List of All Articles with Tag 'rica'

Egypt looked past a pick-up in inflation to keep interest rates unchanged for a second month, with the

The return of El Niño after nearly four years is raising the specter of extreme weather, economic pain,

A Virginia Republican who describes herself as “Trump in heels” has lost her latest election bid in the state. Incumbent state Senator Amanda Chase was narrowly defeated by Glen Sturtevant in the GOP’s Virginia state Senate primary. The race was called earlier this week for Mr Sturtevant, who previously served in the Virginia Senate until 2020, by The Associated Press. The race was required after redistricting in the state. Ms Chase, who attended the January 6 rally for former president Donald Trump in Washington DC, was previously censured by the state Senate for a string of incendiary remarks and election denials. She says she did not take part in the violent riot that followed and that she was driving home when it took place. But Ms Chase later praised those who attacked the US Capitol and breached the building, insisting they were not “rioters and looters.” “These were patriots who loved their country and do not want to see our great republic turned into a socialist country,” she said. “I was there with the people. I know.” The Justice Department has said that it believes more than 2,000 people were involved in the riot, and more than 1,000 defendants from all 50 states have been charged in connection with it. She was defeated for the Republican nomination for Virginia governor in 2021 and called for Mr Trump to declare martial law to prevent Joe Biden from being sworn in as president. She has also drawn attention for openly carrying a firearm during senate sessions, and becoming embroiled in an altercation with a Virginia Capitol police officer over a parking spot. Following her latest defeat, Ms Chase appears to be following the Trump playbook of questioning the legality of her loss. She told WWBT on Thursday that her campaign should have been allowed in the room to watch the certification of machines ahead of early voting.“Right now, we’re in the process of raising money to hire a good attorney that can give us the legal counsel that we need,” Ms Chase told the station. “We know that the state law has been violated, clearly. So now we’re going to hold people accountable,” she said. Chesterfield Voter Registrar Missy Vera told the station that her office had complied with state law, which states that each political party may have one representative present during the machine certification process. Read More Trump news – live: Trump pleads for help from Congress as DoJ shares first classified documents evidence New ad mocks Trump’s excuse that he was too ‘busy’ to hand back boxes of secret government intel Fox guest says Trump’s special counsel looked as comfortable as ‘a monk in a strip club’ in front of committee Everything we know about Nancy Mace being tipped as Donald Trump’s new running mate New recordings of Trump revealed in classified papers investigation, documents show Writer's lawyers say Trump is wrong about $5 million sex abuse-defamation jury award

Kenya felt it was best to sign a bilateral trade deal, despite claims that it undermined regional unity.

The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday against the Navajo Nation in a dispute concerning the tribe’s access to the drought-stricken Colorado River. Critics says the decision harms a community where an estimated one-third of tribal members lack running water and furthers the history of the US government breaking its promises to tribes. The case, Arizona v Navajo Nation, centres on the obligations of an 1868 treaty, which established the Navajo reservation as the tribe’s permanent home, following their forced removal from their ancestral lands by the United States military. The tribe argued that under the treaty, the US government has an obligation to evaluate the tribe’s need for water and factor that analysis into how it divides up water access to the Colorado River, which serves over 40 million people and passes through seven states. The US government, as well as the states of Arizona, Nevada, and Colorado, and various water districts in California, argued against the tribe in consolidated appeals. They claimed that the tribe’s interpretation of the treaty would undermine existing agreements on sharing the water from the Colorado and create and impose unsubstantiated obligations on the US government to develop water infrastructure for the tribe. In a 5-to-4 decision, all but one of the high court’s conservatives ruled against the tribe. “In light of the treaty’s text and history, we conclude that the treaty does not require the United States to take those affirmative steps,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in the majority opinion. “And it is not the Judiciary’s role to rewrite and update this 155-year-old treaty. Rather, Congress and the President may enact — and often have enacted — laws to assist the citizens of the western United States, including the Navajos, with their water needs.” The court’s three liberal justices, as well as the Trump-appointed Neil Gorsuch, an advocate for tribal rights, dissented. “The Navajo have waited patiently for someone, anyone, to help them, only to be told (repeatedly) that they have been standing in the wrong line and must try another,” he wrote in his dissenting opinion. He argued, alongside the tribe, that the Navajo weren’t forcing the US government to immediately start building water infrastructure or changing water claims on the river, but rather begin the process of fully accounting for what the nation needed. Navajo representatives criticised the ruling. "My job as the president of the Navajo Nation is to represent and protect the Navajo people, our land, and our future,” Navajo Nation president Buu Nygren said in a statement after the ruling. “The only way to do that is with secure, quantified water rights to the Lower Basin of the Colorado River.” With a population of about 175,000 and a land mass larger than West Virginia, the Navajo Nation is the largest US tribal reservation, and the Colorado River and its tributaries flow alongside and through the tribe’s territory. “The US government excluded Navajo tribal citizens from receiving a share of water when the original apportioning occurred and today’s Supreme Court decision for Arizona v. Navajo Nation condoned this lack of accountability,” John Echohawk, executive director of the Native American Rights Fund, one of the many Indigenous groups that filed briefs in support of the Navajo Nation, said in a statement. “Despite today’s ruling, Tribal Nations will continue to assert their water rights and NARF remains committed to that fight.” In 2003, the Navajos sued the federal government regarding access to the Colorado River, while the tribe has also fought for access to a tributary, the Little Colorado River, in state court. As The Independent has reported, many on the Navajo nation struggle for basic water access. “If you run out [of water] in the evening, you have to get up earlier the next day to make sure that there’s water for the kids to wash hands, brush their teeth, make breakfast,” Tina Becenti told The Independent. “It was time-consuming and took a lot of energy.” Tribes were cut out of initial deals made to allocate the water on the Colorado River, leaving many to rely on thousands of unregulated wells, springs, and livestock troughs that are spread across the reservation, which can pose a serious health risk. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, these sources may contain bacterial or fecal contaminants, along with unsafe levels of uranium and arsenic – a legacy of mining on Navajo land which began with the US military’s Manhattan Project for nuclear weapons in 1944 and continued until 2005. The fate of the Colorado River has become increasingly contentious, as the vital waterway dwindles under heavy demand and a changing climate. In May, following years of tense negotiations, Arizona, California, and Nevada agreed to cut their use of water from the Colorado in exchange for $1.2bn in federal funding, a last-minute compromise that staved off catastrophic impacts to agriculture, electricity generation, and water supplies to major cities like Phoenix and Los Angeles. The high court decision follows a ruling this month on another topic with a long and complicated history involving tribal groups: adoption. Last week, a 7-2 majority ruled to preserve the Indian Child Welfare Act, defending the law’s preference for the foster care and adoption of Native children by their relatives and Tribes, which was implemented following investigations that revealed more than one-third of Native children were being removed from their homes and placed with non-Native families and institutions, cutting off important family and cultural ties. Louise Boyle and Alex Woodward contributed reporting to this story. Read More Father of 13 dies in Colorado rafting accident after saving his children from danger Feds announce start of public process to reshape key rules on Colorado River water use by 2027 Nevada fight over leaky irrigation canal and groundwater more complicated than appears on surface Supreme Court rules against Navajo Nation in Colorado River water rights case Feds announce start of public process to reshape key rules on Colorado River water use by 2027 Vegas water agency empowered to limit home water flows in future

Former President Donald Trump has made plenty of bold claims about his achievements in the game of golf over the years — and he offered another one on Thursday when he claimed he’s made seven holes-in-one during his life. It’s a remarkable number. Rory McIlroy has apparently made just two holes-in-one in his professional golf career, one on the Abu Dhabi HSBC Golf Championship in 2015 and one on Thursday at the Travelers Championship in Cromwell, Connecticut. When it comes to world leaders, however, Mr Trump does not yet have the field beat. According to official accounts, Kim Jong-il, the former leader of North Korea, shot 11 holes-in-one in a single round during his first ever golf game at the Pyongyang Golf Course in 1994. Still, seven holes-in-one is no small accomplishment — and it’s not the first time Mr Trump has claimed it. Last year, Mr Trump also told Piers Morgan that he’d shot seven holes-in-one. That interview came just weeks after Mr Trump posed with a group including former PGA Tour professional Ernie Els after supposedly shooting a hole-in-one at a course in Commerce, Georgia. The dates of Mr Trump’s other supposed holes-in-one are less clear, but there is no question that the former president is an avid golfer. He owns courses in multiple countries and plays frequently, a habit that he continued even while serving his four years as president. But Mr Trump has also long been dogged by allegations that he cheats at golf. The former Sports Illustrated writer Rick Reilly in 2019 published a book titled Commander in Cheat: How Golf Explains Trump that delves into the former president’s relationship with the game. “Trump doesn’t just cheat at golf,” Reilly writes. “He throws it, boots it, and moves it. He lies about his lies. He fudges and foozles and fluffs. At Winged Foot, where Trump is a member, the caddies got so used to seeing him kick his ball back onto the fairway they came up with a nickname for him: ‘Pele.’” Reilly also claims that Mr Trump’s boast that he has won 18 club championships in his life — made a decade ago to Mark Cuban — is a lie. Reilly has said that whenever the former president has opened a new golf club he plays the first club championship by himself and declares himself the winner. “Donald’s Trump’s boast about winning 18 club championships is a lie that’s so over-the-top Crazytown it loses all credibility among golfers the second it’s out of his mouth,” Reilly wrote. Mr Trump has bigger issues to deal with than his golf record. He’s running for president again, this time under federal indictment for mishandling classified documents. Read More Trump news – live: Trump pleads for help from Congress as DoJ shares first classified documents evidence Trump, DeSantis interviews show Fox influence on GOP field still strong despite troubled year Ivanka and Jared split over attending Trump 2024 launch – follow live Why was Donald Trump impeached twice during his first term? Four big lies Trump told during his 2024 presidential announcement

The Supreme Court met behind closed doors on Thursday to decide if it will take up a case concerning whether the Americans with Disabilities Act covers individuals with gender dysphoria.

Colorado congresswoman Lauren Boebert reportedly accused fellow conservative Marjorie Taylor Greene of accidentally spitting on her lip after Ms Greene called her a “little b****” on the House floor and accused her of copying her articles of impeachment against President Joe Biden. Responding to the comments by Ms Greene, Ms Boebert told CNN, “I’m not in middle school”. Ms Greene said that during the confrontation, Ms Boebert accused Ms Greene of accidentally spitting on her lip, according to Semafor. At the end of the conversation, Ms Greene said she told Ms Boebert, “You need to shut up because the only person that’s recognized to speak right now is Luna” in reference to Representative Anna Paulina Luna of Florida who was speaking on the House floor. C-SPAN cameras captured the two MAGA Republicans having what appeared to be a heated conversation on Wednesday evening after Ms Boebert laid the groundwork to force a procedural vote on her impeachment articles in the coming days. Multiple people witnessed or were apprised of the exchange, including an anonymous GOP lawmaker, and reported its alleged contents to The Daily Beast. The argument reportedly began when Rep Boebert approached Rep Greene and was upset about “statements you made about me publicly”. The Georgia representative then allegedly called her counterpart a “little b****” and accused her of piggybacking on the idea to impeach Joe Biden, though Ms Boebert reportedly denied ever reading Ms Greene’s impeachment resolution. “I’ve donated to you, I’ve defended you. But you’ve been nothing but a little b**** to me,” Ms Greene reportedly said. “And you copied my articles of impeachment after I asked you to cosponsor them.” “Okay, Marjorie, we’re through,” Ms Boebert allegedly responded, to which Ms Greene reportedly said, “We were never together.” Later, Politico reporter Olivia Beavers said Ms Greene had effectively confirmed the exchange. Beavers tweeted: “To be clear, I asked: “Was the name calling correct? There was a Daily Beast story that said you called her ‘a little bitch.’” ‘Impressively correct,’ she replied.” The Colorado Republican didn’t deny the heated exchange when contacted by The Daily Beast. “Marjorie is not my enemy. I came here to protect our children and their posterity. Joe Biden and the Democrats are destroying our country,” she told the outlet. “My priorities are to correct their bad policies and save America.” Ms Greene added fuel to the fire when speaking to Semafor. She was asked if there was any chance of them making up, to which Ms Greene said: “Absolutely not.” “She has genuinely been a nasty little b**** to me,” she added. The Independent has contacted Ms Greene’s office for comment. On the same day as the alleged argument, Ms Greene appeared to publicly criticise Ms Boebert’s impeachment plan. “I’m different than what Lauren Boebert did,” Ms Greene said, CBS News reports. “She just went and did it. I just addressed the conference about impeachment and said that it is the right thing to do.” Ms Boebert has attempted to impeach Joe Biden multiple times. “I am bringing my articles of impeachment against Joe Biden to the House Floor in a privileged motion, meaning that every Member of Congress must vote on holding Joe Biden accountable,” she tweeted on Tuesday evening. The far-right Colorado rep has said she wants to impeach Mr Biden because of his “dereliction of duty” at the southern border. Ms Greene told the press on Wednesday that Ms Boebert had “basically copied my articles” and had attempted to leapfrog her. The Georgia Republican said Ms Boerbert confronted her later on Wednesday about what she had told the media. “I was sitting down, and so I stood up and I said, ‘I’m happy to clarify my public statements to your face,’” Ms Greene told Semafor. “I told her exactly what I think about her.” She added that she had told Ms Boebert she was unhappy that she had pushed her own articles instead of supporting those put forward by Ms Greene. “It’s purely for fundraising,” she said. “It’s throwing out red meat so that people will donate to her campaign because she’s coming up on the end of the month, and she’s trying to produce good fundraising numbers.” Read More AOC implores Greene and Boebert to not waste time with Biden impeachment: ‘We should actually be working’ Exclusive: Marjorie Taylor Greene names her price for McCarthy – impeach Joe Biden Boebert’s latest attempt to impeach Biden had Republicans ‘rolling eyes’, says Democrat AOC implores Greene and Boebert to not waste time with Biden impeachment Marjorie Taylor Greene names her price for McCarthy: Impeach Joe Biden Boebert’s latest attempt to impeach Biden had Republicans ‘rolling eyes’

The group Republican Accountability has released a new advertisement slamming former president Donald Trump’s excuse that he was too “busy” to return boxes of classified documents to the US government. Mr Trump has claimed, first in a rally at his Bedminster golf club in New Jersey last week and then again during a Fox News interview earlier this week, that he failed to return the documents because they were mixed up with his personal belongings and he hadn’t had a chance to go through them yet when the federal government called. The advertisement opens with a narrator asking “Why did Donald Trump refuse to return highly sensitive classified documents?” It then cuts to Mr Trump speaking on Fox News. “I want to go through the boxes and get all my personal things out and I was very busy, as you’ve sort of seen,” Mr Trump says in the Fox News clip. “That’s right,” the narrator says. “He was too busy to comply with a subpoena because he was too busy DJing at Mar-a-Lago.” The advertisement then spends the next 30 or so seconds detailing some of what Mr Trump has been up to since leaving the White House in 2021. “Too busy crashing random people’s weddings,” the narrator says, as images of Mr Trump engaged in various leisure activities appear on the screen. “Too busy going to multiple UFC fights. Too busy selling NFTs. Too busy dancing to the Village People by the pool. Too busy golfing.” Whatever his reasons, Mr Trump is now facing 37 felony counts over his mishandling of the documents and refusal to return them. He is the first president to ever face federal indictment, pleading not guilty to the charges at a courthouse in Miami last Tuesday. Mr Trump is also under indictment in New York over his alleged role in a hush money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels and could face further indictments over his attemps to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election. Nevertheless, the former president continues to lead polls of the 2024 Republican nominating contest by a wide margin. Whether his legal issues affect his standing either in the Republican primary or the general election remains to be seen, but they do appear to be raising the personal stakes of the upcoming presidential election for Mr Trump. “Trump has no respect for the law,” the narrator’s concluding statement begins. “He doesn’t think rules apply to him — especially when he’s so busy.” Read More Ivanka and Jared split over attending Trump 2024 launch – follow live Why was Donald Trump impeached twice during his first term? Four big lies Trump told during his 2024 presidential announcement Trump news – live: Trump pleads for help from Congress as DoJ shares first classified documents evidence Prosecutors have recordings of multiple Trump interviews, documents show

Vice President Kamala Harris has said she knows of young people choosing which college they want to attend based on how restrictive the abortion laws are in that state. Commenting in an interview for the Roe v Wade retrospective on MSNBC’s The ReidOut, Ms Harris said her goddaughter told her that her friends wanted to attend schools in states where there was more freedom in terms of reproductive rights. Ms Harris told the roundtable: “When the decision came down she told me ‘Do you know what’s happening? My friends – whatever gender – are starting to make decisions about where they will actually go to college depending on what’s happening in that state.’” “Because of course, if you look at it, I think the number is something like 23 million women of reproductive age live in states that have banned abortion, and what that is gonna mean for those 23 million, for the myriad of health care issues that are at stake ... It’s having a real impact on all types of decisions people make,” she added. The show took a look back at the decision to overturn the landmark Roe v Wade decision that legalised abortion in the US in 1973 when the Supreme Court ruled that “unduly restrictive state regulation of abortion is unconstitutional”. In 2022, the Supreme Court, packed with three Trump-era appointees, overturned Roe v Wade and returned decisions on abortion freedom to the states. Since then, a number of states have introduced effective abortion bans that limit the procedure to the very early days of pregnancy – often before women are aware they are pregnant. Some states have also criminalised assisting women with accessing abortion, and limited abortion to cases of rape or incest. Ms Harris said that the Supreme Court’s decision last year had infringed on women’s rights. “The idea that the highest court in our land just did that and rolled back rights that had been recognized was incredibly shocking,” she said on MSNBC. She said that after she learned the news of the ruling, she called her husband and shared some “words not meant for television at this moment”. Ms Harris went on to say that the ruling means that some have to “suffer in silence,” the thought of which made her “angry and sad”. Read More Where abortion laws stand in every state a year after the Supreme Court overturned Roe A year after fall of Roe, 25 million women live in states with abortion bans or tighter restrictions Judge to weigh suspending Wyoming's first-in-the-nation ban on abortion pills US prepares for potential end of Roe v Wade - live When will there be a Roe v Wade decision? Why these prosecutors are refusing to enforce anti-abortion laws

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, a multilateral development bank, is in talks to guarantee a climate-related bond being

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board has defended the newspaper’s decision to publish a defensive column from US Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who dismissed allegations of wrongdoing detailed in an investigative news outlet before it had even published its story. The conservative justice – who authored the court’s landmark opinion overturning Roe v Wade one year ago – failed to disclose private jet travel and a luxury fishing trip with a hedge fund billionaire who would later repeatedly ask the nation’s highest court to intervene on his behalf, according to ProPublica’s findings published on 21 June. ProPublica, which has published several investigative pieces outlining alleged ethical lapses among members of the court, had yet to publish its report before The Wall Street Journal ran his column with the blunt and accusatory headline “ProPublica Misleads Its Readers”. Later that day, the editorial board defended its decision to run his defensive piece. “The political assault on the Supreme Court continues, and the latest Justice in the grinder is Samuel Alito,” the board wrote. “As usual, this is a non-scandal built on partisan spin intended to harm the Justice and the current Court majority.” The Wall Street Journal did not return The Independent’s request for comment or explain how it commissioned Mr Alito’s column and how the newspaper made a decision to publish a response to ProPublica before anyone read its reporting. “Justice Alito clearly wanted his defense to receive public disclosure in full, not edited piecemeal. We saw ProPublica’s list of 18 questions and had a good idea of where the reporters were going. The story proved us right,” the editorial board wrote. “It is also hilarious to be denounced for betraying the media brotherhood for the offense of scooping the competition,” the board added, appearing to dismiss criticism that the newspaper provided a venue for a powerful figure before allegations against him were publicised at length as merely a resentful media story. “This is the same crowd that would prefer if we didn’t exist,” the board added. “Their pearl-clutching reveals the degree of media conformity when it comes to approved progressive political targets like Justice Alito.” The board stated that it is defending the Supreme Court “because someone has to,” alleging that the investigations are not about sincere ethics questions but are instead about “the left’s fury at having lost control of the Court” and instead to “destroy” it. ProPublica’s founding editor-in-chief Paul E Steiger served as the managing editor of the Wall Street Journal from 1991 to 2007. Stephen Engelberg, ProPublica’s current editor-in-chief, told The New York Times that Mr Alito’s column “declared without anyone having read the article and without asking for our comment.” “We’re curious to know whether The Journal fact-checked the essay before publication,” he added. Read More Justice Alito tries to get ahead of damning report about billionaire gifts with defensive Wall Street Journal op-ed Wall Street Journal under fire for Justice Alito op-ed: ‘This has simply broken my brain’ Deb Haaland and Tribal leaders welcome Supreme Court decision upholding Indian Child Welfare Act Supreme Court rules Alabama discriminated against Black voters in major victory for voting rights