The content subscription platform said its new transaction rules were not due to one user and will "continue to review these limits" amid the backlash.
from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/3ju6Pah
The Trump administration and Senate Republicans have been in regular contact over possible coronavirus relief measures and the Senate's top Republican will "hopefully" unveil a new bill next week, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Monday. Asked about the collapse of talks with Democrats over aid legislation, Mnuchin told Fox Business Network that he and White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows have been speaking regularly with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.
from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/31KxmtS
Pro-democracy activists, including a health care workers union, in Hong Kong on Sunday called for a boycott of the city's universal coronavirus testing plan, Reuters reports.The opposition is not unconcerned with the virus, but is instead worried by the fact that medical staff from mainland China are supposed to assist with carrying out the plan at a time when many Hong Kong residents believe Beijing is stripping away their freedoms and enhancing its already strong grasp on the city, especially after the passing of a controversial national security law earlier this year and the postponement of September's legislative elections.The union, the Hospital Authority Employees Alliance, was formed during last year's pro-democracy protests and has 20,000 members. It believes universal testing is not an efficient use of resources, arguing that focused testing is the better play for Hong Kong at this point during the pandemic, prompting suspicions about ulterior motives. Union leader Winnie Yu said it's "clear to see the government has one and only one goal," which is "to use the pandemic to achieve their own political aims" of doing "whatever they can to please the central government of China."Well-known activist Joshua Wong supports the boycott and agreed that the government's plan is faulty. Per Reuters, Wong believes a full border closure would be more effective.Neither the Beijing-backed city government, nor the Chinese Communist Party, took the criticism well. Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam said it's an attempt to "smear the central government," while Chinese state media considers the critics ungrateful. Read more at Reuters.More stories from theweek.com 5 more scathingly funny cartoons about the Republican National Convention Air travel in the coronavirus era Biden's latest ad puts Trump's weirdest moments and empty rallies to a Bad Bunny song
from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/32xTK8Q
The U.S. armed forces will have no role in carrying out the election process or resolving a disputed vote, the top U.S. military officer has told Congress. The comments from Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, underscore the extraordinary political environment in America, where the president has declared without evidence that the expected surge in mail-in ballots will make the vote “inaccurate and fraudulent,” and has suggested he might not accept the election results if he loses. Milley's comments were released Friday.
from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/3gF4DLg
Kenosha, a city of 100,000 in Wisconsin’s southeastern corner, now confronts the question of when lethal force is justified in two different cases. One, the shooting of Jacob Blake by a police officer, I addressed yesterday. The other is the case of Kyle Rittenhouse, who is alleged to have killed two people and injured one during the civil unrest this week, and who has been charged with first-degree intentional homicide, reckless homicide, and other offenses.Rittenhouse is a 17-year-old from Antioch, Ill., about a half hour’s drive from Kenosha. Inexplicably, this underage police cadet from out of state wound up on the streets after curfew in a place where a riot was likely imminent, doing interviews with journalists and openly carrying an AR-15–style rifle.There can be no question that Rittenhouse and whatever adults were in charge of him made idiotic decisions. Minors should not stand guard at riots play-acting at being cops. But even people who knowingly put themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time are allowed to defend themselves against attack when they get there. So the biggest legal question is: Did Rittenhouse defend himself against attack with an appropriate amount of force, or were the people he shot the ones acting in self-defense by trying to disarm him?The very beginning of the situation is not on video that I am aware, but the complaint against Rittenhouse contains some key details from Richard McGinnis, a Daily Caller reporter who was interviewing Rittenhouse at the time:> McGinnis said that as they were walking south another armed male who appeared to be in his 30s joined them and said he was there to protect the defendant. McGinnis stated that before the defendant reached the parking lot and ran across it, the defendant had moved from the middle of Sheridan Road to the sidewalk and that is when McGinnis saw a male ([Joseph] Rosenbaum) initially try to engage the defendant. McGinnis stated that as the defendant was walking Rosenbaum was trying to get closer to the defendant. When Rosenbaum advanced, the defendant did a “juke” move and started running. McGinnis stated that there were other people that were moving very quickly. McGinnis stated that they were moving towards the defendant. McGinnis said that according to what he saw the defendant was trying to evade these individuals.After that, much of the situation was recorded, and the New York Times has done an excellent job of stitching the videos together. This Twitter thread from a co-author of the piece nicely explains the events and (for those willing to watch graphic footage) provides the key clips:> A teenager faces charges in shootings that left 2 people dead in Kenosha, WI. The @nytimes Visual Investigations team reviewed hours of livestreams to track 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse’s movements during and leading up to the shootings. [THREAD] https://t.co/FRCYlS5wgH> > -- Christiaan Triebert (@trbrtc) August 27, 2020 The first video starts with people already chasing Rittenhouse, one of whom throws something at him. One person even fires a handgun in the air — and another, Rosenbaum, charges at Rittenhouse, who shoots him. After that, there are more shots from an unknown source, and Rittenhouse calls a friend on his phone and leaves.But again he’s pursued, with some protesters urging others to join in, and this time he falls down. Several people move in on him, and he takes shots at three, hitting two. One is holding a handgun and survives a shot to the arm; the other has a skateboard and dies. Again there are additional mysterious gunshots after the fact.Obviously, a big unanswered question right now is how this all really got started. But as we wait for that information, let’s take a gander at the Wisconsin laws at issue.There are two extremes here: justifiable use of deadly force and first-degree intentional homicide. So let’s see what the law says about those two situations, bearing in mind that other charges can apply if Rittenhouse’s behavior fell in between them. (There are plenty of options: Rittenhouse is charged with reckless homicide for the first fatal shooting, first-degree intentional homicide for the second, and attempted first-degree intentional homicide for the nonfatal one, in addition to charges for reckless endangerment and bearing a dangerous weapon as a minor.)Quite typically for a U.S. state, Wisconsin allows civilian use of deadly force when one “reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.” One major issue, then, will be whether Rittenhouse reasonably thought that the folks engaging with him meant to inflict serious injury, not just disarm him.But what if Rittenhouse provoked the confrontation to begin with? That’s bad for a claim of self-defense, but it doesn’t preclude one. Here’s another excerpt from the Wisconsin statute books:> (a) A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.> > (b) The privilege lost by provocation may be regained if the actor in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his or her assailant.> > (c) A person who provokes an attack, whether by lawful or unlawful conduct, with intent to use such an attack as an excuse to cause death or great bodily harm to his or her assailant is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense.So, even if Rittenhouse bears some responsibility for the initial conflict, he can still argue that he did everything he could to escape the situation and withdraw from the fight. Both shooting incidents began with him running away.Moving to the other extreme, to prove first-degree intentional homicide, prosecutors will have to show that Rittenhouse “cause[d] the death of another human being with intent to kill that person” and will have to disprove the existence of any “mitigating circumstances” the defense asserts. If the prosecution fails at the latter task, the offense is knocked down to the second degree.Mitigating circumstances include “adequate provocation,” meaning the victim did something “sufficient to cause complete lack of self-control in an ordinarily constituted person”; “unnecessary defensive force,” meaning Rittenhouse “believed he . . . was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that the force used was necessary to defend [himself],” even though the belief was unreasonable; and “prevention of felony,” meaning he believed his actions were necessary to stop the “commission of a felony,” even though the belief was unreasonable. In other words, even if Rittenhouse unreasonably thought his actions were necessary, he can get the charge downgraded, though in that case he’ll still have committed a very serious offense.Rittenhouse is already a hero to some and a supervillain to others; in that sense, he is the Bernie Goetz of 2020. The highest charge against him strikes me as a stretch, but beyond that I don’t have any bold opinions yet. The outcome for each shooting will depend on whether Rittenhouse reasonably feared for his life, which in turn might depend on broader context we lack thus far — and even if all three shootings were justified, there are still firearms and reckless-endangerment charges for him to contend with.Where the f*** were this kid’s parents?
from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/3jtTnTY
The highest surge hit about 15 miles east of where Laura was forecast to make landfall but it "wobbled" at the last moment. Most U.S. media played up a nine-foot surge recorded by a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration observation station near Cameron, Louisiana, and the NHC was criticized for perhaps raising too much alarm.
from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/3b5eqsG
An Iranian has been sentenced to nine years in jail for beheading his teenaged daughter in her sleep, local media reported Friday, adding that the mother wants him executed. The so-called "honour" killing of 14-year-old Romina Ashrafi on May 21 sparked widespread outrage, with media condemning "institutionalised violence" in the Islamic republic. Media said Romina was decapitated at the family home in the village of Talesh in the northern province of Gilan. "Despite the judicial authorities' insistence on a 'special handling' of the case, the verdict has terrified me and my family," Rana Dashti, the mother, told ILNA news agency. "I don't want my husband to return to our village ever again," she said, calling for the verdict to be reviewed and changed to "execution". Having lived with the man for 15 years, Dashti said she now fears for the life of the rest of her family. Ebtekar newspaper said at the time of Romina's killing that Iran's "eye for an eye" retributive justice does not apply to a father who kills his child, for which the customary sentence is jail time and fines. Iran's President Hassan Rouhani has "expressed his regrets" following the girl's killing and called for the speedy passing of several anti-violence bills. Romina had reportedly run away after the father refused to give permission for her to marry a man 15 years her senior. But she was detained by authorities and taken home, despite having pleaded with a judge that she feared for her life if returned. The man she wanted to marry, Bahman Khavari, was sentenced to two years in prison, local media said, without specifying the charge. The legal age of marriage for women in Iran is 13.
from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/34TTWCv