Upcoming shows
Real News

NOW ON AIR
Now On Air

Real News with David Knight

9:00 am 12:00 pm



Maga First News

Upcoming Shows

Join The MAGA Network on Discord

0 0

Chicago prosecutor Kim Foxx defends Jussie Smollett decision

Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx defended her office's decision to dismiss charges against Jussie Smollett, claiming the "Empire" star didn't receive special treatment.

"I have been asking myself for the last two weeks what is this really about," Foxx said at the Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr.'s Rainbow Push Coalition on Saturday. "As someone who has lived in this city [Chicago], who came up in the projects of this city to serve as the first African American woman in this role, it is disheartening to me ... that when we get in these positions somehow the goalposts change."

She also said she'd run for re-election when her current term is complete.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT'S ALLEGED HATE CRIME HOAX: A TIMELINE OF EVENTS

Foxx reportedly mentioned in her speech that she welcomes an independent investigation into her handling of the case, saying that nearly 6,000 other "low-level defendants" received the same treatment with deferred prosecution, adding that under the law, Smollett could've been fined a maximum of $10,000 — which he effectively paid when he forfeited his bond for the same amount.

Foxx recused herself from Smollett's case after communicating with one of his relatives during the police investigation into whether or not the musician and actor staged an alleged hate crime against himself. Her office later said she never actually formally recused herself from the case.

DOG THE BOUNTY HUNTER DEFENDS JUSSIE SMOLLETT, LORI LOUGHLIN

Smollett's attorney said that his case was not one of deferred prosecution when she announced that the charges against him had been dropped.

In January, Smollett told police that two masked men attacked him, put a rope around his neck and poured bleach on him as he was walking home from a Subway restaurant. The actor, who is black and openly gay, said the masked men beat him, made racist and homophobic comments and yelled, "This is MAGA country" before fleeing the scene.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT'S LAWYER THREATENS CHICAGO PD IF THEY GO AFTER ACTOR FOR CASH

However, the Chicago Police Department alleged that Smollett paid the two men, Abel and Ola Osundairo, by check for a "phony attack" in order to take "advantage of the pain and anger of racism to promote his career." The brothers were allegedly caught on surveillance footage purchasing the rope used in the staged "attack" on Smollett.

JUSSIE SMOLLETT'S DEADLINE TO REPAY INVESTIGATIVE COSTS LOOMS

The "Sum of my Music" singer was later arrested for allegedly filing a false police report and released on a $10,000 bond. Smollett pleaded not guilty to 16 counts of disorderly conduct stemming from the alleged hoax. All charges against Smollett were dropped in late March in a move that legal experts claimed was "almost unheard of."

Still, the star isn't entirely out of the woods yet: The FBI is investigating whether Smollett sent himself a threatening hate letter to the "Empire" set, which could potentially land him behind bars for a decade for mail fraud — a federal offense.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Smollett has maintained his innocence throughout the ordeal. His attorneys previously told Fox News they've "witnessed an organized law enforcement spectacle that has no place in the American legal system. The presumption of innocence, a bedrock in the search for justice, was trampled upon at the expense of Mr. Smollett and notably, on the eve of a Mayoral election. Mr. Smollett is a young man of impeccable character and integrity who fiercely and solemnly maintains his innocence betrayed by a system that apparently wants to skip due process and proceed directly to sentencing.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source: Fox News National

0 0

Facebook expands ad buying options for premium video

FILE PHOTO: The logo of Facebook is pictured during the Viva Tech start-up and technology summit in Paris
FILE PHOTO: The logo of Facebook is pictured during the Viva Tech start-up and technology summit in Paris, France, May 25, 2018. REUTERS/Charles Platiau/File Photo

February 26, 2019

By Sheila Dang

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Facebook Inc on Tuesday launched new advertising options for its premium video content to attract marketers hoping to buy ad spots in a similar manner to traditional television networks.

The social media platform hopes the move will help it make more money from its Facebook Watch feature, which has short-form video content from publishers like the Economist, as well as premium shows starring well-known Hollywood actors like Elizabeth Olsen.

The new program called Facebook Showcase allows advertisers to purchase ad spots in advance at a fixed cost, similar to the way TV networks host an “upfront” featuring new shows and allowing marketers to buy commercials in advance.

That feature, called In-Stream Reserve, will target audiences that are verified by audience measurement company Nielsen, which is also the industry standard for linear TV.

Every video is reviewed by a human before it is eligible to be part of Facebook Showcase, Erik Geisler, Facebook’s head of North America agency sales, said at a press event in New York on Tuesday.

The emphasis on brand safety comes after the social network’s struggles to stop the spread of misinformation on its platform, as well as troubles at video rival YouTube, which lost several advertisers last week after ads displayed next to disturbing content.

Advertisers can now also purchase spots on premium content in the food and news categories, in addition to sports, entertainment and fashion and beauty, which had been available previously.

Facebook also introduced sponsorships, which allow advertisers to be the exclusive sponsor of a program for U.S. viewers.

(Reporting by Sheila Dang in New York; Editing by Matthew Lewis)

Source: OANN

0 0

Uncle Sam Wants Your DNA: The FBI’s Diabolical Plan to Create a Nation of Suspects

“As more and more data flows from your body and brain to the smart machines via the biometric sensors, it will become easy for corporations and government agencies to know you, manipulate you, and make decisions on your behalf. Even more importantly, they could decipher the deep mechanisms of all bodies and brains, and thereby gain the power to engineer life. If we want to prevent a small elite from monopolising such godlike powers, and if we want to prevent humankind from splitting into biological castes, the key question is: who owns the data? Does the data about my DNA, my brain and my life belong to me, to the government, to a corporation, or to the human collective?”―Professor Yuval Noah Harari

Uncle Sam wants you.

Correction: Uncle Sam wants your DNA.

Actually, if the government gets its hands on your DNA, they as good as have you in their clutches.

Get ready, folks, because the government— helped along by Congress (which adopted legislation allowing police to collect and test DNA immediately following arrests), President Trump (who signed the Rapid DNA Act into law), the courts (which have ruled that police can routinely take DNA samples from people who are arrested but not yet convicted of a crime), and local police agencies (which are chomping at the bit to acquire this new crime-fighting gadget)—is embarking on a diabolical campaign to create a nation of suspects predicated on a massive national DNA database.

As the New York Times reports:

“The science-fiction future, in which police can swiftly identify robbers and murderers from discarded soda cans and cigarette butts, has arrived. In 2017, President Trump signed into law the Rapid DNA Act, which, starting this year, will enable approved police booking stations in several states to connect their Rapid DNA machines to Codis, the national DNA database. Genetic fingerprinting is set to become as routine as the old-fashioned kind.

Referred to as “magic boxes,” these Rapid DNA machines—portable, about the size of a desktop printer, highly unregulated, far from fool-proof, and so fast that they can produce DNA profiles in less than two hours—allow police to go on fishing expeditions for any hint of possible misconduct using DNA samples.

Journalist Heather Murphy explains: “As police agencies build out their local DNA databases, they are collecting DNA not only from people who have been charged with major crimes but also, increasingly, from people who are merely deemed suspicious, permanently linking their genetic identities to criminal databases.”

Suspect Society, meet the American police state.

Every dystopian sci-fi film we’ve ever seen is suddenly converging into this present moment in a dangerous trifecta between science, technology and a government that wants to be all-seeing, all-knowing and all-powerful.

By tapping into your phone lines and cell phone communications, the government knows what you say.

By uploading all of your emails, opening your mail, and reading your Facebook posts and text messages, the government knows what you write.

By monitoring your movements with the use of license plate readers, surveillance cameras and other tracking devices, the government knows where you go.

By churning through all of the detritus of your life—what you read, where you go, what you say—the government can predict what you will do.

By mapping the synapses in your brain, scientists—and in turn, the government—will soon know what you remember.

And by accessing your DNA, the government will soon know everything else about you that they don’t already know: your family chart, your ancestry, what you look like, your health history, your inclination to follow orders or chart your own course, etc.

Of course, none of these technologies are foolproof.

Nor are they immune from tampering, hacking or user bias.

Nevertheless, they have become a convenient tool in the hands of government agents to render null and void the Constitution’s requirements of privacy and its prohibitions against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Consequently, no longer are we “innocent until proven guilty” in the face of DNA evidence that places us at the scene of a crimebehavior sensing technology that interprets our body temperature and facial tics as suspicious, and government surveillance devices that cross-check our biometricslicense plates and DNA against a growing database of unsolved crimes and potential criminals.

The government’s questionable acquisition and use of DNA to identify individuals and “solve” crimes has come under particular scrutiny in recent years.

Until recently, the government was required to at least observe some basic restrictions on when, where and how it could access someone’s DNA. That has all been turned on its head by various U.S. Supreme Court rulings that pave the way for suspicionless searches and herald the loss of privacy on a cellular level.

Certainly, it was difficult enough trying to protect our privacy in the wake of a 2013 Supreme Court ruling in Maryland v. King that likened DNA collection to photographing and fingerprinting suspects when they are booked, thereby allowing the government to take DNA samples from people merely “arrested” in connection with “serious” crimes.

Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent in Maryland v. King is worth reading not only for the history lesson on the Fourth Amendment but for its clear-sighted rebuke of the police state’s tendency to justify every encroachment on our freedoms as necessary for security.

As Scalia noted:

“Solving unsolved crimes is a noble objective, but it occupies a lower place in the American pantheon of noble objectives than the protection of our people from suspicionless law-enforcement searches… Make no mistake about it: As an entirely predictable consequence of today’s decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national DNA database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason. Today’s judgment will, to be sure, have the beneficial effect of solving more crimes; then again, so would the taking of DNA samples from anyone who flies on an airplane (surely the Transportation Security Administration needs to know the “identity” of the flying public), applies for a driver’s license, or attends a public school. Perhaps the construction of such a genetic panopticon is wise. But I doubt that the proud men who wrote the charter of our liberties would have been so eager to open their mouths for royal inspection.”

The Court’s decision to let stand the Maryland Court of Appeals’ ruling in Raynor v. Maryland, which essentially determined that individuals do not have a right to privacy when it comes to their DNA, made Americans even more vulnerable to the government accessing, analyzing and storing their DNA without their knowledge or permission.

Although Glenn Raynor, a suspected rapist, willingly agreed to be questioned by police, he refused to provide them with a DNA sample.

No problem. Police simply swabbed the chair in which Raynor had been sitting and took what he refused to voluntarily provide.

Raynor’s DNA was a match, and the suspect became a convict.

As the dissenting opinion in Raynor for the Maryland Court of Appeals rightly warned, “a person desiring to keep her DNA profile private, must conduct her public affairs in a hermetically sealed hazmat suit…. The Majority’s holding means that a person can no longer vote, participate in a jury, or obtain a driver’s license, without opening up his genetic material for state collection and codification.”

Yet in refusing to hear the case, the U.S. Supreme Court gave its tacit approval for government agents to collect shed DNA, likening it to a person’s fingerprints or the color of their hair, eyes or skin.

Whereas fingerprint technology created a watershed moment for police in their ability to “crack” a case, DNA technology is now being hailed by law enforcement agencies as the magic bullet in crime solving.

It’s what police like to refer to a “modern fingerprint.”

However, unlike a fingerprint, a DNA print reveals everything about “who we are, where we come from, and who we will be.”

With such a powerful tool at their disposal, it was inevitable that the government’s collection of DNA would become a slippery slope toward government intrusion.

All 50 states now maintain their own DNA databases, although the protocols for collection differ from state to state. Increasingly, many of the data from local databanks are being uploaded to CODIS (Combined DNA Index System), the FBI’s massive DNA database, which has become a de facto way to identify and track the American people from birth to death.

Even hospitals have gotten in on the game by taking and storing newborn babies’ DNA, often without their parents’ knowledge or consent. It’s part of the government’s mandatory genetic screening of newborns. However, in many states, the DNA is stored indefinitely.

What this means for those being born today is inclusion in a government database that contains intimate information about who they are, their ancestry, and what awaits them in the future, including their inclinations to be followers, leaders or troublemakers.

For the rest of us, it’s just a matter of time before the government gets hold of our DNA, either through mandatory programs carried out in connection with law enforcement and corporate America, by warrantlessly accessing our familial DNA shared with geneological services such as Ancestry and 23andMe, or through the collection of our “shed” or “touch” DNA.

All of those fascinating, geneological ancestral searches that allow you to trace your family tree can also be used against you and those you love. As law professor Elizabeth Joh explains, “When you upload your DNA, you’re potentially becoming a genetic informant on the rest of your family.”

While much of the public debate, legislative efforts and legal challenges in recent years have focused on the protocols surrounding when police can legally collect a suspect’s DNA (with or without a search warrant and whether upon arrest or conviction), the question of how to handle “shed” or “touch” DNA has largely slipped through without much debate or opposition.

Yet as scientist Leslie A. Pray notes:

We all shed DNA, leaving traces of our identity practically everywhere we go. Forensic scientists use DNA left behind on cigarette butts, phones, handles, keyboards, cups, and numerous other objects, not to mention the genetic content found in drops of bodily fluid, like blood and semen. In fact, the garbage you leave for curbside pickup is a potential gold mine of this sort of material. All of this shed or so-called abandoned DNA is free for the taking by local police investigators hoping to crack unsolvable cases. Or, if the future scenario depicted at the beginning of this article is any indication, shed DNA is also free for inclusion in a secret universal DNA databank.

What this means is that if you have the misfortune to leave your DNA traces anywhere a crime has been committed, you’ve already got a file somewhere in some state or federal database—albeit it may be a file without a name.

As Forensic magazine reports, “As officers have become more aware of touch DNA’s potential, they are using it more and more. Unfortunately, some [police] have not been selective enough when they process crime scenes. Instead, they have processed anything and everything at the scene, submitting 150 or more samples for analysis.”

Even old samples taken from crime scenes and “cold” cases are being unearthed and mined for their DNA profiles.

Today, helped along by robotics and automation, DNA processing, analysis and reporting takes far less time and can bring forth all manner of information, right down to a person’s eye color and relatives. Incredibly, one company specializes in creating “mug shots” for police based on DNA samples from unknown “suspects” which are then compared to individuals with similar genetic profiles.

If you haven’t yet connected the dots, let me point the way.

Having already used surveillance technology to render the entire American populace potential suspects, DNA technology in the hands of government will complete our transition to a suspect society in which we are all merely waiting to be matched up with a crime.

No longer can we consider ourselves innocent until proven guilty.

Now we are all suspects in a DNA lineup until circumstances and science say otherwise.

Of course, there will be those who point to DNA’s positive uses in criminal justice, such as in those instances where it is used to absolve someone on death row of a crime he didn’t commit, and there is no denying its beneficial purposes at times.

However, as is the case with body camera footage and every other so-called technology that is hailed as a “check” on government abuses, in order for the average person—especially one convicted of a crime—to request and get access to DNA testing, they first have to embark on a costly, uphill legal battle through red tape and, even then, they are opposed at every turn by a government bureaucracy run by prosecutors, legislatures and law enforcement.

What this amounts to is a scenario in which we have little to no defense of against charges of wrongdoing, especially when “convicted” by technology, and even less protection against the government sweeping up our DNA in much the same way it sweeps up our phone calls, emails and text messages.

Yet if there are no limits to government officials being able to access your DNA and all that it says about you, then where do you draw the line?

As technology makes it ever easier for the government to tap into our thoughts, our memories, our dreams, suddenly the landscape becomes that much more dystopian.

With the entire governmental system shifting into a pre-crime mode aimed at detecting and pursuing those who “might” commit a crime before they have an inkling, let alone an opportunity, to do so, it’s not so far-fetched to imagine a scenario in which government agents (FBI, local police, etc.) target potential criminals based on their genetic disposition to be a “troublemaker” or their relationship to past dissenters.

Equally disconcerting: if scientists can, using DNA, track salmon across hundreds of square miles of streams and rivers, how easy will it be for government agents to not only know everywhere we’ve been and how long we were at each place but collect our easily shed DNA and add it to the government’s already burgeoning database?

As always there will be those voices—well-meaning, certainly—insisting that if you want to save the next girl from being raped, abducted or killed, then we need to give the government all the tools necessary to catch these criminals before they can commit their heinous crimes.

If you care for someone, you’re particularly vulnerable to this line of reasoning. Of course we don’t want our wives butchered, our girlfriends raped, our daughters abducted and subjected to all manner of atrocities.

But what about those cases in which the technology proved to be wrong, either through human error or tampering? It happens more often than we are told.

For example, David Butler spent eight months in prison for a murder he didn’t commit after his DNA was allegedly found on the murder victim and surveillance camera footage placed him in the general area the murder took place. Conveniently, Butler’s DNA was on file after he had voluntarily submitted it during an investigation years earlier into a robbery at his mother’s home. The case seemed cut and dried to everyone but Butler who proclaimed his innocence. Except that the DNA evidence and surveillance footage was wrong: Butler was innocent.

Moreover, despite the insistence by government agents that DNA is infallible, New York Times reporter Andrew Pollack makes a clear and convincing case that DNA evidence can, in fact, be fabricated. Israeli scientists “fabricated blood and saliva samples containing DNA from a person other than the donor of the blood and saliva,” stated Pollack. “They also showed that if they had access to a DNA profile in a database, they could construct a sample of DNA to match that profile without obtaining any tissue from that person.”

The danger, warns scientist Dan Frumkin, is that crime scenes can be engineered with fabricated DNA.

Now if you happen to be the kind of person who trusts the government implicitly and refuses to believe it would ever do anything illegal or immoral, then the prospect of government officials—police, especially—using fake DNA samples to influence the outcome of a case might seem outlandish.

Yet as history shows—and as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People — the probability of our government acting in a way that is not only illegal but immoral becomes less a question of “if” and more a question of “when.”

This article was reprinted with permission from The Rutherford Institute.


Source: InfoWars

0 0

WTA roundup: Anisimova wins all-teen quarterfinal

Tennis: Miami Open
FILE PHOTO: Mar 20, 2019; Miami Gardens, FL, USA; Amanda Anisimova of the United States reaches for a backhand against Andrea Petkovic of Germany (not pictured) in the first round of the Miami Open at Miami Open Tennis Complex. Mandatory Credit: Geoff Burke-USA TODAY Sports

April 13, 2019

Sixth-seeded Amanda Anisimova won a quarterfinal battle of 17-year-olds, beating Maria Camila Osorio Serrano 6-2, 1-6, 6-3 in the Claro Open Colsanitas on Friday in Bogota, Colombia.

Anisimova, an American, disappointed the home crowd rooting for Osorio Serrano, who is Colombian. One more win would move the New Jersey native into her second career WTA Tour final. She lost the title match last year at Hiroshima, Japan.

In the semifinals, Anisimova will meet Brazil’s Beatriz Haddad Maia, who topped Spain’s Sara Sorribes Tormo 6-7 (6), 6-2, 6-3.

Eleventh-seeded Lara Arruabarrena of Spain, the 2012 Bogota champion who has reached the event’s finals three times, will oppose Australia’s Astra Sharma in the other semifinals. Arruabarrena beat fifth-seeded Tamara Zidansek of Slovenia 6-4, 6-2, and Sharma got past Italy’s Sara Errani 6-1, 7-5.

Samsung Open

The last remaining seeded player in the draw at Lugano, Switzerland, fell as Poland’s Iga Swiatek upset eighth-seeded Vera Lapko of Belarus 4-6, 6-4, 6-1 in the quarterfinals.

Swiatek’s semifinal opponent will be the Czech Republic’s Kristyna Pliskova, who defeated Russia’s Svetlana Kuznetsova 4-6, 6-3, 7-5.

Fiona Ferro of France edged Switzerland’s Stefanie Voegele 7-5, 7-6 (5). Ferro will match up in the semifinals with Slovenia’s Polona Hercog, who beat Russia’s Veronika Kudermetova 6-4, 6-1.

–Field Level Media

Source: OANN

0 0

Rick Crawford: Schiff Turned Panel into ‘Propaganda Organ’

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff has turned his panel into “a propaganda organ of the Democrat Party,” according to Arizona Republican Rep. Rick Crawford.

“I’m sure people like Adam Schiff lay awake at night going, ‘What can we do next to make sure we can’t move past this? What do I have to do I do to perpetuate this Russia collusion hoax?'” Crawford said in an interview with “Breitbart News Daily” on SiriusXM.

“The Intelligence Committee is supposed to be about protecting the country, and what Adam Schiff has turned it into, it’s an arm of the DCCC. It is a propaganda organ of the Democrat Party and what can we do to smear the president sufficiently to deny him a second term.”

Crawford and his fellow Republicans on the House intelligence panel wrote a letter on Thursday requesting Schiff’s resignation.

“We unanimously expressed our discontent with the comments he’s made — that he’s never substantiated — [over] the two years that he has spent making false claims … and accusing the president of X, Y, and Z related to collusion, and there was a laundry list of quotes that I submitted for the record.”

He added, “Basically, the letter is essentially saying, “We’ve lost faith in your ability to lead.’ This is basically a no-confidence letter, and we’re asking him to resign his position. Under his leadership, the Intelligence Committee is weaker and by extension the intelligence community we rely on for national security is weaker because of him.”

Source: NewsMax Politics

0 0

Last migrants end protest, evacuate makeshift camp in Greece

The last 60 holdouts from among nearly 1,000 migrants who fought with Greek police for three days have left their makeshift camp in northern Greece.

The migrants clashed with police because they believed false reports on social media that restrictions on travel to central and northern Europe had been lifted.

Police detained a few of the 60 who had no valid papers. The rest left either for migrant camps or apartments across Greece. None of the residents of a nearby official camp were among them.

Even as the makeshift camp started emptying late Saturday, a group was heard cheering loudly. Asked why, they said Chancellor Angela Merkel was opening Germany's borders. Like the previous reports, this one also was false.

Most of the migrants are refugees from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Source: Fox News World

0 0

Israel’s president starts consultations on prime minister nomination

FILE PHOTO: Israeli President Reuven Rivlin talks during a press conference at the Presidential Palace in Nicosia
FILE PHOTO: Israeli President Reuven Rivlin talks during a press conference at the Presidential Palace in Nicosia, Cyprus February 12, 2019. REUTERS/Yiannis Kourtoglou

April 15, 2019

By Jeffrey Heller

JERUSALEM (Reuters) – Israel’s president began post-election consultations on Monday with political parties that will lead to his appointment of a candidate to form a government.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s nomination seemed virtually ensured after his right-wing Likud won the largest number of parliamentary seats in Tuesday’s ballot, and his closest rival, Benny Gantz of the centrist Blue and White party, conceded defeat.

The president, Reuven Rivlin, said he would announce his choice on Wednesday after meeting with all of the parties that captured seats in the 120-member Knesset.

Under Israeli law, after consultations with the parties the president taps a legislator whom he believes has the best chance of forming a government, delegating 28 days, with a two-week extension if necessary, to complete the task.

Netanyahu said he intends to build a coalition with five far-right, right-wing and ultra-Orthodox Jewish parties that would give a Likud-led government 65 seats, four more than the outgoing administration he heads.

Four of those parties have already said they would back Netanyahu, bringing his tally of seats to 60.

Former Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman of the ultranationalist Yisrael Beitenu party, which won five seats and meets Rivlin on Tuesday, has not formally declared he would join a Likud-led coalition.

But political commentators, noting Lieberman’s sharp differences with left-wing and Arab parties whose support Gantz would need to govern, predicted he would sign up with Netanyahu after pressing for concessions in coalition negotiations.

Gantz, a former military chief whose party won 35 parliamentary seats, would likely be next in line to try to put together a government if Netanyahu fails.

For the first time, Rivlin’s consultations with the parties were being broadcast live as part of what he described as a display of transparency in what has historically been a closed-door process in Israel.

At the meeting with Likud representatives, Culture Minister Miri Regev noted Netanyahu had won re-election despite Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit’s announcement in February that he plans to charge the prime minister in three graft cases.

Netanyahu has denied any wrongdoing. He can still argue, at a pre-trial hearing with Mandelblit whose date has not been set, against the filing of bribery and fraud charges against him.

The Israeli leader is under no legal obligation to resign if indicted.

(Reporting by Jeffrey Heller; Editing by David Holmes)

Source: OANN

NOW ON AIR
Now On Air

Real News with David Knight

9:00 am 12:00 pm



FILE PHOTO: Customers shop in a Sainsbury's store in Redhill
FILE PHOTO: Customers shop in a Sainsbury’s store in Redhill, Britain, March 27, 2018. REUTERS/Peter Nicholls/File Photo

April 26, 2019

By James Davey

LONDON (Reuters) – With Sainsbury’s dream of creating Britain’s biggest supermarket group in tatters, its chastened CEO Mike Coupe needs to reassure investors he has the plan to arrest a sales decline when he presents annual results next week.

Britain’s competition regulator blocked Sainsbury’s 7.3 billion pound ($9.4 billion) takeover of Walmart’s Asda on Thursday, saying the deal would increase prices. Sainsbury’s shares fell 5 percent and are down 22 percent over the last three months.

For Sainsbury’s fourth quarter to March 9 analysts are on average forecasting a 1.6 percent fall in like-for-like sales, which would follow 1.1 percent decline over the Christmas period.

Monthly industry data from researcher Kantar has also shown Sainsbury’s as the weakest performer of the big four grocers this year and this month it lost its status as Britain’s No. 2 supermarket group by market share to Asda.

While Sainsbury’s has struggled, market leader Tesco has gained momentum, this month reporting a 34 percent jump in full year profit.

Prohibition of the deal was a major blow to Coupe, its architect and Sainsbury’s boss since 2014.

Martin Scicluna became Sainsbury’s chairman last month and when bedded-in may decide that if the group needs a major shake-up it is best carried out by a new leader.

Much will depend on the attitude of 22 percent shareholder the Qatar Investment Authority, which has so far declined to comment, as well as Coupe’s own appetite to continue after 15 years at the group.

THE RIGHT STRATEGY?

Coupe said on Thursday he was confident Sainsbury’s was pursuing the right strategy.

That was a clear indication that Wednesday’s results statement will not include radical changes to the group’s plans, such as a big margin reset — sacrificing profit to drive sales.

However, sources connected to Sainsbury’s said Coupe would likely acknowledge that more needs to be done on prices, so the supermarket business can better compete with its big four rivals – Tesco, Asda and No. 4 Morrisons – as well as German-owned discounters Aldi and Lidl.

Coupe’s strategy is based on differentiating Sainsbury’s food offer, growing its general merchandise, clothing business and bank, while investing in convenience and online channels.

Some analysts believe major change is needed.

HSBC analyst David McCarthy reckons Sainsbury’s needs a margin reset, should allocate more space for core lines and needs to drive better store standards. He said Sainsbury’s might consider closing down space in some of its larger stores and reducing its non-food offer.

For the full 2018-19 year analysts are on average forecasting a pretax profit of 626 million pounds, up from 589 million pounds in 2017-18 – a second straight year of profit growth. A full year dividend of 10.5 pence per share is forecast versus 10.2 pence last time.

Bank and lawyer fees related to the proposed combination with Asda were 17 million pounds in the first half and have reportedly jumped to around 50 million pounds.

(Reporting by James Davey; Editing by Keith Weir)

Source: OANN

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!
FILE PHOTO: FILE PHOTO: A Canadian dollar coin commonly known as the
FILE PHOTO: A Canadian dollar coin, commonly known as the “Loonie”, is pictured in this illustration picture taken in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, January 23, 2015. REUTERS/Mark Blinch/File Photo/File Photo

April 26, 2019

OTTAWA (Reuters) – Canada posted a budget surplus in the first 11 months of the 2018/19 fiscal year compared to a deficit the year earlier as revenues increased mostly on higher tax incomes, the finance department said on Friday.

The surplus for April-February was C$3.1 billion, compared to a deficit of C$6 billion in the same 2017/18 period. Revenues climbed by 8.5 percent, mainly due to higher tax receipts, while program expenses rose by 4.8 percent.

The surplus for February was C$4.3 billion compared with C$2.8 billion in February 2018. Revenues jumped by 12.2 percent while program expenses posted a more modest 6.9 percent gain.

Last month, the Liberals unveiled their new budget, projecting a C$14.9 billion deficit in 2018/19, with the deficit rising to C$19.8 billion in fiscal 2019/20.

(Reporting by Julie Gordon in Ottawa; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama)

Source: OANN

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!

President Trump said Friday he would beat Joe Biden “easily” in the 2020 presidential election, suggesting the former vice president could not have enough “energy” to hold the post—taking an apparent swipe at his age.

The president, departing the White House, was asked about Biden’s entrance into the Democratic primary field. Biden announced his presidential bid early Thursday morning, marking his third attempt at the White House.

JOE BIDEN OFFICIALLY LAUNCHES 2020 PRESIDENTIAL BID

“I think we’d beat him easily,” Trump told reporters Friday.

Trump, 72, said he feels “young” and is ready for 2020, and another term for his administration.

“I feel like a young man. I am a young, vibrant man,” Trump said. “I look at Joe, I don’t know about him.”

The president’s comments seemingly were a shot at the age of Biden, who is 76.

BIDEN ENTERS WHITE HOUSE RACE WITHOUT OBAMA’S ENDORSEMENT

“I would never say anyone’s too old,” Trump said. “I know they’re all making me look very young both in terms of age and in terms of energy.”

Biden became the 20th candidate to join the crowded Democratic primary field Thursday. But Biden is not the oldest in the pack. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., is 77 and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., is 69.

Should Trump be re-elected, he would be 74 on Jan. 20, 2021—Inauguration Day. Should the presidency go to one of the elder Democrats in the field—Biden would be 78; Sanders would be 79; and Warren would be 71.

Meanwhile, in a wide-ranging interview on “Hannity” Thursday night, Trump dismissed Biden’s candidacy, nicknaming him “Sleepy Joe,” and saying he’s “not the brightest bulb.” Trump also said that while the former vice president has name recognition, he won’t “be able to do the job.”

Source: Fox News Politics

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!
Venezuela's Foreign Affairs Minister Jorge Arreaza talks to the media during a news conference in Caracas
Venezuela’s Foreign Affairs Minister Jorge Arreaza talks to the media during a news conference in Caracas, Venezuela April 8, 2019. REUTERS/Manaure Quintero

April 26, 2019

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Treasury Department on Friday imposed sanctions on Venezuela’s foreign minister and a Venezuelan judge, according to a statement on the department’s website.

Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza and a judge, Carol Padilla, were targeted over the ongoing crisis in Venezuela, the Treasury Department said, the latest in a list of officials blacklisted by U.S. authorities for their role in President Nicolas Maduro’s government.

(Reporting by Susan Heavey, Makini Brice and Lesley Wroughton; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama)

Source: OANN

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!
Avengers fans gather at the TCL Chinese Theatre in Hollywood to attend the opening screening of
Avengers fans gather at the TCL Chinese Theatre in Hollywood to attend the opening screening of “Avengers: Endgame” in Los Angeles, California, U.S., April 25, 2019. REUTERS/Mike Blake

April 26, 2019

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – Marvel Studios superhero spectacle “Avengers: Endgame” hauled in a record $60 million at U.S. and Canadian box offices during its Thursday night debut, distributor Walt Disney Co said.

Global ticket sales for the film about Iron Man, Hulk and other popular characters reached $305 million for the first two days, Disney said.

(Reporting by Lisa Richwine; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama)

Source: OANN

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!
Current track

Title

Artist