banning someone who uses drugs from owning a firearm is “inconsistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” “In short, our history and tradition may support some limits on an intoxicated person’s right to carry a weapon, but it does not justify disarming a sober citizen based exclusively on his past drug usage,” Ronald Reagan-appointed US District Judge Jerry Smith wrote for a federal appeal courts panel in August. “Nor do more generalized traditions of disarming dangerous persons support this restriction on nonviolent drug users.” Hunter Biden is charged with illegally owning a gun as a drug user, and with allegedly lying on a form when he bought the firearm. If convicted, he could face up to 25 years in prison, though it is highly unlikely he would face such a sentence. Jacob Charles, a professor at Pepperdine University’s Caruso School of Law and a constitutional law scholar focusing on the Second Amendment, said Mr Biden’s attorneys likely have a viable Second Amendment case. It might be more difficult to challenge federal law against lying on a firearms form, which is not directly tied to Second Amendment rights, “so it’s possible that an appeals court or the Supreme Court would agree with the defense on both of the questions, and say it’s unconstitutional, and since it’s unconstitutional, you also can’t be punished for lying about the other category,” Mr Charles told The Independent. Essentially: if one count is on unconstitutional grounds, there’s a chance the other counts wouldn’t stand up either. “It’s not always the case that the higher profile the defendant, the more likely you’re going to get Supreme Court review,” he said. “Sometimes it seems to happen lately. But there are other cases that are farther along in the process that are challenging this same law, that if the court really wanted to answer this question, it wouldn’t have to use the Hunter Biden vehicle to do it.” Mr Charles says the case has underscored the “disruptive effects of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen” and the chaotic new landscape for the nation’s myriad gun laws, which now have an apparent historical analogy regardless of the urgency for such laws in the first place. This year, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a major Second Amendment test that further magnifies the chasm between the new historical test and current realities, when justices will hear a case involving a man who possessed firearms and allegedly repeatedly shot at people while subject to a domestic violence restraining order. It is also unclear what evidence prosecutors are reviewing to determine that Hunter Biden was using drugs at the time; those details are publicised in his memoir, in which he describes his struggle with abuse and his relapse in 2018, the year he bought the gun. Mr Biden’s attorney Abbe Lowell believes the case will be tossed out altogether. “The only change that has occurred between when they investigated [this alleged crime] and today is that the law changed,” he told ABC’s Good Morning America on 15 September. “But the law didn’t change in favour of the prosecution. The law changed against it.” ‘I’ve never heard of this charge. Never’ Mr Lowell and others have also questioned the timing of the case, parallel to growing threats of impeachment from far-right members of Congress against President Biden and adjacent investigations from House Republicans seeking criminal prosecutions against the president and his family. “The US Attorney’s Office has known about this for years,” Mr Lowell said. “What changed? Not the facts, not the law, but all the politics that have now come into play.” The younger Biden was prepared to plead guilty to charges stemming from the firearms purchase as well as separate tax-related misdemeanours earlier this year, though a plea agreement appeared to fall apart under scrutiny from a federal judge. Justice Department special counsel David Weiss, who as US Attorney for Delaware has been investigating Hunter Biden for roughly five years, said he would seek a grand jury indictment in the case by the end of September. Mr Weiss was appointed by Mr Trump and initially requested by congressional Republicans to lead a special counsel probe. Following the collapse of that plea deal, Mr Lowell stressed to CBS Face the Nation that Mr Weiss is “a Republican US attorney appointed by a Republican president and attorney general who had career prosecutors working this case for five years looking at every transaction” in which Hunter Biden was involved. “If anything changes from his conclusion,” he added, “the question should be asked, what infected the process that was not the facts in the law?” Outside of the constitutional scrutiny in Mr Biden’s case is the unusual stand-alone charge for lying on a form, which is typically charged in connection with a more serious underlying crime. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 – supported by then-Senator Joe Biden as the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee – made a federal form for firearms purchases a key part of a package of anti-crime legislation. According to prosecutors, Hunter Biden lied on the form when he was asked whether he is an “an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance.” But the chance of being prosecuted for lying on that form is exceedingly rare among the millions of background checks performed each year. Within the fiscal year that Mr Biden bought the gun and filled out that paperwork, federal prosecutors received 478 referrals for charges – and filed cases in roughly half of them. Mr Biden likely did receive so-called “special treatment” from federal prosecutors, as Republican officials have claimed. But it was in the opposite direction. His prosecution appears especially more severe than that facing a typical defendant. “Can anyone tell me how many people have been federally indicted for purchasing a gun while dealing with substance abuse issues?” asked Keisha Lance Bottoms, a former senior adviser to President Biden. “I don’t know the answer, but in my over 29 years as an attorney, I have never heard of it.” According to former Justice Department inspector general Michael Bromwich, these kinds of charges simply do not happen. “I’ve been involved in law enforcement both as a prosecutor and a defense lawyer for 40 years. I’ve never heard of this charge being brought. Never,” according to Mr Bromwich, who served as Justice Department inspector general from 1995 to 1999 and previously served as a federal prosecutor in New York. He is currently a senior counsel at Steptoe & Johnson LLP. “I think it’s extremely unusual to bring, if not unprecedented to bring, this set of charges,” he told The Independent. “These charges were brought as a result of the unrelenting political pressure brought by Republicans in Congress to bring a heavy hand down on Hunter Biden as a way of trying to get to Joe Biden, and I think the prosecutor, Mr Weiss … has succumbed to political pressure,” he said. A plea agreement like the one reached this summer “is much more in keeping with what an ordinary prosecutor would do,” according to Mr Bromwich. Should Mr Weiss seek a plea arrangement like the one prosecutors sought earlier this year, his office is “going to invite criticism from the very Republicans who will put the pressure on him right now who now feel great that there are these very serious charges against Hunter Biden,” he told The Independent. “Given all the forces at play, all the political pressure exerted from the Republican members of Congress, it’s very hard to predict where this is going to go, and how.” Read More Trump denies pushing for Biden impeachment inquiry in secret meetings with MAGA Republicans Hunter Biden indicted: What are the charges and what could happen next? Will House Republicans put up or shut up on Hunter Biden? Should domestic abusers have the right to be armed? The Supreme Court could upend protections for survivors Trump, January 6 and a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election: The federal investigation, explained