Now On Air

Liberty #MAGAOne Mix

Via MAGA One Mix

6:00 am 8:00 am


Upcoming shows
Real News

NOW ON AIR
Now On Air

Liberty #MAGAOne Mix

Via MAGA One Mix

6:00 am 8:00 am



Maga First News

Upcoming Shows

Join The MAGA Network on Discord

0 0

UK Prime Minister Theresa May opens door to ‘short, limited’ Brexit delay

British Prime Minister Theresa May on Tuesday opened the door to a “short, limited” delay in Britain’s departure from the European Union -- a move greeted warily by pro-Brexit members of her Conservative Party.

Britain is scheduled to leave the bloc on March 29, but after Parliament overwhelmingly rejected the draft withdrawal agreement that she hashed out with E.U. leaders, the country is set to leave without an agreement.

BREXIT MUST NOT BE FRUSTRATED, UK'S MAY VOWS, AS CABINET MEMBERS WARNS AGAINST 'DISASTROUS' NO DEAL

Members of May’s government, along with pro-E.U. members and business groups, have warned that a “no deal Brexit” could have catastrophic consequences and lead to food and medicine shortages and blocked ports. Pro-Brexit MPs have downplayed those concerns, saying that Britain would merely revert to World Trade Organization trading terms.

On Tuesday, May told the House of Commons that there will be a new “meaningful vote” on her deal on March 12. Should that fail, as expected, there would be a vote a day later on a “no-deal Brexit.” May said that, if that fails also, the government would put forward a motion “on whether Parliament wants to seek a short limited extension to Article 50” -- referring to the trigger mechanism by which Britain would leave the E.U.

“Let me be clear, I do not want to see Article 50 extended,” she said, after clarifying that the delay would be no later than the end of June. “Our absolute focus should be on working to get a deal and leaving on 29 March.”

The move is unlikely to please May who has staked her premiership on delivering Brexit, and has already faced significant pressure from her own party to step down over her handling of the Brexit negotiations. British newspapers reported this week that May faced a number of cabinet resignations if she had not given MPs a vote to delay Brexit. She still ruled out revoking Article 50 altogether.

“An extension cannot take no deal off the table," she told Parliament. "The only way to do that is to revoke Article 50, which I shall not do, or agree a deal.”

She added: "Ultimately the choices we face would remain unchanged – leave with a deal, leave with no deal, or have no Brexit."

Pro-Remain forces, who have been increasing calls for a second Brexit referendum, accused May of simply delaying the inevitable and said that Britain will face the same dilemma in the summer as it does now.

“She seems to be giving us a date for a new cliff edge,” Tory MP Ken Clarke, a staunch Europhile, said in the Commons. “Isn’t the danger we continue the same pantomime performance through the next three months?”

Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn scorched May over what he called her "cynical tactics" of delay, and said it risked the loss of jobs and investment in Britain as uncertainty continues.

"The responsibility for this lies exclusively with the Prime Minister and her government's shambolic handling of Brexit," he said.

ANTI-BREXIT MPS BREAK AWAY FROM BOTH MAIN PARTIES, FORM PRO-EU INDEPENDENT GROUP

Eurosceptics were similarly disgruntled, with former MP Mark Reckless tweeting simply: “Betrayal.”

Conservative Jacob Rees Mogg, head of the pro-Brexit European Research Group, said that May’s move only moved back the cliff edge and “it doesn’t offer parliament very much.”

He also raised the fear among Brexiteers that the calls for delay have been part of a push to ultimately scupper Brexit.

“If it’s being delayed, which is my suspicion, as a plot to stop Brexit altogether then i think that would be the most grievous error politicians could commit,” Rees-Mogg told Sky News. “It would be overthrowing a referendum result, two general elections -- one to call for the referendum and one to endorse the referendum -- and would undermine our democracy.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Pressure on May to call for a referendum re-do is likely only to increase over the Spring. On Monday, the Labour Party called for a second referendum, having previously promised to honor the 2016 referendum result in its 2017 election manifesto.

Last week, a group of pro-Remain Labour and Conservative MPs splintered off from their parties to form The Independent Group -- a cross-party bloc of centrist MPs. Those MPs have also called for Britons to be sent back to the polls to reconsider their votes.

Source: Fox News World

0 0

Potential U.S. auto tariffs would hurt Germany, Japan, Korea: Moody’s

Imported automobiles are parked in a lot at the port of Newark New Jersey
Imported automobiles are parked in a lot at the port of Newark New Jersey, U.S., February 19, 2019. REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz

April 9, 2019

(Reuters) – Ratings firm Moody’s said on Tuesday that potential auto tariffs by the United States would be a risk to global growth, hindering economic momentum in Germany, Japan and Korea.

However, such a move would be less severe for China as Chinese vehicle exports were already subject to trade restrictions, Moody’s said in a report, adding that it would also be broadly credit negative for the global auto industry.

“Auto trade restrictions would cause a broader hit to business and consumer confidence globally in an already slowing global economy,” Moody’s Associate Managing Director Elena Duggar wrote.

(Reporting by Philip George in Bengaluru)

Source: OANN

0 0

Suspect formally charged in Nipsey Hussle murder, due in court

Andre Ward v Paul Smith
FILE PHOTO: Rapper Nipsey Hussle performs before a boxing match between Andre Ward and Paul Smith at the Oracle Arena in Oakland, California, on 20/6/15. Action Images via Reuters / Andrew Couldridge

April 4, 2019

By Dan Whitcomb

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – A 33-year-old Los Angeles man accused of killing Grammy-nominated rapper Nipsey Hussle was formally charged with murder and attempted murder on Thursday, prosecutors said.

Eric Ronald Holder, who was arrested earlier this week in connection with the fatal shooting, was expected to make his first court appearance in the case later on Thursday, the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office said in a written statement.

Hussle, 33, whose real name was Ermias Asghedom, was shot multiple times on March 31 outside his Marathon Clothing store, in south Los Angeles. Two other people were wounded in the gunfire, according to police.

Holder, 29, was taken into custody on Tuesday in the Los Angeles suburb of Bellflower after a tipster called to report seeing the man police had named as a suspect. Investigators have said that the killing was motivated by a personal dispute between the two men.

Holder faces a maximum sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole if convicted at trial. It was not immediately clear if he had retained a criminal defense attorney.

Holder is accused of walking up to Hussle and two other men outside the store and opening fire, before fleeing in a Chevy Cruze driven by a woman, police have said. The woman has not been identified publicly or arrested.

On Monday, a crowd gathered for a vigil outside Hussle’s clothing store. A disturbance set off a stampede and at least two people were critically injured, officials and media reports said.

Hussle’s debut studio album, “Victory Lap,” was nominated for Best Rap Album at this year’s Grammy Awards. His death rattled the entertainment and hip-hop world, with celebrities posting memories of him on social media.

The rapper, who was of Eritrean descent and grew up in south Los Angeles, has said that he once belonged to a street gang, but more recently had become a community organizer and activist.

The day he died, Hussle wrote on his Twitter page, “Having strong enemies is a blessing.”

(Reporting by Dan Whitcomb; Editing by Dan Grebler)

Source: OANN

0 0

NZ Threatens 10 Years In Prison For ‘Possessing’ Mosque Shooting Video

New Zealand authorities have reminded citizens that they face up to 10 years in prison for “knowingly” possessing a copy of the New Zealand mosque shooting video – and up to 14 years in prison for sharing it. Corporations (such as web hosts) face an additional $200,000 ($137,000 US) fine under the same law. 

Terrorist Brenton Tarrant used Facebook Live to broadcast the first 17 minutes of his attack on the Al Noor Mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand at approximately 1:40 p.m. on Friday – the first of two mosque attacks which left 50 dead and 50 injured.

Copies of Tarrant’s livestream, along with his lengthy manifesto, began to rapidly circulate on various file hosting sites following the attack, which as we noted Friday – were quickly scrubbed from mainstream platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Scribd. YouTube has gone so far as to intentionally disable search filters so that people cannot find Christchurch shooting materials – including footage of suspected multiple shooters as well as the arrest of Tarrant and other suspects.

On Saturday, journalist Nick Monroe reported that New Zealand police have warned citizens that they face imprisonment for distributing the video, while popular New Zealand Facebook group Wellington Live notes that “NZ police would like to remind the public that it is an offence to share an objectional publication which includes the horrific video from yesterday’s attack. If you see this video, report it immediately. Do not download it. Do not share it. If you are found to have a copy of the video or to have shared it, you face fines & potential imprisonment.”

Dissenter blocked in New Zealand

Along with the censorship of online materials and investigation of content sharing platforms such as BitChute and 8chan – where the shooter posted a link to the livestream of his attack, social discussion service Dissenter has been blocked in New Zealand. Created by the people behind Twitter competitor Gab.ai – Dissenter is a browser extension which pops up a third-party comments section for any website where people can discuss content outside of the control of the website owner.

On Saturday, Gab’s official accounts (@gab and @getongab) reported that “New Zealand ISPs have banned dissenter.com until it is “censorship compliant.””

Update: Shortly after this article published, we were informed that ZeroHedge is unable to be reached by Votafone customers.

Milo banned

Meanwhile, far-right commentator Milo Yiannopoulos was banned from Australia in the wake of the New Zealand shootings after he said on Facebook that attacks like Christchurch happen because “the establishment panders to and mollycoddles extremist leftism and barbaric, alien religious cultures.”

Australia’s immigration minister, David Coleman, said in a Saturday statement that Yiannopoulos’s comments were “appalling and forment hatred and division,” adding “Milo Yiannopoulos will not be allowed to enter Australia for his proposed tour this year.”

UK man arrested

While the Christchurch attacks were utterly reprehensible, supporting them is now punishable in the United Kingdom. On Saturday afternoon, a 24-year-old man from Oldham was arrested on suspicion of sending malicious communications in support of the mosque attacks. It is unclear what he is alleged to have written.

The Greater Manchester Police said in a statement that they “became aware of a post on social media making reference and support for the terrible events in New Zealand,” adding “Police have made urgent enquiries and a man aged 24 from the Oldham area is now under arrest on suspicion of sending malicious communications.”

“It is clear that people are worried and we really understand that… It is truly terrible what happened yesterday. It is hard to put into any form of words,” said Assistant Chief Constable Russ Jackson, who added “We have nothing to suggest any threat locally, but none of this can diminish how people feel and that is why we want to be there to offer more support at this difficult time.”

Source: InfoWars

0 0

Theresa May buckles: British PM to rule out no-deal Brexit – The Sun

Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May arrives to attend Arab league and EU summit, in Sharm el-Sheikh
Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May arrives to attend a summit between Arab league and European Union member states, in the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, February 24, 2019. REUTERS/Mohamed Abd El Ghany

February 26, 2019

LONDON (Reuters) – British Prime Minister Theresa May will on Tuesday propose formally ruling out a no-deal Brexit in a bid to avoid a rebellion by lawmakers who are threatening to grab control of the divorce process, The Sun newspaper reported.

As the United Kingdom’s labyrinthine Brexit crisis goes down to the wire, May is making a last-ditch effort to get changes to the divorce package but lawmakers will try on Wednesday to grab control of Brexit in a series of parliamentary votes.

After the British parliament voted 432-202 against her deal in January, the worst defeat in modern British history, May has tried use the threat of a potentially disorderly no-deal Brexit to get concessions out of the EU.

But many British lawmakers and some of her own ministers have warned they will try to grab control of Brexit to avert thrusting the world’s fifth largest economy into a tumultuous economic crisis.

May on Tuesday will propose to her cabinet of senior ministers that she formally rules out a no-deal Brexit, opening the door to a delay of weeks or months to the March 29 exit date, The Sun newspaper reported.

Reuters reported on Monday that May’s government was looking at different options including a possible delay.

After meeting EU leaders in the Red Sea resort of Sharm El-Sheikh on Monday, May said a timely exit was “within our grasp” and insisted that delaying Brexit would be no way to solve the impasse in parliament over the departure.

With just a month to go until Brexit, the ultimate outcome is still unclear with scenarios ranging from a last-minute deal to another referendum that May has warned would reopen the divisions of the 2016 referendum.

The opposition Labour Party said on Monday it would back calls for a second referendum on Brexit if parliament rejects its alternative plan for leaving the EU.

(Reporting by Guy Faulconbridge; editing by Kate Holton)

Source: OANN

0 0

Wisconsin man pleads not guilty in case of abused teen

A Wisconsin man accused of helping a 14-year-old girl escape sexual abuse in exchange for video of her being raped has pleaded not guilty to sexually exploiting a child.

The Knoxville News Sentinel reports 31-year-old Bryan Rogers also pleaded not guilty Thursday to making false statements. Authorities have said Rodgers met the Tennessee teen in the online game Roblox in December and she told him she was being raped by her adoptive father.

They say Rodgers offered to help her run away if she provided him "clear video evidence" so he wouldn't get in trouble for taking her from her home. Court records say he received the video in January and brought the teen to his Madison home days later. The girl's adopted father was arrested on rape charges.

Source: Fox News National

0 0

Trump and Conservatives: It’s Complicated (But It’s Working)

X

Story Stream

recent articles

Donald Trump is not a conventional conservative. Far from it. He’s a populist of the right. His strong appeal to conservatives lies in his nationalism, tax cuts, deregulation, and appointment of originalist judges.

Unlike Ronald Reagan, who had well-formed political ideas, Trump’s notions about public policy come from gut instincts, reinforced by cheering crowds. Their common thread is "Don't tread on me."

Trump’s disdain for tradition is the opposite of orthodox conservativism. It is most visible in the wrecking ball aimed at NATO and other allies. If you are rich enough and want our military protection, he says, then pay up or forget it. Prove you deserve our protection. Show us the money.

Trump’s threat to walk away is more credible than that of previous presidents because he is instinctively closer to Robert Taft’s isolationism than to Arthur Vandenberg’s internationalism. The Taft-Vandenberg debate in the late 1940s settled Republican foreign policy for the next 60 years. Vandenberg, who chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, led bipartisan support for President Harry Truman’s policies, including the Marshall Plan and forming NATO. The party’s stance was sealed in 1952 when Dwight Eisenhower defeated Taft for the presidential nomination.

Republicans remained internationalist on both security and trade throughout the Cold War, the “Unipolar Moment” of the 1990s, and the Global War on Terror after 9/11. That consensus shattered in the endless mess of Afghanistan and Iraq and the hollowing out of U.S. manufacturing employment. The Democratic Party backed away from those policies even sooner.

As a result, there is no consensus today on America’s proper role in the world. Our allies know it and are understandably nervous. Trump, a tough negotiator, is exploiting their anxiety to strike better deals for American defense support. That only works if allies believe he might actually pull back. They do, and so do internationalists in both parties. They are also worried about trade policy, where his strategy is similar.

Trump’s personal style adds to those worries, including those of conservatives. Many are repulsed by his crudity, thin-skinned nature, and vitriolic personal attacks. They fret as he shreds established norms. They oppose his micro-interventions in the economy (“don’t close that GM plant”), which are the opposite of free-market economics.

But—and this is crucial—conservatives and many independents recognize Trump’s biggest achievement, beyond strengthening the economy and rebuilding the military, is his persistent effort to roll back the administrative state, with its endless regulations and executive orders. The agencies that make the rules also enforce and adjudicate them. The result is fiat law—undemocratic, unaccountable, and unbearably expensive to fight. (If you think that’s also a major popular complaint about the European Union, you are correct.)

To curtail this administrative overreach, Trump needs to downsize the permanent bureaucracy, pass laws that require congressional approval for major regulations, and keep appointing judges who will rein in bureaucratic excess. Eliminating specific regulations is not enough. The next Democratic president will simply reimpose them.

Trump’s progress on judges is obvious—and consequential. That’s why Democrats are fighting so tenaciously. The latest battle, after Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court appointment, was Neomi Rao’s nomination to the D.C. Circuit. She proved her commitment to deregulation while heading the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Now she sits on the appellate court that hears those cases.

Trump’s determination to claw back Washington’s bureaucracy is beloved by conservatives, but it poses a curious dilemma. It took eight decades to ratchet up the government’s mammoth size and scope. Rolling it back swiftly and dramatically is what conservatives want substantively. But abrupt changes are what conservatives hate procedurally. They favor incremental change.

“Build on what we already have,” say these procedural conservatives. “That’s the surest foundation for improvement.” No one can anticipate the effects of large, disruptive changes. They might be disastrous. Edmund Burke first made that argument in 1790. His devastating critique of the French Revolution set the template for modern conservativism.

Unfortunately for modern conservatives, that kind of incrementalism would hardly dent America’s huge, intrusive government. It would do nothing to stop its regrowth after Trump leaves. That’s why “substantive conservatives” want to pare down the state now. The opportunity might be fleeting.

These are meaningful differences among conservatives. Yet they will fade to insignificance when Democrats nominate another big-government candidate. Faced with that alternative, conservatives of all stripes will back Trump. The only exceptions are those who despise him.

The president’s shortcomings offer Democrats a real opportunity. They seem determined to fumble it. Most candidates are sucking up to the left-wing base and arguing for huge, structural changes, everything from packing the Supreme Court to abolishing private health coverage. Their most daring ideas, such as the Green New Deal and “Medicare for All,” are recipes for fiscal apocalypse and totalizing government control. Their intolerance of dissent has made them the Party of Social Justice Church Ladies.

More centrist candidates are drifting left, too. Their reorientation may appeal to primary voters, but it will be a huge impediment in November. Ultimately, they are still selling Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society, now with more programs, more funding, and more taxes to pay in support of them. The ideas are stale, but there are two bigger defects: They cost too much and advocates cannot explain why the old programs failed.

If that’s what the Democrats have on offer in 2020, they won’t just lose conservatives and right-of-center independents. They’ll lose the election, unless there’s a recession.

If Trump wins, he will continue doing what no president has even attempted since Franklin Roosevelt: fundamentally shrinking the vast, centralized power of the administrative state. It’s a monumental task. But, for conservatives, none is more important.

Charles Lipson is the Peter B. Ritzma Professor of Political Science Emeritus at the University of Chicago, where he is founding director of PIPES, the Program on International Politics, Economics, and Security. He can be reached at charles.lipson@gmail.com.

NOW ON AIR
Now On Air

Liberty #MAGAOne Mix

Via MAGA One Mix

6:00 am 8:00 am



Police secure the area where the body of a woman was discovered near the village of Orounta
Police secure the area where the body of a woman was discovered near the village of Orounta, Cyprus, April 25, 2019. REUTERS/Stefanos Kouratzis

April 26, 2019

NICOSIA (Reuters) – Cypriot police searched on Friday for more victims of a suspected serial killer, in a case which has shocked the Mediterranean island and exposed the authorities to charges of “criminal indifference” because the dead women were foreigners.

The main opposition party, the left-wing AKEL, called for the resignation of Cyprus’s justice minister and police chief.

Police were combing three different locations west of the capital Nicosia for victims of the suspected killer, a 35-year-old army officer who has been in detention for a week.

The bodies of three women, including two thought to be from the Philippines, have been recovered. Police sources said the suspect had indicated the location of the third body, found on Thursday, and had said the person was “either Indian or Nepali”.

Police said they were searching for a further four people, including two children, based on the suspect’s testimony.

“These women came here to earn a living, to help their families. They lived away from their families. And the earth swallowed them, nobody was interested,” AKEL lawmaker Irene Charalambides told Reuters.

“This killer will be judged by the court but the other big question is the criminal indifference shown by the others when the reports first surfaced. I believe, as does my party, that the justice minister and the police chief should resign. They are irrevocably exposed.”

Police have said they will investigate any perceived shortcomings in their handling of the case.

One person who did attempt to alert the authorities over the disappearances, a 70-year-old Cypriot citizen, said his motives were questioned by police.

The bodies of the two Filipino women reported missing in May and August 2018 were found in an abandoned mine shaft this month. Police discovered the body of the third woman at an army firing range about 14 km (9 miles) from the mine shaft.

Police are now searching for the six-year-old daughter of the first victim found, a Romanian mother who disappeared with her eight-year-old child in 2016, and a woman from the Phillipines who vanished in Dec. 2017.

The suspect has not been publicly named, in line with Cypriot legal practice.

A public vigil for the missing was planned later on Friday.

(Reporting By Michele Kambas; Editing by Gareth Jones)

Source: OANN

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!
An employee looks up at goods at the Miniclipper Logistics warehouse in Leighton Buzzard
FILE PHOTO: An employee looks up at goods at the Miniclipper Logistics warehouse in Leighton Buzzard, Britain December 3, 2018. REUTERS/Simon Dawson

April 26, 2019

LONDON, April 26 – British factories stockpiled raw materials and goods ahead of Brexit at the fastest pace since records began in the 1950s, and they were increasingly downbeat about their prospects, a survey showed on Friday.

The Confederation of British Industry’s (CBI) quarterly survey of the manufacturing industry showed expectations for export orders in the next three months fell to their lowest level since mid-2009, when Britain was reeling from the global financial crisis.

The record pace of stockpiling recorded by the CBI was mirrored by the closely-watched IHS Markit/CIPS purchasing managers’ index published earlier this month.

(Reporting by Andy Bruce, editing by David Milliken)

Source: OANN

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!
Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad speaks at the opening ceremony for the second Belt and Road Forum in Beijing
Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad speaks at the opening ceremony for the second Belt and Road Forum in Beijing, China April 26, 2019. REUTERS/Florence Lo

April 26, 2019

KUALA LUMPUR (Reuters) – Fewer than half of Malaysians approve of Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, an opinion poll showed on Friday, as concerns over rising costs and racial matters plague his administration nearly a year after taking office.

The survey, conducted in March by independent pollster Merdeka Center, showed that only 46 percent of voters surveyed were satisfied with Mahathir, a sharp drop from the 71 percent approval rating he received in August 2018.

Mahathir’s Pakatan Harapan coalition won a stunning election victory in May 2018, ending the previous government’s more than 60-year rule.

But his administration has since been criticized for failing to deliver on promised reforms and protecting the rights of majority ethnic Malay Muslims.

Of 1,204 survey respondents, 46 percent felt that the “country was headed in the wrong direction”, up from 24 percent in August 2018, the Merdeka Center said in a statement. Just 39 percent said they approved of the ruling government.

High living costs remained the top most concern among Malaysians, with just 40 percent satisfied with the government’s management of the economy, the survey showed.

It also showed mixed responses to Pakatan Harapan’s proposed reforms.

Some 69 percent opposed plans to abolish the death penalty, while respondents were sharply divided over proposals to lower the minimum voting age to 18, or to implement a sugar tax.

“In our opinion, the results appear to indicate a public that favors the status quo, and thus requires a robust and coordinated advocacy efforts in order to garner their acceptance of new measures,” Merdeka Center said.

The survey also found 23 percent of Malaysians were concerned over ethnic and religious matters.

Some groups representing Malays have expressed fear that affirmative-action policies favoring them in business, education and housing could be taken away and criticized the appointments of non-Muslims to key government posts.

Last November, the government reversed its pledge to ratify a UN convention against racial discrimination, after a backlash from Malay groups.

Earlier this month, Pakatan Harapan suffered its third successive loss in local elections since taking power, which has been seen as a further sign of waning public support.

Despite the decline, most Malaysians – 67 percent – agreed that Mahathir’s government should be given more time to fulfill its election promises, Merdeka Center said.

This included a majority of Malay voters who were largely more critical of the new administration, it added.

(Reporting by Rozanna Latiff; Editing by Nick Macfie)

Source: OANN

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!
The German share price index DAX graph at the stock exchange in Frankfurt
The German share price index DAX graph is pictured at the stock exchange in Frankfurt, Germany, April 25, 2019. REUTERS/Staff

April 26, 2019

By Medha Singh and Agamoni Ghosh

(Reuters) – European shares slipped on Friday after losses in heavyweight banks and Glencore outweighed gains in healthcare and auto stocks, while investors remained on the sidelines ahead of U.S. economic data for the first quarter.

The pan-European STOXX 600 index was down 0.1 percent by 0935 GMT, eyeing a modest loss at the end of a holiday-shortened week. Banks-heavy Italian and Spanish indices were laggards.

The banking index fell for a fourth day, at the end of a heavy earnings week for lenders.

Britain’s Royal Bank of Scotland tumbled after posting lower first quarter profit, hurt by intensifying competition and Brexit uncertainty, while its investment bank also registered poor returns.

Weakness in investment banking also dented Deutsche Bank’s quarterly trading revenue and sent its shares lower a day after the German bank abandoned merger talks with smaller rival Commerzbank.

“The current interest rate environment makes it challenging for banks to make proper earnings because of their intermediary function,” said Teeuwe Mevissen, senior market economist eurozone, at Rabobank.

Since the start of April, all country indexes were on pace to rise between 1.8 percent and 3.4 percent, their fourth month of gains, while Germany was strongly outperforming with 6 percent growth.

“For now the current sentiment is very cautious as markets wait for the first estimates of the U.S. GDP growth which could see a surprise,” Mevissen said.

U.S. economic data for the first-quarter is due at 1230 GMT. Growth worries outside the United States resurfaced this week after South Korea’s economy unexpectedly contracted at the start of the year and weak German business sentiment data for April also disappointed.

Among the biggest drags on the benchmark index in Europe were the basic resources sector and the oil and gas sector, weighed down by Britain’s Glencore and France’s Total, respectively.

Glencore dropped after reports that U.S authorities were investigating whether the company and its subsidiaries violated certain provisions of the commodity exchange act.

Energy major Total said its net profit for the first three months of the year fell compared with a year ago due to volatile oil prices and debt costs.

Chip stocks in the region including Siltronic, Ams and STMicroelectronics lost more than 1 percent after Intel Corp reduced its full-year revenue forecast, adding to concerns that an industry-wide slowdown could persist until the end of 2019.

Meanwhile, healthcare, which is also seen as a defensive sector, was a bright spot. It was helped by French drugmaker Sanofi after it returned to growth with higher profits and revenues for the first-quarter.

Luxembourg-based satellite operator SES led media stocks higher after it maintained its full-year outlook on the back of the company’s Networks division.

Automakers in the region rose 0.4 percent, led by Valeo’s 6 percent jump as the French parts maker said its performance would improve in the second half of the year.

Continental AG advanced after it backed its outlook for the year despite reporting a fall in first-quarter earnings.

Renault rose more than 3 percent as it clung to full-year targets and pursues merger talks with its Japanese partner Nissan.

(Reporting by Medha Singh and Agamoni Ghosh in Bengaluru; Editing by Gareth Jones and Elaine Hardcastle)

Source: OANN

Listen to https://magaoneradio.net and Listen Daily! Don't Forget to Share Click a Link Below!
U.S. President Donald Trump hosts Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work Day at the White House in Washington
U.S. President Donald Trump gives a thumbs up to his audience as he hosts Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work Day at the White House in Washington, U.S., April 25, 2019. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

April 26, 2019

By Jan Wolfe and Richard Cowan

(Reuters) – The “i word” – impeachment – is swirling around the U.S. Congress since the release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s redacted Russia report, which painted a picture of lies, threats and confusion in Donald Trump’s White House.

Some Democrats say trying to remove Trump from office would be a waste of time because his fellow Republicans still have majority control of the Senate. Other Democrats argue they have a moral obligation at least to try to impeach, even though Mueller did not charge Trump with conspiring with Russia in the 2016 U.S. election or with obstruction of justice.

Whether or not the Democrats decide to go down this risky path, here is how the impeachment process works.

WHAT ARE GROUNDS FOR IMPEACHMENT?

The U.S. Constitution says the president can be removed from office by Congress for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” Exactly what that means is unclear.

Before he became president in 1974, replacing Republican Richard Nixon who resigned over the Watergate scandal, Gerald Ford said: “An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.”

Frank Bowman, a University of Missouri law professor and author of a forthcoming book on the history of impeachment, said Congress could look beyond criminal laws in defining “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Historically, it can encompass corruption and other abuses, including trying to obstruct judicial proceedings.

HOW DOES IMPEACHMENT PLAY OUT?

The term impeachment is often interpreted as simply removing a president from office, but that is not strictly accurate.

Impeachment technically refers to the 435-member House of Representatives approving formal charges against a president.

The House effectively acts as accuser – voting on whether to bring specific charges. An impeachment resolution, known as “articles of impeachment,” is like an indictment in a criminal case. A simple majority vote is needed in the House to impeach.

The Senate then conducts a trial. House members act as the prosecutors, with senators as the jurors. The chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court presides over the trial. A two-thirds majority vote is required in the 100-member Senate to convict and remove a president from office.

No president has ever been removed from office as a direct result of an impeachment and conviction by Congress.

Nixon quit in 1974 rather than face impeachment. Presidents Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1998 were impeached by the House, but both stayed in office after the Senate acquitted them.

Obstruction of justice was one charge against Clinton, who faced allegations of lying under oath about his relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Obstruction was also included in the articles of impeachment against Nixon.

CAN THE SUPREME COURT OVERTURN?

No.

Trump said on Twitter on Wednesday that he would ask the Supreme Court to intervene if Democrats tried to impeach him. But America’s founders explicitly rejected making a Senate conviction appealable to the federal judiciary, Bowman said.

“They quite plainly decided this is a political process and it is ultimately a political judgment,” Bowman said.

“So when Trump suggests there is any judicial remedy for impeachment, he is just wrong.”

PROOF OF WRONGDOING?

In a typical criminal court case, jurors are told to convict only if there is “proof beyond a reasonable doubt,” a fairly stringent standard.

Impeachment proceedings are different. The House and Senate “can decide on whatever burden of proof they want,” Bowman said. “There is no agreement on what the burden should be.”

PARTY BREAKDOWN IN CONGRESS?

Right now, there are 235 Democrats, 197 Republicans and three vacancies in the House. As a result, the Democratic majority could vote to impeach Trump without any Republican votes.

In 1998, when Republicans had a House majority, the chamber voted largely along party lines to impeach Clinton, a Democrat.

The Senate now has 53 Republicans, 45 Democrats and two independents who usually vote with Democrats. Conviction and removal of a president would requires 67 votes. So that means for Trump to be impeached, at least 20 Republicans and all the Democrats and independents would have to vote against him.

WHO BECOMES PRESIDENT IF TRUMP IS REMOVED?

A Senate conviction removing Trump from office would elevate Vice President Mike Pence to the presidency to fill out Trump’s term, which ends on Jan. 20, 2021.

(Reporting by Jan Wolfe and Richard Cowan; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh and Peter Cooney)

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