online casino game earn money

online casino game earn money The U.S. dollar gained strength on Tuesday following President-elect Donald Trump's announcement of potential tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China. Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve's recent meeting minutes reflected officials' divided stance on further interest rate cuts, albeit with consensus on maintaining policy ambiguity. Stock markets responded positively, with the Dow Jones, S&P 500, and Nasdaq posting gains. Investors, however, approached Trump's tariff plans cautiously, considering them more as a strategic negotiation maneuver. MSCI's global equity index ticked upwards despite previous declines in European markets. U.S. Treasury yields edged higher after Monday's bond rally stalled with the tariff news. Meanwhile, the Mexican peso and Canadian dollar weakened against the rising U.S. dollar. In commodities, oil prices dipped amid news of a ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon, while gold experienced mixed movements amid fluctuating safe-haven demand. (With inputs from agencies.)During his first presidency and in his campaign leading up to the 2024 election, Donald Trump repeatedly pledged to crack down on illegal immigration. As president-elect, Trump posted on Truth Social on Nov. 18 confirming his plans to declare a national emergency and use the U.S. military for mass deportations of undocumented immigrants. Trump commented “TRUE!!!” with a repost of a Truth Social post from Tom Fitton, who runs the conservative group Judicial Watch . Fitton’s post reads, “GOOD NEWS: Reports are incoming @RealDonaldTrump administration prepared to declare a national emergency and will use military assets to reverse the Biden invasion through a mass deportation program.” Several VERIFY readers, including Debbie, Jacq and Matty, asked us whether Trump can use the military to carry out mass deportations. THE QUESTION Can the president use the military to carry out mass deportations? THE SOURCES David Bier , director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute Peter Margulies , law professor at Roger Williams University Elizabeth Goitein , senior director of the Brennan Center for Justice’s Liberty & National Security Program Brennan Center for Justice President Joe Biden’s Executive Order #14097 Department of Homeland Security The Posse Comitatus Act U.S. Section 502(f) National Defense Authorization Act of 2016 Lawfare , a nonprofit organization THE ANSWER Yes, it's legal for the president to use the military to help carry out mass deportations and other immigration enforcement actions. The National Guard, with approval from a state's governor, can detain individuals, but the other branches of the military can offer mostly logistical support. WHAT WE FOUND A president has the executive power to deploy the military to assist with immigration enforcement, but there are legal limits on the role the military can play. The Posse Comitatus Act, a 143-year-old law, prohibits the president from using active-duty, full-time service members, such as soldiers or Marines, as a police force, according to the Brennan Center for Justice . That means federal military branches like the U.S. Army or Air Force can’t perform tasks such as detaining individuals or making arrests on U.S. soil, even under a national emergency declaration. David Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, explained that active-duty service members, barred from acting like police under Posse Comitatus, would likely focus on non-law enforcement tasks. That could include building infrastructure, like temporary detention facilities, transporting detainees and providing armed backup for domestic law enforcement. The Posse Comitatus Act, however, does not apply to the National Guard, Peter Margulies, a law professor at Roger Williams University, told VERIFY. “The National Guard is a state militia and can be called out by the president with the cooperation of the state governors, and so you could have the National Guard from, let's say, Texas, be used for apprehension. That would not create Posse Comitatus issues,” Margulies said. Trump's post on Truth Social mentioned declaring a national emergency, but the president can request National Guard assistance or federal military assistance with or without declaring a national emergency , according to Chris Mirasola, a contributor for non-profit Lawfare. The Brennan Center for Justice explains that declaring a national emergency grants a president with swift authority during times of crises without waiting for Congressional approval, including diverting federal funds or resources. Both Bier and Margulies told VERIFY Trump's deportation agenda would likely face significant legal challenges and be subject to congressional oversight. And if he declares a national emergency, Congress has the ability to eventually terminate that declaration , but it would require passing a law with a veto-proof supermajority, “which is increasingly difficult in our polarized political environment,” Goitein told VERIFY. Military involvement in immigration enforcement is not unprecedented. In 2019, then-President Trump declared a national emergency to redirect military funds to construct the U.S.-Mexico border wall. More recently, President Joe Biden used a national emergency declaration to deploy the National Guard to the southern border to assist with processing and facility operations tied to drug enforcement. According to Google Trends data , online searches about mass deportation have spiked, with some appearing to link the military's involvement to martial law. Martial law involves the suspension of ordinary law and government functions, with military authorities assuming control. Margulies said even if Trump uses the military in his administration’s deportation efforts, it would not equate to declaring martial law. Margulies explained that martial law hasn’t been used since the Civil War and is “profoundly unlikely” to happen as part of Trump’s proposed initiative because he doesn’t need martial law to execute his deportation plans.

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexican lower house lawmakers on Tuesday overwhelmingly passed a proposal to alter the constitution to include a ban on e-cigarettes and vaping devices as well as a crackdown on synthetic drugs such as fentanyl. WHY IT'S IMPORTANT Former President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who sent the proposal to Congress before leaving office this year, had argued that smoking devices were damaging public health, with children particularly susceptible to getting hooked. ADDITIONAL CONTEXT Lopez Obrador had already banned such devices through a presidential decree, though they remain widely available for purchase. Millions of Mexicans, meanwhile, smoke traditional cigarettes, which remain legal. The reform passed by the legislature on Tuesday also sanctions "production, distribution and sale of toxic substances, chemical precursors, the illicit use of fentanyl and other non-authorized synthetic drugs." Fentanyl, while approved for some use medically, is also by and large banned in Mexico. BY THE NUMBERS The measure passed, in general terms, with 410 votes in favor and 24 against. Less than 1 million people from ages 12 to 65 reported regularly using a vape in 2022, according to federal data cited by lawmakers. Meanwhile, around 500,000 teens and 300,000 adults used e-cigarettes. KEY QUOTES "We value girls', boys', and young people's right to good health above economic and political interests," said Workers' Party lawmaker Mary Carmen Bernal, who belongs to the ruling bloc. Opposition legislator Ector Jaime Ramirez, meanwhile, said banning fentanyl and vaping in the same reform was excessive and "trivializing to the effort being made to combat the most addictive and dangerous drugs." WHAT'S NEXT The reform is now set to head to the senate, where the ruling Morena party and its allies hold a strong majority. (Reporting by Kylie Madry; Editing by David Gregorio) Copyright 2024 Thomson Reuters .

Pakistan-trained militant Javed Munshi apprehended near Indo-Bangladesh border in West Bengal

NoneElon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy say they’re hunting for ways to make American government more efficient. One possible target: the semiannual changing of the clock that so many Americans dislike. “Looks like the people want to abolish the annoying time changes!” Musk wrote last week on his social platform, X, linking to another user’s online poll that found most respondents wanted to end daylight saving time. The practice of shifting clocks forward one hour in March and back one hour in November is intended to maximize Americans’ exposure to sunlight during working hours but has long been derided for causing groggy mornings, missed appointments and even some public health problems. “It’s inefficient & easy to change,” Ramaswamy wrote in a reply to Musk. It was not immediately clear whether the two men, whom President-elect Donald Trump has tapped to run a new effort dubbed the “Department of Government Efficiency” were seriously floating a new policy priority or just spitballing on social media. It was also unclear how a Trump White House would seek to end clock changes, given that Congress – not the executive branch – has controlled the nation’s time shifts, and lawmakers’ recent legislation has stalled. Ramaswamy did not respond to a request for comment. X and Tesla, which Musk also owns, did not immediately respond to requests sent to them asking for comment from Musk. In a follow-up post, Musk told Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) that he did indeed want to end the time changes. The simmering fight over how Americans set their clocks, and when they must do it, has drawn unusual coalitions in Washington based more on geography than on politics. Republicans and Democrats, mostly from the coasts, have called for year-round daylight saving time, saying that permanently advancing the clocks one hour and never “falling back” would allow more people to enjoy sunshine and avoid the frustrations involved with resetting clocks. “Switching the clocks just doesn’t make sense for a country on the move,” Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Massachusetts) said in a statement to The Washington Post. “But we need permanent daylight saving time – more hours of daylight in the evening means more hours to get things done.” Politicians in the center of the country have often balked at the idea, warning that a year-round “spring forward” would mean winter sunrises that could creep past 9 a.m. in cities such as Indianapolis and Detroit. Meanwhile, public health groups have said that permanent standard time would be more natural for our circadian rhythms, citing research that the clock changes increase the risk of heart attacks, stroke and other health problems. “There is a significant stress on the body, and changes that occur, when we are not aligned to the right internal clock,” Lourdes DelRosso, a sleep medicine physician at the University of California at San Francisco-Fresno and co-chair of this year’s World Sleep Day awareness event, said in an interview earlier this year. A March 2023 YouGov poll found that 62% of Americans want to end the practice of changing the clocks, but there was little consensus over what to do next. Half of respondents said they wanted year-round daylight saving time, just under one-third wanted permanent standard time and the remainder said they were unsure or had no opinion. For more than a century, Americans have shifted their clocks forward every spring and back every fall, a tradition that was eventually enshrined in federal law. Voters’ complaints about those clock changes are not new. Lawmakers in the early 1970s moved to permanently adopt daylight saving time, but the decision almost immediately backfired with nationwide complaints, such as children waiting in the dark for school buses to arrive. Congress rolled back the change after 10 months. That defeat has not stopped Markey and other lawmakers who have steadily pushed to lengthen the number of days that Americans spend under daylight saving time, extending that period in 1985, and again in 2005. Most Americans now live with daylight saving time for 238 days a year – nearly eight months. (Two states, Hawaii and most of Arizona, have opted out of the semiannual time changes and remain on permanent standard time, which states are allowed to do.) But states cannot adopt permanent daylight saving time unless Congress passes a bill that allows them to do so. There is a growing political movement attempting to do just that; the Senate in 2022 passed a bill that died in the House. Twenty states have also approved measures that would allow them to adopt year-round daylight saving time if Congress passed a bill making it permanent nationwide, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Other countries have ended their own clock changes, including Mexico, which moved to abolish daylight saving time in 2022. Musk was born and spent his childhood in South Africa – which does not follow daylight saving time – and has previously mocked America’s semiannual time changes. “Finally, an explanation for daylight savings that makes sense ...” the billionaire entrepreneur wrote on social media in 2017, linking to a video by the Onion, a satirical news site, that lampooned the practice. President Biden’s views on time changes are unclear. The White House has not responded to questions in the past two years about whether Biden supported efforts in Congress to adopt year-round daylight saving time, which may have stifled lawmakers’ attempts to attract support for their bill. But the next president appears more receptive. “Making Daylight Saving Time permanent is O.K. with me!” Trump wrote on social media in March 2019, the Monday morning after the “spring forward” took effect that year. The Transportation Department oversees the implementation of daylight saving time, and agency officials have said DOT does not have the authority to change it without an act of Congress. It is not clear whether Musk and Ramaswamy, who have argued that recent Supreme Court decisions would allow the White House to make regulatory changes without going through Congress, see a path to doing so with daylight saving time. Their commission is supposed to make its recommendations to the president by July 4, 2026 – the date they’ve targeted to wind down their panel. Musk and Ramaswamy may have other allies in Trump’s emerging administration. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Florida), Trump’s pick to serve as secretary of state, has spent years calling to end clock changes and make daylight saving time year-round. “My Sunshine Protection Act would end this stupid practice of changing our clocks back and forth,” Rubio said in a statement in March, referencing his legislation. His office did not respond to a request for comment about whether Rubio had spoken with Musk and Ramaswamy about ending the semiannual clock changes. “Can we just stop changing our clocks twice a year?” Jim O’Neill, Trump’s pick to be deputy secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, wrote on X in 2022. “The one industry that doesn’t need disruption is daylight.” We invite you to add your comments. We encourage a thoughtful exchange of ideas and information on this website. By joining the conversation, you are agreeing to our commenting policy and terms of use . More information is found on our FAQs . You can modify your screen name here . Comments are managed by our staff during regular business hours Monday through Friday as well as limited hours on Saturday and Sunday. Comments held for moderation outside of those hours may take longer to approve. Please sign into your Sun Journal account to participate in conversations below. If you do not have an account, you can register or subscribe . Questions? Please see our FAQs . Your commenting screen name has been updated. Send questions/comments to the editors. « Previous Next »

Nordson forecasts FY 2025 revenue below estimates on weak farm equipment demand