las vegas casino slot machines

"In light of the novelty and difficulty of this case, the court should consider staying the statutory deadline to grant more breathing space to address these issues," Trump's legal team wrote, to give him "the opportunity to pursue a political resolution." Trump was fiercely opposed to TikTok during his 2017-21 first term, and tried in vain to ban the video app on national security grounds. The Republican voiced concerns -- echoed by political rivals -- that the Chinese government might tap into US TikTok users' data or manipulate what they see on the platform. US officials had also voiced alarm over the popularity of the video-sharing app with young people, alleging that its parent company is subservient to Beijing and that the app is used to spread propaganda, claims denied by the company and the Chinese government. Trump called for a US company to buy TikTok, with the government sharing in the sale price, and his successor Joe Biden went one stage further -- signing a law to ban the app for the same reasons. Trump has now, however, reversed course. "Now (that) I'm thinking about it, I'm for TikTok, because you need competition," he recently told Bloomberg. "If you don't have TikTok, you have Facebook and Instagram -- and that's, you know, that's Zuckerberg." Facebook, founded by Mark Zuckerberg and part of his Meta tech empire, was among the social media networks that banned Trump after attacks by his supporters on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021. The ban was driven by concerns that he would use the platform to promote more violence. Those bans on major social media platforms were later lifted. In the brief filed on Friday, Trump's lawyer made it clear the president-elect did not take a position on the legal merits of the current case. "President Trump takes no position on the underlying merits of this dispute," John Sauer wrote in the amicus curiae -- or "friend of the court" -- brief. "Instead, he respectfully requests that the court consider staying the act's deadline for divestment of January 19, 2025, while it considers the merits of this case, thus permitting President Trump's incoming Administration the opportunity to pursue a political resolution of the questions at issue in the case." ft/ahaLONDON -- Bukayo Saka will miss more than two months after undergoing surgery on a hamstring injury, Mikel Arteta has says. Saka limped out of Arsenal's 5-1 win over Crystal Palace on December 21, the latest hammer blow of a season in which the Gunners have suffered a string of injuries to key players. None will be more profoundly felt than the absence of their leading chance creator, assist provider, ball progressor and shot taker. "He had a procedure, everything went well but unfortunately he will be out for many, many weeks," said Arteta, who added when pressed for a timescale: "I said many weeks. I think it will be more than two months. I don't know exactly how much longer. I think it will depend on the scar tissue that starts to heel in the first week or so, the mobility of that. Let's see." Even if Arteta's assessment is slightly too conservative, an absence of just the two months would see Saka miss a further nine Premier League games at a time when Arsenal need a winning run to haul in Liverpool. He would also miss the remainder of the Champions League league phase games, the knockout round if Arsenal are required to play it and may even be a doubt for the round of 16. Saka was not the only forward missing from the Arsenal side that ran out 1-0 winners over Ipswich, Raheem Sterling missing from a second straight Premier League matchday squad with a knee injury. That, however, is progressing encouragingly for Arsenal. "The news with Raz I think is better," said Arteta. "We have to see this week how he evolves but we expected the injury to probably take longer than actually the way the knee is evolving in the last few days. Hopefully that's good because we need it." Sterling has struggled to impress since joining on loan from Chelsea on deadline day but given Saka's absence opportunities will doubtless come his way to turn the tide. Replacing Saka will surely be beyond a 30 year old who appears to be in decline but, robbed of one of the Premier League's best players, Arsenal are going to need all the hope they can get.las vegas casino slot machines 。

Former Army soldier Alexander Vindman, a crucial witness in Donald Trump's initial impeachment, may file a lawsuit against Elon Musk after the tech magnate accused him of treason. Eugene Vindman, Alex's twin brother, raised the prospect of a defamation suit after Musk's social media comments. The newly elected congressman from Virginia, Eugene Vindman, denounced Musk's remarks. “If anybody’s on the cusp of having to pay, it’s maybe Elon Musk,” Eugene Vindman said. He said the charges had no factual foundation and were "false and defamatory." Musk’s Accusations and Vindman’s Response Musk said that Alexander Vindman had committed treason and was "on the payroll of Ukrainian oligarchs." Alexander Vindman criticized Musk's behavior, prompting the comments on X, previously Twitter. Vindman had charged Musk of supporting Russian goals by using his business connections and powerful platform. Vindman quickly refuted the claims. He addressed his involvement with a charity group supporting Ukraine in its war with Russia and said he did not accept any money from oligarchs. Musk's claims were deemed unfounded and suggestive of conspiracy theories by him. Vindman’s Role in Trump Impeachment During the Trump-Ukraine crisis in 2019, Alexander Vindman, who was born in Ukraine and subsequently immigrated to the United States, became well-known nationwide. In his testimony against Trump during the impeachment process, he claimed wrongdoing in a phone conversation with the president of Ukraine while serving as the Director for European Affairs at the National Security Council. After supporting his brother during the proceedings, Eugene Vindman, a former military member, entered politics and became the Democrat who won Virginia's 7th Congressional District seat. Concerns Over National Security and Russian Influence Vindman has been outspoken about his worries about Musk's purported impact on American politics and national security. He charged that Musk had been exploited by Russian President Vladimir Putin to foment division in the United States. “Elon Musk has access to state secrets,” Alexander Vindman said in a recent interview. “It’s possible that sensitive information is seeping through.” He described Musk as a potential tool in Russia’s efforts to destabilize American democracy. Get Latest News Live on Times Now along with Breaking News and Top Headlines from US News, World and around the world.

IPL 2025: Punjab Kings acquire Maxwell for Rs 4.20cr, Marsh to LucknowShoppers say they want eco-friendly products, so why aren't they buying them?Rich countries' promise of $300 billion a year in climate finance brought fury at talks in Baku from poor nations that found it too paltry, but it also shows a shift in global political realities. The two-week marathon COP29 climate conference opened days after the decisive victory in the US presidential election of Donald Trump, a sceptic both of climate change and foreign aid. In the new year, Germany, Canada and Australia all hold elections in which conservatives less supportive of green policies stand chances of victory. Britain is an exception, with the new Labour government putting climate high back on the agenda, but in much of the West, concerns about inflation and budgetary shocks from Russia's invasion of Ukraine have dented enthusiasm for aggressive climate measures. At COP29, Germany and the European Union maintained their roles championing climate but also advocated a noticeably practical approach on how much money historical polluters should give poorer countries. "We live in a time of truly challenging geopolitics, and we should simply not have the illusion" otherwise, European climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra told bleary-eyed delegates at COP29's pre-dawn closing session Sunday, as activists in the back loudly coughed to drown him out. But he vowed leadership by Europe, hailing COP29 as "the start of a new era for climate finance". German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, a Green party member and longtime climate advocate, called for flexibility on ways to provide funding. Europe should "live up to its responsibilities, but in a way that it doesn't make promises it can't keep", she said. Avinash Persaud, special advisor on climate change to the president of the Inter-American Development Bank, called the final deal "the boundary between what is politically achievable today in developed countries and what would make a difference in developing countries". Activists say that climate funding is a duty, not choice, for wealthy nations whose decades of greenhouse gas emissions most contributed to the crisis that most hits the poorest. This year is again set to be the hottest on record on the planet. Just since COP29, deadly storms have battered the Philippines and Honduras, and Ecuador declared a national emergency due to drought and forest fires. Wealthy historic emitters' promise of $300 billion a year by 2035 is a step up from an expiring commitment of $100 billion annually, but all sides acknowledge it is not enough. The COP29 agreement cites the need for $1.3 trillion per year, meaning a whopping $1 trillion a year needs to come from elsewhere. Even within the $300 billion commitment, some activists see too much wiggle room. "It is, to some extent, almost an empty promise," said Mariana Paoli, the global advocacy lead at London-based development group Christian Aid. She described the target as "creative accounting", saying there was not enough clarity on how much money would come from public funds and in grants rather than loans. She acknowledged the politics of the moment but said that wealthy nations had options such as taxation on fossil fuel companies. "There is a backlash because there is no political will," she said. In one closely scrutinised part of the Baku deal, countries will be able to count climate finance through international financial institutions toward the $300 billion goal. The text states that it is "voluntary" -- potentially opening the way to include China, which is the world's largest emitter but refuses to have requirements like long-developed countries. In a joint statement at COP29, multilateral development banks led by the Washington-based World Bank Group but also including the Beijing-based Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank -- which has long faced US criticism -- expected that they together can provide $120 billion annually in climate financing and mobilise another $65 billion from the private sector by 2030. Melanie Robinson, director of the global climate program at the World Resources Institute, said there were good reasons to rely on multinational development banks, including how much capital they can leverage and their tools to advance green policies. "They are the most effective way to turn each dollar of finance into impact on the ground," she said. She agreed that the $300 billion was insufficient but added, "It's a down payment on what we need." Beyond the debate on dollar figures, she pointed to an initiative within the G20 by Brazil, which holds COP30 next year, to reform financial institutions so as to incorporate debtor nations as well as climate concerns. "There is really a much bigger opportunity for us -- which is shifting the whole financial system," she said. sct/giv

OGDC boosts Pasakhi-5 well productionA crackdown on the theft of vehicles from driveways will see new laws introduced to ban devices which can clone electronic keys. Criminals can target cars which activate automatically when a fob is nearby. The cloning devices have been blamed for a massive increase in thefts of high-tech vehicles which in turn has forced insurers to push up premiums. The thieves use electronic equipment designed for legitimate locksmiths and garages to copy keys inside homes, allowing cars to be driven away. The Home Office is working on a law “to ban electronic devices used to steal vehicles, empowering the police and courts to target those criminals using, manufacturing and supplying them”. Measures are expected to be included in the forthcoming Crime and Policing Bill, which will also include measures to crack down on shoplifting and new “respect orders” banning persistent offenders from high streets. Policing minister Diana Johnson held talks two weeks ago with the National Police Chiefs’ Council about proposals to cut car theft after the number of stolen vehicles recorded by police shot up. Incidents rose from 70,053 in 2013-14 to 128,553 in 2023-24. Crime figures show four in ten cases involve the offender using the signal from an electronic key. This typically involves technology that receives it from a key inside a property and sends it to a device held near the car. This fools the car into thinking the key is nearby, the doors unlock and the engine can be started. The practice is known as relay car theft because the key’s signal is “relayed” to a device. The growing problem is one of the reasons insurance premiums have risen to an average of £622 – 21 per cent higher than a year ago, according to the Association of British Insurers. Other factors include an increase in the cost of repairing damaged vehicles. People who keep keys near the front door and their vehicle on the drive close by can be particularly vulnerable and car owners can protect themselves by storing keys in a container called a Faraday Bag which blocks the signal. An Association of British Insurers spokesperson said: “Vehicle theft remains a serious problem. “So far this year, insurers have settled more than 40,000 claims for stolen vehicles and have paid out more than £490 million to support affected customers. “The industry invests millions each year to combat vehicle crime and help customers to protect their vehicles, and the Government’s efforts to combat thefts are welcome. “We look forward to seeing more details in the Crime and Policing Bill and will continue to work with Government and the police to clamp down on these sorts of crimes.” Minister for Crime and Policing, Dame Diana Johnson said: “Vehicle theft has a devastating effect on victims and we are aware of the real concerns people have in their day-to-day lives. "In the last year alone there were over 128,000 vehicle thefts, which is why we are focused on tackling this issue at source and have committed to bringing forward legislation to ban electronic devices used to steal vehicles, preventing them from getting into the hands of organised crime groups. "We will continue to work closely with the National Police Chiefs’ Council, which includes supporting their National Vehicle Crime Reduction Partnership, which brings together the police and manufacturers to clamp down on vehicle crime.”Daily Post Nigeria NPFL: Lobi Stars pip Kwara United, Insurance win at home Home News Politics Metro Entertainment Sport Sport NPFL: Lobi Stars pip Kwara United, Insurance win at home Published on November 30, 2024 By Mike Oyebola Lobi Stars returned to winning ways after a hard-earned 1-0 victory over Kwara United at the Lafia City Stadium on Saturday. Peter Onah’s 26th minute strike separated both teams on the night. Daniel Amokachi’s side drew one and lost two of their three previous games. Kwara United finished the game with 10-men after Junior Aimufua was sent off two minutes from time. In the day’s other matchday 15 game, Bendel Insurance pip Plateau United 2-1 at the Samuel Ogbemudia Stadium, Benin City. Seven games will be played across different venues on Sunday. Related Topics: insurance Lobi Stars.Kwara United NPFL Don't Miss Bundesliga: Boniface faces sanction for reckless driving You may like NPFL: Heartland shift attention to Nasarawa United clash after midweek disappointment NPFL: El-kanemi Warriors attacked by armed robbers NPFL: Ikorodu City must aim top three finish — Aweroro NPFL: Niger Tornadoes boss gives update on Okoro’s injury NPFL: Abia Warriors’ Megwo targets maximum points against Shooting Stars NPFL: Santo upbeat Aina will sign new contract at Nottingham Forest Advertise About Us Contact Us Privacy-Policy Terms Copyright © Daily Post Media Ltd

Watch: Arvind Kejriwal attacked with liquid during padyatra in DelhiSinclair Broadcast stock hits 52-week high at $18.21Mnangagwa’s security panics, rushes him to safety after parliament plunged into darkness

Fulham boss Marco Silva sends ex-Arsenal stars message in bid to get one over on Tottenham

The countdown to 2025 begins. With less than a week remaining to the new year, rapper Pitbull helped unveil Times Square's iconic New Year's Eve ball on Friday. The Waterford Crystal ball is a geodesic sphere covered with 2,688 crystal triangles and measuring 12 feet in diameter. It weighs 11,875 pounds with has more than 32,000 LED lights. While AccuWeather meteorologists have predicted a rainy New Year's Eve in New York, it's not expected not to dampen any of the celebrations too much. Here's what to know about the annual Times Square tradition and how to watch on TV and streaming. What is the New Year's Eve ball drop? On New Year's Eve, the massive shimmering ball will be lowered at Times Square in New York City to kick off the new year. Need a break? Play the USA TODAY Daily Crossword Puzzle. Though the ball drop tradition at Times Square began in 1907, New Year’s Eve celebrations at the iconic venue were first held in 1904. Seven versions of the ball have been designed over the years. The first ball, measuring 5 feet in diameter and weighing 700 pounds, was made of iron and wood and was covered with 100 25-watt light bulbs. It was made by a young immigrant metalworker named Jacob Starr, according to the Times Square official website . 'Proud tradition' Over the years, the ball witnessed major changes. It went from a 400-pound iron ball in 1920 to a 150-pound aluminum ball with 180 light bulbs in 1955. In 1995, the aluminum ball was upgraded with aluminum skin, rhinestones, and computer controls. The crystal New Year’s Eve Ball, meanwhile, was introduced in 1999 to welcome the new millennium. Modern LED technology replaced light bulbs in 2007 for the 100th Anniversary of the New Year’s Eve Ball and the next year in 2008, the "permanent Big Ball was unveiled atop One Times Square shining brightly above Times Square throughout the year." "This proud tradition is now a universal symbol of the New Year," Times Square says, adding that more than a ton of confetti will also be dropped. When is the ball drop? The Times Square Ball Drop celebration will kick off shortly before 6 p.m. on Dec. 31 and the New Year's Eve Ball will be raised to the top of the pole at One Times Square. At exactly 11:59 p.m., the ball will make its 60-second descent down the flagpole to signal the start of the new year. Who is performing? The Times Square New Year celebrations will include performances by rock legend Lenny Kravitz, Mark Ambor, Grammy-nominated country singer Mickey Guyton, Carrie Underwood, Megan Moroney, Sophie Ellis-Bextor, the Jonas Brothers, TLC, Greeicy, De La Ghetto, Kapo, and the dance group AGNEW among others. Underwood will perform just before the ball drops at midnight with a medley of some of her biggest hits, followed by Guyton, who then perform the special Times Square New Year tradition of singing John Lennon’s “Imagine” moments before the ball drop. See full list of performers: 'New Year's Rockin' Eve 2025' headlined by Carrie Underwood, Jonas Brothers How to watch Times Square ball drop While multiple broadcasting corporations will be airing the New Year's Eve celebrations live on their TV channels and streaming platforms (details below) audiences can also catch the live webcast on Times Square's official website starting 6 p.m. on Tuesday, Dec. 31. "Enjoy commercial-free, webcast coverage of the festivities leading up to the Ball Drop at midnight, including backstage access, behind-the-scenes stories and interviews with performers and other celebrities," Times Square says on their website. A livestream with open captions and American Sign Language (ASL) interpretation will also be available on YouTube. How to watch on CNN Anderson Cooper and Andy Cohen will return for the eighth consecutive year as co-hosts of CNN’s "New Year’s Eve Live with Anderson Cooper and Andy Cohen" and will host the show live from Times Square. The show will begin at 8 p.m. ET on Tuesday, Dec. 31. Guests include 50 Cent, live from his residency at Planet Hollywood Resort & Casino in Las Vegas, Sting, Meghan Trainor, Shania Twain, Diplo, Lil Jon and Patti LaBelle. Comedians Whitney Cummings, Amy Sedaris, Sasheer Zamata, Ziwe and Adam Devine also will be part of the show. The new year show will stream live on Max for subscribers and on CNN.com, CNN connected TV and mobile apps for pay TV subscribers. How to watch on CBS CBS will air "Nashville's Big Bash," hosted by Keith Urban and Rachel Smith. The show, scheduled to air live on Tuesday, Dec. 31, will begin at 8 p.m. ET/PT and will go on till 10 p.m. before taking a half-hour break and resuming at 10:30 p.m. ET/PT and going on till 1:30 a.m. The show will air on the CBS Television Network and will also be available to stream on Paramount+. Dustin Lynch and WCBS-New York weather anchor Lonnie Quinn "will count down with the East Coast at midnight ET for New York’s Ball Drop," CBS said in a news release. Watch 'Nashville's Big Bash': Subscribe to Paramount+ How to watch on ABC Ryan Seacrest, who is marking his 20th year as host, will host "Dick Clark’s New Year’s Rockin’ Eve with Ryan Seacrest 2025," alongside co-host Rita Ora from Times Square on ABC. Carrie Underwood is set to perform just before midnight. The show will live on Tuesday, December 31, on ABC starting at 8 p.m. ET and will be available to stream on Hulu the next day. Watch 'Dick Clark’s New Year’s Rockin’ Eve with Ryan Seacrest 2025': Subscribe to Hulu Beyond Times Square: A giant Peep, a wrench, a crab. A look at the weirdest NYE drops. How to watch on NBC NBC will not be doing any live programming this year and will instead air recorded specials with “TODAY’s" Hoda Kotb, Jenna Bush Hager and Seth Meyers, among others. We occasionally recommend interesting products and services. If you make a purchase by clicking one of the links, we may earn an affiliate fee. USA TODAY Network newsrooms operate independently, and this doesn’t influence our coverage. Saman Shafiq is a trending news reporter for USA TODAY. Reach her at sshafiq@gannett.com and follow her on X and Instagram @saman_shafiq7.I’ve been seeing variations on the question above on comment boards and social media, and the answer is inevitably a resounding “No. Fucking. Way.” But let’s be clear about what the question really is, since it’s actually two questions at once. The fundamental thing that’s being asked is: Could “ Babygirl ,” an enthralling high-kink corporate drama, in which Nicole Kidman plays a girlboss who secretly yearns to be dominated and debased, and plays this all out with one of her young male interns...could a male director have gotten away with making that movie today? The answer everyone seems to agree on, with an underlying note of look-how-far-we’ve-come cultural pride, is no. I don’t necessarily disagree — though actually, in a way, I sort of do. “Babygirl,” written and directed by the volcanically talented Dutch filmmaker Halina Reijn , is a gripping movie about a woman who liberates herself by giving into transgressive desires — desires we might once have categorized as politically or sexually incorrect, and that we would now call...what? Would we say, “She gets turned on by doing stuff that’s super not woke?” No, we wouldn’t say that, because it would sound absurd. But the point is that “Babygirl” is a film about someone who feels, and believes, that her deepest desires are wrong. It’s important to recognize what a common sensation that is. There’s an old saying that goes, “Sex isn’t good unless it’s dirty,” and I think what that expresses is that it’s intrinsic to the nature of human sexuality that people are drawn, in the erotic arena, to acting out things that feel “naughty” or “bad” or whatever. It’s whatever floats your boat. That’s why we have movies like “Basic Instinct” or “91⁄2 Weeks” or “Last Tango in Paris” or “In the Realm of the Senses” or “Bound” or “The Piano Teacher” or “Unfaithful” — movies that allow us to play out, in a collective ritual (or, at least, it used to feel that way in a theater), the tingly lure of forbidden sexuality. And it’s why we have porn, which Kidman’s character in “Babygirl” is addicted to. That’s the realm where her libidinous imagination can roam free. Kidman’s character, Romy, is trapped in a gilded and proper upper-class domestic existence, with a husband, played by Antonio Banderas, who loves and supports her, and two daughters she’s devoted to. But that’s part of her prison. It’s the life she has built and the life she wants; she has no reason to leave it. Yet it doesn’t feed her inner flame. She also wants to own her sexuality, every last kinky enticing layer of it, and because movies work in a mythological way, “Babygirl” makes a larger statement about the desire of women to own their sexuality. That’s why knowing that there’s a woman filmmaker behind the camera is part of the film’s sexual politics. Once Romy and Samuel (Harris Dickinson), who seduces and dominates her by acting like a dick, begin their forbidden affair, the relationship that gets played out is teeming with “wrong” things. But the movie, though it wants to be sexy, isn’t exploiting those things; it’s exploring them. Its gaze is allied with a liberated vision. What if a man had made the same film? You could certainly say it would be more controversial. But I still think it would be the kind of hot-button conversation-starter that movies should be about. And if the ultimate truth of a movie is what’s onscreen, and if we agree that “Babygirl” is not an exploitation film, then if a man had directed it, why in theory would we need to react differently to what’s onscreen? But here’s the thing: It wouldn’t have been the same movie. The crucial point about authorship and gender relates to the second meaning of “Could ‘Babygirl’ have been made by a male director?” Politically, that movie might have been an even hotter potato, but the real answer is: A male director would not and could not have made “Babygirl” the way that Halina Reijn made it. It’s not just about the cultural identity politics. It’s about how the film’s power emerges from a hard-wired female consciousness. Kidman’s performance is extraordinary (the best by a female actor this year, in my opinion), but part of what makes acting like this possible is that the role is conceived with an intimacy that renders Romy’s gaze more potent than ours. She’s gazing into the sadomasochistic abyss of her own longing. I think it’s worth noting just how infrequently the movies have portrayed this level of incendiary sexual adventure, especially on the part of women. We’re used to seeing it in a fevered pop-thriller context (e.g., “Basic Instinct”). But serious erotic movies are actually very rare wildflowers. “91⁄2 Weeks,” which Reijn has cited as an inspiration that she watched countless times when she was younger, was always, to me, the glossy synthetic kitsch version of a transgressive romance. “Fatal Attraction,” also directed by Adrian Lyne (and also an influence on Reijn), is infinitely better than “91⁄2 Weeks,” but it’s less about sexuality than a new line in the sand that women were drawing, with Glenn Close’s Alex telling Michael Douglas’s sneaky adulterer: I will not be used and thrown away. What “Babygirl” gets into, in the scene where Romy and Samuel meet up for an extended hotel-room tryst, is the shivery ambivalence Romy feels, her alternating current of fear and desire, and the danger too, which Samuel picks up on and uses to excite her. She’s letting go at last, but the focus is on the push-pull of her emotions. I can’t imagine that a male director would have staged that scene in quite that way. So no, a male director couldn’t have made the movie that “Babygirl” is. For too long, women didn’t have the power to make movies like this one. In a real sense, it’s their turn. That’s a revolution to be celebrated. Yet if we pivot back to the original meaning of the question, it seems as if part of what’s being asked is, “ Should a male director today make a movie like ‘Babygirl’?” And in that sense, I confess I’m a bit uncomfortable with that resounding “no.” It feels as if the “no” is coming from people who are saying, implicitly, “We’re the ones who would attack that movie. Simply for existing.” Yet do we truly want to be that lockstep when it comes to the issue of who can make what? “Babygirl” is a film that revels in throwing off the shackles of what’s allowed. We shouldn’t greet a movie like that by using it as an opportunity to lay down one more restriction on what we, as a culture, allow.Shohei Ohtani wins his third MVP and first in the NL following a historic offensive season with the Los Angeles Dodgers