types of slot games

South Korea’s leadership crisis will play out in the Constitutional Court, which will decide the fate of President Yoon Suk-yeol and Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, both impeached and suspended from power over a short-lived martial law. Han, who was impeached on Friday, had taken over as acting president from Yoon, impeached on December 14. Finance Minister Choi Sang-mok now becomes acting president under the law. Also on Friday, the court held its first hearing in a case to decide whether to reinstate Yoon or remove him permanently from power. The ruling conservative People Power Party filed a court injunction after the vote to impeach Han, saying a simple majority was not sufficient to impeach an acting president. After being impeached on Dec 14, Yoon’s presidential powers were suspended but he remains in office, retaining his immunity from most charges except insurrection or treason. The Constitutional Court must decide within 180 days whether to remove him from office or reject the impeachment and restore his powers. If it removes Yoon or he resigns, a presidential election must be held within 60 days. Opposition Democratic Party lawmaker Jung Chung-rae, the head of parliament’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee, is leading the case for removing Yoon. Yoon’s legal counsel included former Constitutional Court spokesperson Bae Bo-yoon and former prosecutor Yoon Kab-keun, who appeared at Friday’s hearing. The court is also expected to hold a trial on whether to remove Han from office or restore him to his role. South Korea’s constitution requires six justices to agree on the ouster of an impeached president. But the nine-member court has three vacancies, so the current justices would have to vote unanimously to remove Yoon. The court has said it can deliberate and hear arguments with just six justices. The three vacancies are to be filled by parliament, controlled by the main opposition Democratic Party, which approved three nominees this week, although the ruling People Power Party boycotted them. However, Han refused to appoint the justices without bipartisan agreement, saying to do so would exceed his powers in the acting role. Then the opposition-controlled parliament impeached him. There is precedent for an acting president to appoint a Constitutional Court justice, as when former President Park Geun-hye was impeached in late 2016. In South Korea’s only previous presidential removal by impeachment, the court took three months to oust Park in 2017. This time, the terms of two court justices expire in April, and legal experts predict it may seek to rule before that to minimise uncertainty. On Friday Justice Cheong Hyung-sik of the Constitutional Court said it would move swiftly in the case, considering its gravity. In the past, academics say, the justices have not voted predictably by political leaning but have decided case by case, going by their interpretation of the constitution. Conservative attempts to rally popular support for Yoon are not expected to affect the court’s ruling, as Park was removed from office despite continued conservative rallies to keep her in power, warring with candlelight rallies seeking her removal. In the case of Park, who like Yoon was from a centre-right party, the court voted unanimously to remove her, including some justices viewed as conservative and two Park appointees. Yoon also faces criminal investigations related to the martial law decision. If charged, he could ask the Constitutional Court to suspend the 180-day clock on the impeachment ruling. The court denied a similar request by Park. In 2004, then-President Roh Moo-hyun, from a centre-left party, was impeached for falling short of the political neutrality required of a high public official, but finished his five-year term after the court rejected the motion within two months. - ReutersLegislation that would weaken the powers of North Carolina’s incoming governor and other Democrat officials cleared both chambers of the state’s Republican-controlled Legislature this week. The bill would strip authority from the soon-to-be governor, Democrat Josh Stein, to appoint members to the State Board of Elections. Currently, the governor appoints all five members of the board—including three from his own party—based on the recommendations of the Democratic and Republican parties. The new bill would reassign that role to the state auditor, a position that will be filled by Republican Dave Boliek come January 2025. Another provision would limit the governor’s choice of candidates to fill vacancies on the state’s Court of Appeals and Supreme Court to a list provided by the outgoing judge’s political party. The bill would also bar the state’s attorney general from taking a legal position contrary to that of the General Assembly in litigation challenging state laws. Democrat U.S. Rep. Jeff Jackson will assume that office after winning his race against Republican Rep. Dan Bishop. Meanwhile, Democrat Mo Green, set to take over the role of superintendent of public instruction, would be stripped of the power to appeal against a state review board’s decisions on charter school applications. The measure passed the North Carolina House along party lines on Nov. 19, prompting criticism from outgoing Gov. Roy Cooper. “Legislators have put forward a bill that fails to provide real support to communities hit hard by Hurricane Helene and instead prioritizes more power grabs in Raleigh,” Cooper said in a statement. The Senate nonetheless passed the bill a day later and sent it to the governor’s desk. The bill, Republican state Sen. Vickie Sawyer noted, allocates an additional $252 million for Hurricane Helene recovery efforts in Western North Carolina. “This historic commitment brings the total state funding for relief to $1.1 billion. Families still struggling to rebuild after the storm can count on our continued focus on housing, infrastructure, and other critical needs,” Sawyer wrote in a social media post. While the General Assembly is in session, Cooper has 10 days to sign or veto legislation before it automatically becomes law. If he should veto the measure, Republicans have the supermajority needed for an override, though it remains unclear if they would all support one. In the House, three Republicans from Helene-damaged areas joined with the chamber’s Democrats in voting against the bill. Just one defection would be enough for an override to fail. Republicans are poised to lose their veto-proof majority next year after falling one House seat short in the Nov. 5 election. While the party will retain its supermajority in the Senate and a majority in the House, the current lame-duck session could be the last opportunity for Republicans to bypass the state’s Democrat administration. In 2016, the state’s Republican-led Legislature pulled a similar move, limiting the governor’s powers ahead of the transition to Cooper’s administration. That legislation sparked protests and years of litigation.Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter dies at 100types of slot games 。

USC women move to No. 4 in AP poll as top three unchangedDonald Trump criminal prosecution for alleged attempt to subvert 2020 election results dropped

First Period_None. Penalties_None. Second Period_1, Los Angeles, Kempe 10 (Kopitar, Turcotte), 4:19. 2, Los Angeles, Byfield 3 (Fiala, Kopitar), 6:03 (pp). Penalties_Gourde, SEA (Interference), 5:03; Clarke, LA (Roughing), 12:41; Kartye, SEA (Roughing), 12:41; Kempe, LA (Interference), 14:16; Spence, LA (Holding), 17:30. Third Period_3, Seattle, Montour 6 (Bjorkstrand, Gourde), 18:26. Penalties_Laferriere, LA (High Sticking), 16:03. Shots on Goal_Seattle 5-7-8_20. Los Angeles 4-12-5_21. Power-play opportunities_Seattle 0 of 3; Los Angeles 1 of 1. Goalies_Seattle, Daccord 9-4-1 (21 shots-19 saves). Los Angeles, Rittich 7-5-0 (20-19). A_18,145 (18,230). T_2:21. Referees_Tom Chmielewski, Brandon Schrader. Linesmen_Mitch Hunt, Kiel Murchison.Baker Mayfield throws for 3 TDs, Bucs take over 1st in NFC South with 28-13 win over RaidersHigh Haven Celebrates "Danksgiving" Cannabis Event with Green Wednesday and Holiday Deals Across Illinois Locations

A plurality of Americans believe President Joe Biden’s presidential pardons are “inappropriate,” according to the latest weekly survey from the Economist /YouGov. The survey asked , “Do you think the way President Biden has used the power to pardon or commute the sentences of people convicted of federal crimes has been appropriate or inappropriate?” A plurality, 46 percent, described it as “inappropriate,” while 28 percent said it is “appropriate.” Just over a quarter, 26 percent, remain unsure. There is major partisan divide on this matter, as a majority of Democrats, 55 percent, believe Biden’s actions on these pardons has been “appropriate.” Only 17 percent said it is not. However, most Republicans, 71 percent, deem Biden’s actions on this matter “inappropriate,” and a plurality of independents, 48 percent, agree. Only 12 percent of Republicans and 19 percent of independents believe Biden’s actions regarding pardons has been “appropriate” in nature. The survey was taken December 15 – 17, 2024, among 1,553 U.S. adult citizens. It has a +/- 3.4 percent margin of error. It follows Biden issuing presidential pardons to 39 Americans convicted of nonviolent crimes and commuting the sentences of close to 1,500 individuals. As Breitbart News reported , this makes it the “largest single-day act of clemency in modern history.” Notably, the survey came ahead of Biden doubling down and commenting the sentences of 37 of 40 individuals on federal death row. “Make no mistake: I condemn these murderers, grieve for the victims of their despicable acts, and ache for all the families who have suffered unimaginable and irreparable loss,” Biden claimed in a December 23 statement, asserting that he was “guided by [his] conscience and [his] experience as a public defender, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Vice President, and now President” to make that decision. “I am more convinced than ever that we must stop the use of the death penalty at the federal level. In good conscience, I cannot stand back and let a new administration resume executions that I halted,” he added. A presidential pardon that received the most pushback was that of his own son, Hunter Biden. The 82-year-old pardoned his criminal son in his final weeks in office after years of denying he would do so. “No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunter’s cases can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my son – and that is wrong,” Biden concluded in a December 1 statement. “There has been an effort to break Hunter – who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution,” he said, adding, “In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me – and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough.” Notably, Biden’s pardon extends all the way back to 2014, which includes Hunter’s role in Ukraine, serving on the board of corrupt Ukrainian gas company Burisma. RELATED — Jill Biden: “Of Course” I Support Pardon for Hunter Biden That pardon came despite Biden and his administration lying to the American people repeatedly throughout the years, as both denied his intentions to pardon Hunter. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre lied about it as recently as November 7, 2024, flatly telling a reporter, “No,” when asked if Biden had any intention of pardoning his son. “We’ve been asked that question multiple times. Our answer stands, which is no,” she claimed. RELATED — Karine Jean-Pierre: “No” Possibility Joe Biden Pardons His Son Hunter

(VRIF, VRE and VDY) TORONTO, Nov. 22, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Vanguard Investments Canada Inc. today announced the final November 2024 cash distributions for certain Vanguard ETFs, listed below, that trade on Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX). Unitholders of record on November 29, 2024 will receive cash distributions payable on December 06, 2024. Details of the "per unit” distribution amounts are as follows: Ticker Symbol per Unit ($) Frequency About Vanguard Canadians own CAD $117 billion in Vanguard assets, including Canadian and U.S.-domiciled ETFs and Canadian mutual funds. Vanguard Investments Canada Inc. manages CAD $87 billion in assets (as of September 30, 2024) with 38 Canadian ETFs and six mutual funds currently available. The Vanguard Group, Inc. is one of the world's largest investment management companies and a leading provider of company-sponsored retirement plan services. Vanguard manages USD $10.1 trillion (CAD $14 trillion) in global assets, including over USD $3.1 trillion (CAD $4.3 trillion) in global ETF assets (as of September 30, 2024). Vanguard has offices in the United States, Canada, Mexico, Europe and Australia. The firm offers 426 funds, including ETFs, to its more than 50 million investors worldwide. Vanguard operates under a unique operating structure. Unlike firms that are publicly held or owned by a small group of individuals, The Vanguard Group, Inc. is owned by Vanguard's U.S.-domiciled funds and ETFs. Those funds, in turn, are owned by Vanguard clients. This unique mutual structure aligns Vanguard interests with those of its investors and drives the culture, philosophy, and policies throughout the Vanguard organization worldwide. As a result, Canadian investors benefit from Vanguard's stability and experience, low-cost investing, and client focus. For more information, please visit vanguard.ca. For more information, please contact: Matt Gierasimczuk Vanguard Canada Public Relations Phone: 416-263-7087 [email protected] Important information Commissions, management fees, and expenses all may be associated with investment funds. Investment objectives, risks, fees, expenses, and other important information are contained in the prospectus; please read it before investing. Investment funds are not guaranteed, their values change frequently, and past performance may not be repeated. Vanguard funds are managed by Vanguard Investments Canada Inc. and are available across Canada through registered dealers. London Stock Exchange Group companies include FTSE International Limited ("FTSE"), Frank Russell Company ("Russell"), MTS Next Limited ("MTS"), and FTSE TMX Global Debt Capital Markets Inc. ("FTSE TMX"). All rights reserved. "FTSE®", "Russell®", "MTS®", "FTSE TMX®" and "FTSE Russell" and other service marks and trademarks related to the FTSE or Russell indexes are trademarks of the London Stock Exchange Group companies and are used by FTSE, MTS, FTSE TMX and Russell under licence. All information is provided for information purposes only. No responsibility or liability can be accepted by the London Stock Exchange Group companies nor its licensors for any errors or for any loss from use of this publication. Neither the London Stock Exchange Group companies nor any of its licensors make any claim, prediction, warranty or representation whatsoever, expressly or impliedly, either as to the results to be obtained from the use of the FTSE Indexes or the fitness or suitability of the Indexes for any particular purpose to which they might be put. The S&P 500 Index is a product of S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC ("SPDJI”), and has been licensed for use by The Vanguard Group, Inc. (Vanguard). Standard & Poor's®, S&P® and S&P 500® are registered trademarks of Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC ("S&P”); Dow Jones® is a registered trademark of Dow Jones Trademark Holdings LLC ("Dow Jones”); and these trademarks have been licensed for use by SPDJI and sublicensed for certain purposes by Vanguard. Vanguard ETFs are not sponsored, endorsed, sold or promoted by SPDJI, Dow Jones, S&P, their respective affiliates, and none of such parties make any representation regarding the advisability of investing in such product(s) nor do they have any liability for any errors, omissions, or interruptions of the S&P 500 Index.How to watch #4 Auburn vs. #5 Iowa State basketball: Time, TV channel, FREE live stream

Sheriffs will likely play a key role in helping federal agents secure the border and deport illegal immigrants under President-elect Donald Trump. Trump made mass deportation of illegal immigrants a key part of his campaign to win a second term as almost 11 million people flooded into the country illegally since 2021. The president-elect’s incoming border czar, Tom Homan, has signaled a new era of federal, state, and local cooperation when it comes to deporting illegal immigrants. Homan, the former acting head of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), indicated he will first target those who have criminal convictions or are wanted for crimes. “The nation wants a safe country. We’ve had enough crime in this country,” Homan said during a stop at the Texas border in November. Sheriffs in the nation’s 3,100 counties could play an essential role in helping ICE to identify and detain illegal immigrants, said Sam Bushman, CEO of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA), a conservative organization that opposes “unconstitutional” government overreach. As chief law enforcement officers in their counties, elected sheriffs have more latitude than appointed police chiefs. They have authority over criminal investigations, serving warrants, managing county jails, and providing court security within the county. Bushman foresees cooperation between willing county, state, and federal authorities to deport illegal immigrants, possibly through the creation of a new coordination agency or command center. “I think that we could create an organization that communicates with this trifecta, and that would be very effective,” he said. Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff and founder of CSPOA, has been in contact with Homan and believes sheriffs will be an integral part of border security and deportation efforts because of their unique understanding of their jurisdictions. “Who in this country knows their counties better than the sheriff?” he asked. Because of their local knowledge, sheriffs are in a unique position to help make deportation safer and easier, Mack told The Epoch Times. Regardless of politics, sheriffs must protect their constituents from crime and criminals, both tied to illegal immigration in terms of drug and human smuggling along with violent gang activity, he said. Policy experts have suggested that the federal government could deputize local law enforcement under its 287(g) program to aid ICE because the agency likely doesn’t have the manpower to do so alone. The 287(g) program currently provides a framework of cooperation wherein local jails work with ICE to identify illegal immigrants as they are booked for a crime. ICE and designated local law enforcement can then hold that inmate for up to an additional 48 hours so that ICE can take custody of the inmate. Homan has touted the program as a safe deportation pipeline, as ICE officers can pick up deportees within the safety of a jail setting, rather than having to organize an operation out in the community. Former Chief of the U.S. Border Patrol Rodney Scott, who served under both Trump and Biden, said in a previous interview with The Epoch Times that Trump could expand the 287(g) program to help with deportations, as he did during his first term. Scott was recently nominated by Trump to serve as the incoming Customs and Border Protection commissioner. In the blue state of Maryland, Frederick County Sheriff Chuck Jenkins, a longtime Republican, recalls when the task force model was operational in 2008. “We had deputies on the street that could work at the direction of ICE and with ICE to take into custody people who had deportation warrants and so forth,” Jenkins told The Epoch Times. Reinstating the task force model would help expedite the deportation of criminals in the country illegally, he said. The Trump administration could also send representatives to local sheriff departments to recruit them to join the program, he said. “ICE can’t do it alone, or certainly not enough,” Jenkins said. “We need to be a force multiplier for them.” Tying federal grant money to sheriff department cooperation with ICE would likely convince many to come on board, he said. Even if sheriffs don’t participate in arresting illegal immigrants, they could help in other ways, such as providing transportation and logistical support and workspace for ICE, he said. Jenkins said Frederick County’s jail-based detainer program has been successful, resulting in the removal of about 2,000 illegal immigrant criminals in the county. Under the 287(g) program, sheriff’s office employees are trained to file a detainer and prepare the paperwork under the supervision of ICE in an effort to streamline the process, he said. San Diego County Sheriff Kelly Martinez, who serves in the nation’s fifth most populous county, has vowed to defy a new county policy to limit cooperation with federal deportation efforts. Earlier this month, San Diego County supervisors voted to ban its sheriff department from working with ICE on the federal agency’s enforcement of civil immigration laws, including those that allow for deportations. California law generally prohibits cooperation but makes exceptions for those convicted of certain violent crimes. Martinez, whose office is nonpartisan but considers herself a Democrat, said she wouldn’t honor the new policy and that the county government doesn’t oversee her office. “Current state law strikes the right balance between limiting local law enforcement’s cooperation with immigration authorities, ensuring public safety, and building community trust,” Martinez said. In the blue state of Michigan, Barry County Sheriff Dar Lief said it is important to remove violent criminals from the streets. “I’m on board with that,” he told The Epoch Times. Lief echoed the belief of Trump and his surrogates during the presidential campaign that many of the illegal immigrants coming into the country were from prison systems or asylums. “Nonetheless, our governor here asked residents to take in illegal immigrants,” he said. “Who are you opening up your house to?” Lief said he warned the citizens of Barry County against taking in illegal immigrants, which Gov. Gretchen Whitmer called “new Americans,” because there was no guarantee they were properly vetted. Not all blue states or city leaders are against Trump’s deportation plan to remove criminal illegal immigrants. “We will not be a safe haven for those who commit violent acts. We don’t do it for those who are citizens, and we’re not going to do it for those who are undocumented,” Adams said during a press conference. Adams said law-abiding illegal immigrants are welcome in the city. Still, it was a “terrible mistake” to allow those in the country unlawfully to commit violent crimes repeatedly, especially those associated with gangs. “Someone breaks the law—I‘ll be the first one to call up ICE and say, ’Get them out of here,'” she said. Homan said blue city officials don’t have to cooperate, but he has repeatedly warned them not to stand in his way. Homan recently announced he would begin deportations in Chicago, criticizing Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker for resisting the removal of criminal immigrants. “If he impedes us, if he knowingly harbors and conceals an illegal alien, I will prosecute him,” Homan said of the Chicago mayor. The operation consists of Department of Public Safety law enforcement and Texas National Guard members. The program also focuses on arresting illegal immigrants for trespassing on private ranchland along the border—offering a unique roadmap for how counties could help deport illegal immigrants. Brent Smith, the county attorney for Kinney County, has plenty of experience dealing with illegal immigrants in his county, which sits along the Texas–Mexico border. Kinney County has prosecuted the largest number of illegal immigrants for trespass and related misdemeanors under Operation Lone Star. In 2019 and 2020, the small, rural county dealt with just 254 and 132 misdemeanor cases, respectively, mostly involving U.S. citizens. The U.S. citizen caseload has remained somewhat constant, but because of illegal immigration, the total number of misdemeanor cases shot up to 6,799 in 2022 and 5,826 in 2023, according to numbers obtained from the county attorney’s office. Smith told The Epoch Times that trespassing arrests in Kinney County under Operation Lone Star offered valuable lessons on how to run a border security initiative. At first, funding went to provide law enforcement, but Smith said it became clear that there needed to be more funding for the entire county justice system for prosecutors, public defenders, clerks, and judges to process illegal immigrants charged with trespassing. “What I foresee is some very strong 287(g) agreements being entered into, and state and local law enforcement actually becoming an arm of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) immigration enforcement,” he said. He said that after undergoing a DHS training program, local officers are considered immigration officers under the supervision of an ICE agent. He pointed to former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who was known for implementing the 287(g) task force successfully to arrest illegal immigrants in Arizona but came under fire during the Obama administration. Maricopa County’s 287(g) program was canceled in 2011 after a Department of Justice investigation accused the sheriff of racial profiling. In 2012, the Obama administration discontinued the task force and hybrid models of the program altogether. Trump expanded the program in his first term to 150 agreements with local law enforcement and broadened the removal criteria to include misdemeanors. Smith said that once Trump ends the Biden administration’s catch-and-release policy, there will be more “gotaways,” which will require a shift in resources to focus on apprehension instead of processing those claiming asylum. Money—or the lack of it—will be an essential tool in deportation and border security, he said. On the state level, he has been discussing a bill with Texas lawmakers that would require sheriffs to apply for 287(g) agreements before receiving state grant funding. The same principle could be applied to federal grant money for cities such as Chicago, he said. “How much is your political leanings worth to you? Is it worth $1,000, or $100,000, or $2 million?” he said. “We’re going to find out.”Digi International stock hits 52-week high at $34.13

VANCOUVER - Online predators are becoming increasingly resourceful in trolling media platforms where children gravitate, prompting an explosion in police case loads, said an officer who works for the RCMP Integrated Child Exploitation Unit in British Columbia. Data show the problem spiked during COVID-19 when children began spending more time online — but rates did not wane as police anticipated after lockdowns ended. In B.C., they soared, almost quadrupling from 2021 to 2023. Const. Solana Pare is now warning exploitation of children is likely here to stay, as a technological race between police and predators gains momentum. “Technology is becoming more and more available, and online platforms and social media sites are being used by children younger and younger, which provides an opportunity for predators to connect with them,” Pare said in an interview. Police say child exploitation cases in B.C. went from about 4,600 in 2021 to 9,600 in 2022 to 15,920 reports last year. The upwards trend is seen nationally, too. Statistics Canada says the rate of online child sexual exploitation reported to police rose by 58 per cent from 2019 to 2022, and police data show cases have continued to rise. The RCMP’s National Child Exploitation Crime Centre reported that from April 1, 2023, to March 31, 2024, it received 118,162 reports of suspected online child sexual exploitation offences — a 15 per cent increase compared with the previous year. Online child sexual exploitation, Pare explained, includes offences such as sextortion, child luring and the creation or distribution of sexually explicit images of a minor. “We don’t see these types of reports going away,” Pare said. “We only see them increasing because the use of electronic devices and social media, and kids being online earlier and earlier is becoming more common. There’s going to be more opportunity for predators to target children online.” Monique St. Germain, general counsel for the Canadian Centre for Child Protection, said the most common type of child luring is communicating with a youth online in order get them to produce sexual abuse material. She said “the pandemic accelerated those types of cases, and it hasn’t slowed down.” “The tools (Canadian authorities) have to deal with this type of behaviour are inadequate for the scope and the scale of what’s going on,” she said. THE RISE OF ‘SEXTORTION’ Online exploitation gained international attention in 2015 in the case of Port Coquitlam, B.C., teenager, Amanda Todd, who died by suicide after being blackmailed and harassed online by a man for years, starting when she was 12. The month before the 15-year-old died, she uploaded a nine-minute video using a series of flash cards detailing the abuse she experienced by the stranger and how it had affected her life. It’s been viewed millions of times. Dutch national Aydin Coban was extradited to Canada for trial and, in October 2022, he was convicted of charges including the extortion and harassment of Todd. Since then, the term “sextortion” has made its way into the vernacular as more cases come to light. Among them was Carson Cleland, a 12-year-old Prince George, B.C., boy who died by suicide in October 2023 after falling victim to the crime. In New Brunswick that same month, 16-year-old William Doiron took his own life after falling victim to a global sextortion scheme. Mounties across Canada have issued news releases warning of increased cases in their communities, noting that the consequences for the victims can include self-harm and suicide. St. Germain said technology, such as artificial intelligence, is also becoming more user-friendly. “The existence of that technology and its ease of use and ready accessibility is a problem, and it is going to be an increasingly large problem as we move forward,” she said. Pare said police are also adapting to technological advancements in order to keep up with the ever-changing online landscape. “Police are constantly obtaining training on digital technologies to increase our knowledge and understanding of all the intricacies involving their use and how to capture any digital evidence,” she said. Pare said the true rates of the crime are impossible to determine, but pointed to increased social awareness and legislation across North America around mandatory reporting of child abuse material from social media companies as a potential reason for the increase. It’s not going undetected any longer, she said. “Additionally, there’s been a lot of use in artificial intelligence to detect child exploitation materials within those platforms.” Pare said “it’s up to each individual platform” to ensure there is no child sexual abuse material on their sites or apps. “With mandatory reporting, it’s putting the onus back on the electronic service providers to ensure they have measures in place to prevent this from happening, and if it is happening that it is being reported,” she said. “That being said, there are times when things don’t get located.” That is why the Canadian Centre for Child Protection has been advocating for the adoption of the Online Harms Bill that the federal government introduced in February, St. Germain said. “It’s shocking that up until now, we’ve relied on companies to self regulate, meaning we’ve just relied on them to do the right thing,” she said. “What we are seeing in terms of the number of offences and in terms of all the harm that is happening in society as a result of online platforms is completely tied to the decision not to regulate. We need to have rules in any sector, and this sector is no different.” ‘CANADA IS REALLY BEHIND’ The Online Harms Bill covers seven types of harms, from non-consensual sharing of intimate images to content that can be used to bully a child. Earlier this month, Justice Minister Arif Virani announced the Liberal government will split the bill into two parts: dealing with keeping children safe online, and combating predators and issues related to revenge pornography. “We are putting our emphasis and prioritization and our time and efforts on the first portion of the bill,” Virani told reporters on Dec. 5. Such measures would include a new Digital Safety Commission of Canada, which would compel social media companies to outline how they plan to reduce the risks their platforms pose to users, particularly minors. It would have the power to levy fines and evaluate companies’ digital safety plans. St. Germain said such a split “makes sense,” noting that most objections to the bill are related to changes to the Criminal Code and not measures around curbing harms to children. “There obviously are differences of opinion in terms of what is the best way forward, and what kind of regulatory approach makes sense, and who should the regulator be, but there does seem to be consensus on the idea that we need to do more in terms of protecting children online,” she said, adding that the organization is still in support of the second half of the bill. She said the United Kingdom previously passed its own Online Safety Act that will come into effect in 2025, which includes requiring social media firms to protect children from content such as self-harm material, pornography and violent content. Failure to do so will result in fines. “Canada is really behind,” she said. “The amount of information that has come out of the U.K., the amount of time and care and attention that their legislatures have paid to this issue is really quite remarkable, and we really hope that Canada steps up and does something for Canadian children soon.” In the absence of national legislation, province’s have filled the void. In January, B.C. enacted the Intimate Images Protection Act, providing a path for victims to have online photos, videos or deep fakes expeditiously removed. Individuals are fined up to $500 per day and websites up to $5,000 a day if they don’t comply with orders to stop distributing images that are posted without consent. B.C.‘s Ministry of the Attorney General said that as of Dec. 11, the Civil Resolution Tribunal had received a total of 199 disputes under the Intimate Images Protection Act. It said the Intimate Images Protection Service had served more than 240 clients impacted by the non-consensual distribution of intimate images, adding that four awards of $5,000 each and one for $3,000 had been supplied as of mid-December. Nova Scotia, Manitoba, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Alberta and Saskatchewan have also enacted legislation targeting unauthorized distribution of intimate images. St. Germain said the use of provincial powers is also necessary, but it’s not enough. “A piece of provincial legislation is going to be very difficult to be effective against multiple actors in multiple countries,” she said, noting that the online crime is borderless. “We need something bigger — more comprehensive. We need to use all tools in the tool box.” This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 29, 2024.Croatia's president faces conservative rival in election run-offDeep-pocketed investors have adopted a bearish approach towards Amgen AMGN , and it's something market players shouldn't ignore. Our tracking of public options records at Benzinga unveiled this significant move today. The identity of these investors remains unknown, but such a substantial move in AMGN usually suggests something big is about to happen. We gleaned this information from our observations today when Benzinga's options scanner highlighted 10 extraordinary options activities for Amgen. This level of activity is out of the ordinary. The general mood among these heavyweight investors is divided, with 10% leaning bullish and 60% bearish. Among these notable options, 6 are puts, totaling $327,012, and 4 are calls, amounting to $381,036. Predicted Price Range Analyzing the Volume and Open Interest in these contracts, it seems that the big players have been eyeing a price window from $135.0 to $310.0 for Amgen during the past quarter. Analyzing Volume & Open Interest In terms of liquidity and interest, the mean open interest for Amgen options trades today is 108.33 with a total volume of 445.00. In the following chart, we are able to follow the development of volume and open interest of call and put options for Amgen's big money trades within a strike price range of $135.0 to $310.0 over the last 30 days. Amgen Option Volume And Open Interest Over Last 30 Days Significant Options Trades Detected: Symbol PUT/CALL Trade Type Sentiment Exp. Date Ask Bid Price Strike Price Total Trade Price Open Interest Volume AMGN CALL TRADE BEARISH 02/21/25 $13.4 $13.2 $13.2 $260.00 $209.8K 127 186 AMGN PUT SWEEP BEARISH 05/16/25 $11.9 $11.75 $11.9 $250.00 $147.5K 64 124 AMGN CALL TRADE NEUTRAL 12/27/24 $18.45 $16.85 $17.6 $245.00 $70.4K 2 40 AMGN CALL SWEEP NEUTRAL 03/21/25 $131.25 $126.35 $129.07 $135.00 $64.5K 0 5 AMGN PUT SWEEP NEUTRAL 06/20/25 $50.2 $49.75 $50.14 $310.00 $44.9K 159 15 About Amgen Amgen is a leader in biotechnology-based human therapeutics. Flagship drugs include red blood cell boosters Epogen and Aranesp, immune system boosters Neupogen and Neulasta, and Enbrel and Otezla for inflammatory diseases. Amgen introduced its first cancer therapeutic, Vectibix, in 2006 and markets bone-strengthening drug Prolia/Xgeva (approved 2010) and Evenity (2019). The acquisition of Onyx bolstered the firm's therapeutic oncology portfolio with Kyprolis. Recent launches include Repatha (cholesterol-lowering), Aimovig (migraine), Lumakras (lung cancer), and Tezspire (asthma). The 2023 Horizon acquisition brings several rare-disease drugs, including thyroid eye disease drug Tepezza. Amgen also has a growing biosimilar portfolio. Current Position of Amgen With a volume of 1,153,448, the price of AMGN is down -0.14% at $263.02. RSI indicators hint that the underlying stock may be approaching oversold. Next earnings are expected to be released in 43 days. Professional Analyst Ratings for Amgen Over the past month, 2 industry analysts have shared their insights on this stock, proposing an average target price of $293.0. Unusual Options Activity Detected: Smart Money on the Move Benzinga Edge's Unusual Options board spots potential market movers before they happen. See what positions big money is taking on your favorite stocks. Click here for access .* An analyst from RBC Capital has decided to maintain their Outperform rating on Amgen, which currently sits at a price target of $330. * An analyst from B of A Securities has revised its rating downward to Underperform, adjusting the price target to $256. Trading options involves greater risks but also offers the potential for higher profits. Savvy traders mitigate these risks through ongoing education, strategic trade adjustments, utilizing various indicators, and staying attuned to market dynamics. Keep up with the latest options trades for Amgen with Benzinga Pro for real-time alerts. © 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.AI Revolutionizes Data Governance: A New Era of Intelligent Management

What the experts are saying about the major economic trends that will shape 2025