th777

Ruling on Monday after an emergency hearing at Belfast High Court, judge Mr Justice McAlinden rejected loyalist activist Jamie Bryson’s application for leave for a full judicial review hearing against Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn. The judge said Mr Bryson, who represented himself as a personal litigant, had “very ably argued” his case with “perseverance and cogency”, and had raised some issues of law that caused him “some concern”. However, he found against him on the three grounds of challenge against Mr Benn. Mr Bryson had initially asked the court to grant interim relief in his challenge to prevent Tuesday’s democratic consent motion being heard in the Assembly, pending the hearing of a full judicial review. However, he abandoned that element of his leave application during proceedings on Monday, after the judge made clear he would be “very reluctant” to do anything that would be “trespassing into the realms” of a democratically elected Assembly. Mr Bryson had challenged Mr Benn’s move to initiate the democratic consent process that is required under the UK and EU’s Windsor Framework deal to extend the trading arrangements that apply to Northern Ireland. The previously stated voting intentions of the main parties suggest that Stormont MLAs will vote to continue the measures for another four years when they convene to debate the motion on Tuesday. After the ruling, Mr Bryson told the court he intended to appeal to the Court of Appeal. Any hearing was not expected to come later on Monday. In applying for leave, the activist’s argument was founded on three key grounds. The first was the assertion that Mr Benn failed to make sufficient efforts to ensure Stormont’s leaders undertook a public consultation exercise in Northern Ireland before the consent vote. The second was that the Secretary of State allegedly failed to demonstrate he had paid special regard to protecting Northern Ireland’s place in the UK customs territory in triggering the vote. The third ground centred on law changes introduced by the previous UK government earlier this year, as part of its Safeguarding the Union deal to restore powersharing at Stormont. He claimed that if the amendments achieved their purpose, namely, to safeguard Northern Ireland’s place within the United Kingdom, then it would be unlawful to renew and extend post-Brexit trading arrangements that have created economic barriers between the region and the rest of the UK. In 2023, the UK Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the trading arrangements for Northern Ireland are lawful. The appellants in the case argued that legislation passed at Westminster to give effect to the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement conflicted with the 1800 Acts of Union that formed the United Kingdom, particularly article six of that statute guaranteeing unfettered trade within the UK. The Supreme Court found that while article six of the Acts of Union has been “modified” by the arrangements, that was done with the express will of a sovereign parliament, and so therefore was lawful. Mr Bryson contended that amendments made to the Withdrawal Agreement earlier this year, as part of the Safeguarding the Union measures proposed by the Government to convince the DUP to return to powersharing, purport to reassert and reinforce Northern Ireland’s constitutional status in light of the Supreme Court judgment. He told the court that it was “quite clear” there was “inconsistency” between the different legal provisions. “That inconsistency has to be resolved – there is an arguable case,” he told the judge. However, Dr Tony McGleenan KC, representing the Government, described Mr Bryson’s argument as “hopeless” and “not even arguable”. He said all three limbs of the case had “no prospect of success and serve no utility”. He added: “This is a political argument masquerading as a point of constitutional law and the court should see that for what it is.” After rising to consider the arguments, Justice McAlinden delivered his ruling shortly after 7pm. The judge dismissed the application on the first ground around the lack consultation, noting that such an exercise was not a “mandatory” obligation on Mr Benn. On the second ground, he said there were “very clear” indications that the Secretary of State had paid special regard to the customs territory issues. On the final ground, Justice McAlinden found there was no inconsistency with the recent legislative amendments and the position stated in the Supreme Court judgment. “I don’t think any such inconsistency exists,” he said. He said the amendments were simply a “restatement” of the position as set out by the Supreme Court judgment, and only served to confirm that replacing the Northern Ireland Protocol with the Windsor Framework had not changed the constitutional fact that Article Six of the Acts of Union had been lawfully “modified” by post-Brexit trading arrangements. “It does no more than that,” he said. The framework, and its predecessor the NI Protocol, require checks and customs paperwork on goods moving from Great Britain into Northern Ireland. Under the arrangements, which were designed to ensure no hardening of the Irish land border post-Brexit, Northern Ireland continues to follow many EU trade and customs rules. This has proved highly controversial, with unionists arguing the system threatens Northern Ireland’s place in the United Kingdom. Advocates of the arrangements say they help insulate the region from negative economic consequences of Brexit. A dispute over the so-called Irish Sea border led to the collapse of the Northern Ireland Assembly in 2022, when the DUP withdrew then-first minister Paul Givan from the coalition executive. The impasse lasted two years and ended in January when the Government published its Safeguarding the Union measures. Under the terms of the framework, a Stormont vote must be held on articles five to 10 of the Windsor Framework, which underpin the EU trade laws in force in Northern Ireland, before they expire. The vote must take place before December 17. Based on the numbers in the Assembly, MLAs are expected to back the continuation of the measures for another four years, even though unionists are likely to oppose the move. DUP leader Gavin Robinson has already made clear his party will be voting against continuing the operation of the Windsor Framework. Unlike other votes on contentious issues at Stormont, the motion does not require cross-community support to pass. If it is voted through with a simple majority, the arrangements are extended for four years. In that event, the Government is obliged to hold an independent review of how the framework is working. If it wins cross-community support, which is a majority of unionists and a majority of nationalists, then it is extended for eight years. The chances of it securing such cross-community backing are highly unlikely.China's mega hydel project along Brahmaputra serves as wake-up call for India's pending hydroelectric projectMSU Bobcats win "Can the Griz" food drive, raising over 1.3 million lbs. of food together with UM

A Stormont vote must be held on articles five to 10 of the Windsor Framework, which underpin EU trade laws in Northern Ireland, before they expire. A court challenge over a Stormont vote on extending post-Brexit trading arrangements for Northern Ireland has been dismissed, and the Assembly debate will go ahead as planned on Tuesday. Ruling on Monday after an emergency hearing at Belfast High Court, judge Mr Justice McAlinden rejected loyalist activist Jamie Bryson’s application for leave for a full judicial review hearing against Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn. The judge said Mr Bryson, who represented himself as a personal litigant, had “very ably argued” his case with “perseverance and cogency”, and had raised some issues of law that caused him “some concern”. However, he found against him on the three grounds of challenge against Mr Benn. Mr Bryson had initially asked the court to grant interim relief in his challenge to prevent Tuesday’s democratic consent motion being heard in the Assembly, pending the hearing of a full judicial review. However, he abandoned that element of his leave application during proceedings on Monday, after the judge made clear he would be “very reluctant” to do anything that would be “trespassing into the realms” of a democratically elected Assembly. Mr Bryson had challenged Mr Benn’s move to initiate the democratic consent process that is required under the UK and EU’s Windsor Framework deal to extend the trading arrangements that apply to Northern Ireland. The previously stated voting intentions of the main parties suggest that Stormont MLAs will vote to continue the measures for another four years when they convene to debate the motion on Tuesday. After the ruling, Mr Bryson told the court he intended to appeal to the Court of Appeal. Any hearing was not expected to come later on Monday. In applying for leave, the activist’s argument was founded on three key grounds. The first was the assertion that Mr Benn failed to make sufficient efforts to ensure Stormont’s leaders undertook a public consultation exercise in Northern Ireland before the consent vote. The second was that the Secretary of State allegedly failed to demonstrate he had paid special regard to protecting Northern Ireland’s place in the UK customs territory in triggering the vote. The third ground centred on law changes introduced by the previous UK government earlier this year, as part of its Safeguarding the Union deal to restore powersharing at Stormont. He claimed that if the amendments achieved their purpose, namely, to safeguard Northern Ireland’s place within the United Kingdom, then it would be unlawful to renew and extend post-Brexit trading arrangements that have created economic barriers between the region and the rest of the UK. In 2023, the UK Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the trading arrangements for Northern Ireland are lawful. The appellants in the case argued that legislation passed at Westminster to give effect to the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement conflicted with the 1800 Acts of Union that formed the United Kingdom, particularly article six of that statute guaranteeing unfettered trade within the UK. The Supreme Court found that while article six of the Acts of Union has been “modified” by the arrangements, that was done with the express will of a sovereign parliament, and so therefore was lawful. Mr Bryson contended that amendments made to the Withdrawal Agreement earlier this year, as part of the Safeguarding the Union measures proposed by the Government to convince the DUP to return to powersharing, purport to reassert and reinforce Northern Ireland’s constitutional status in light of the Supreme Court judgment. He told the court that it was “quite clear” there was “inconsistency” between the different legal provisions. “That inconsistency has to be resolved – there is an arguable case,” he told the judge. However, Dr Tony McGleenan KC, representing the Government, described Mr Bryson’s argument as “hopeless” and “not even arguable”. He said all three limbs of the case had “no prospect of success and serve no utility”. He added: “This is a political argument masquerading as a point of constitutional law and the court should see that for what it is.” After rising to consider the arguments, Justice McAlinden delivered his ruling shortly after 7pm. The judge dismissed the application on the first ground around the lack consultation, noting that such an exercise was not a “mandatory” obligation on Mr Benn. On the second ground, he said there were “very clear” indications that the Secretary of State had paid special regard to the customs territory issues. On the final ground, Justice McAlinden found there was no inconsistency with the recent legislative amendments and the position stated in the Supreme Court judgment. “I don’t think any such inconsistency exists,” he said. He said the amendments were simply a “restatement” of the position as set out by the Supreme Court judgment, and only served to confirm that replacing the Northern Ireland Protocol with the Windsor Framework had not changed the constitutional fact that Article Six of the Acts of Union had been lawfully “modified” by post-Brexit trading arrangements. “It does no more than that,” he said. The framework, and its predecessor the NI Protocol, require checks and customs paperwork on goods moving from Great Britain into Northern Ireland. Under the arrangements, which were designed to ensure no hardening of the Irish land border post-Brexit, Northern Ireland continues to follow many EU trade and customs rules. This has proved highly controversial, with unionists arguing the system threatens Northern Ireland’s place in the United Kingdom. Advocates of the arrangements say they help insulate the region from negative economic consequences of Brexit. A dispute over the so-called Irish Sea border led to the collapse of the Northern Ireland Assembly in 2022, when the DUP withdrew then-first minister Paul Givan from the coalition executive. The impasse lasted two years and ended in January when the Government published its Safeguarding the Union measures. Under the terms of the framework, a Stormont vote must be held on articles five to 10 of the Windsor Framework, which underpin the EU trade laws in force in Northern Ireland, before they expire. The vote must take place before December 17. Based on the numbers in the Assembly, MLAs are expected to back the continuation of the measures for another four years, even though unionists are likely to oppose the move. DUP leader Gavin Robinson has already made clear his party will be voting against continuing the operation of the Windsor Framework. Unlike other votes on contentious issues at Stormont, the motion does not require cross-community support to pass. If it is voted through with a simple majority, the arrangements are extended for four years. In that event, the Government is obliged to hold an independent review of how the framework is working. If it wins cross-community support, which is a majority of unionists and a majority of nationalists, then it is extended for eight years. The chances of it securing such cross-community backing are highly unlikely.Ruben Amorim issues storm warning after smooth start with Manchester United

Jigawa sends 30 agric technicians to China for training

Ruben Amorim warned “the storm will come” eventually as Manchester United’s head coach tried to temper expectations ahead of the trip to Arsenal. The 39-year-old has been a breath of fresh air since succeeding Erik ten Hag, with his personality and approach, coupled with promising early performances, bringing hope back to Old Trafford. Amorim has been touched by his warm welcome but repeatedly urged fans to avoid jumping the gun, having followed a draw at Ipswich with home wins against Bodo/Glimt and Everton. Wednesday’s trip to Arsenal is comfortably his biggest challenge yet and victory would see United move within three points of the Premier League title contenders. Put to Amorim it will be hard to manage expectations if they won in the capital, the head coach said: “I would like to say different things, but I have to say it again: the storm will come. “I don’t know if you use that expression, but we are going to have difficult moments and we will be found out in some games. “And I know that because I’m knowing my players and I know football and I follow football, so I understand the difference between the teams. “We are in the point in that we are putting simple things in the team, without training, and you feel it in this game against Everton, they change a little bit the way they were building up. “They are very good team, and we were with a lot of problems because we cannot change it by calling one thing to the captain. A midweek trip to the capital awaits 🚆 #MUFC || #PL pic.twitter.com/1e6VrILJW3 — Manchester United (@ManUtd) December 3, 2024 “So, we don’t have this training, so let’s focus on each game, on the performance, what we have to improve, trying to win games. And that is the focus. “I know it’s really hard to be a Manchester United coach and say these things in press conferences. We want to win all the time. No matter what. “We are going to try to win, but we know that we are in a different point if you compare to Arsenal. “So, it is what it is and we will try to win it and we go with confidence to win, but we know that we need to play very well to win the next football match.” The trip to Arsenal is the second of nine December matches for United, who are looking to avoid suffering four straight league defeats to the Gunners for the first time. The Red Devils have not won a Premier League match at the Emirates Stadium since 2017, but Amorim knows a thing or two about frustrating Mikel Arteta’s men. Arsenal thrashed Sporting Lisbon 5-1 in the Champions League last week, but in 2022-23 he led the Portuguese side to a Europa League last-16 penalty triumph after a 1-1 draw in London made it 3-3 on aggregate. “Arsenal this year, they play a little bit different,” Amorim said. “They are more fluid. “For example, two years ago when we faced them with Sporting, you knew how to press because you can understand better the structure. “Now it’s more fluid with (Riccardo) Calafiori and (Jurrien) Timber in different sides. One coming inside, the other going outside. Also (Martin) Odegaard changed the team, and you can feel it during this season. “So, you can take something from that game, especially because I know so well the opponent so you can understand the weakness of that team. “But every game is different, so you take something, but you already know that you are going to face a very good team.” This hectic winter schedule means Amorim sidestepped talk of January transfer business ahead of facing Arsenal, although he was more forthcoming on Amad Diallo’s future. The 22-year-old, who put in a man of the match display in Sunday’s 4-0 win against Everton, is out of contract at the end of the season, although the club holds an option to extend by a year. Diallo has repeatedly spoken of his desire to stay at United and it has been reported an agreement is close. Amorim said: “I think he wants to stay, and we want him to stay. So that is clear and we will find a solution.”

Why I’m keeping my 2004 beater with 315,000 miles

In many ways, President Vladimir Putin seems to be winning. Russian forces are pushing ahead in Ukraine. President-elect Donald Trump is returning to the White House. War fatigue is spreading across Europe. North Korean troops have boosted the ranks of his army. And yet on Thursday, Putin appeared weary, threatened and newly aggrieved as he took his bellicose threats against his Western adversaries to a new level. Even with the prospect of a friendlier American administration around the corner, he has found himself struggling anew to confront perhaps the biggest failure of his war: Russia’s inability to deter the West from providing colossal amounts of military aid to Ukraine. As a result, Putin is bringing Russia closer to a direct conflict with the United States than at any point in decades. He announced Thursday evening that Russia had struck Ukraine with a new intermediate-range missile, one with nuclear capabilities, using a televised speech to cast the West as an aggressor that left Moscow with no choice but to respond. On Friday, Putin told a meeting of military leaders that Russia would continue using and begin regular production of the new missile. Two months from now, Trump’s second presidency could give Putin the chance to strike a peace deal with Ukraine that he could portray as a victory. But until then, people who study the Kremlin say, Putin is intent on driving home the chilling message that America risks nuclear war as it expands its support for Kyiv. “The Russian side has clearly demonstrated its capabilities,” Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin’s spokesperson, said on Friday. “The contours of further retaliatory actions, if our concerns are not taken into account, have also been quite clearly outlined.” Capturing the mood, one of Russia’s most influential security hawks, Sergey Karaganov, a political scientist, published an article on Thursday warning that Russia risked “ripping defeat from the jaws of victory.” To prevail over the West, he argued, the Kremlin needed to step up the threat of nuclear weapons being used. “Russia has started to win in the fight against Western aggression in Ukraine,” Karaganov wrote. “But it’s early and dangerous to relax. The fight is only beginning.” Ever since he launched his invasion in February 2022, Putin has mostly been careful to avoid direct military conflict with NATO, even as Western countries poured modern weaponry into Ukraine that killed tens of thousands of Russian soldiers. But on Thursday, he said in the most explicit terms yet that he was ready for such an escalation: Russia was “entitled,” he said, to strike the military facilities of countries “that allow their weapons to be used against our facilities.” The main reason for that shift appears clear: President Joe Biden’s recent decision to allow Ukraine to strike deep into Russian territory with U.S.-provided missiles that have a range of 190 miles. That was followed by a similar decision by the British government. While Ukraine’s present stock of Western missiles is not sufficient to change the course of the war, Putin appears to fear that the West could provide Ukraine with more powerful, longer-range missiles in the future. “From that point onward,” Putin said Thursday, referring to Ukraine’s missile attacks this week, “the regional conflict in Ukraine provoked by the West has assumed elements of a global nature.” But some analysts see a second reason Putin may feel prepared to take bigger risks now: Trump’s looming return to the White House. After all, Putin’s threats about a “global” war dovetail with Trump’s rhetoric about Biden risking World War III. So Putin — who quickly praised Trump after he won the election — may believe that taking more aggressive steps now could help him strike a favorable deal once Trump is inaugurated. “I don’t see him being concerned about ruining his chances for a deal with Trump — rather, quite the opposite,” said Tatiana Stanovaya, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center. “Trump took the position that Biden’s policies are leading to World War III, and what Putin is doing confirms this.” Biden long resisted allowing Ukraine to strike deep into Russia with U.S. missiles, to Ukraine’s great frustration, amid concern about Putin’s response. In September, Putin said that such a move would put his country “at war” with NATO, for the first time defining a specific “red line” that he was warning the West not to cross. This week, the Biden administration crossed it, citing Putin’s own escalation of the war this fall by bringing thousands of North Korean troops into the fight. Biden administration officials calculate that the risk of escalation by Putin diminished with the election of Trump. But in Moscow, some question that notion. A former senior Russian official who remains close to the Kremlin said “no one knows” if a deal with Trump is really possible. But “a threat after Biden’s decision has already emerged,” he added, “so we have to respond.” He spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive Kremlin deliberations. American officials “are overestimating both themselves and the significance of their agenda for others,” said Dmitry Trenin, a hawkish specialist on security policy at Moscow’s Higher School of Economics, suggesting Putin is not so concerned about who holds power in Washington. “Putin has his schedule and his strategy, and he will follow them.” Still, Putin has repeatedly signaled that he is interested in a negotiated settlement, as long as he is able to keep the land Russia has captured in Ukraine and to extract political concessions, like a guarantee that the country won’t join NATO. He has often pointed to a draft treaty that Ukrainian and Russian negotiators hammered out in the first months of the invasion in 2022, in which Ukraine would have declared itself “permanently neutral” and accepted limits on the size of its army. Russia may be “quite cynical and skeptical” about the prospects for a deal after Trump takes office, said Samuel Charap, a senior political scientist at the Rand Corp. “But they still recognize that they need a deal eventually.” Ukrainian and Western officials contend that Putin is simply looking for a deal only on his terms, tantamount to capitulation. The 2022 negotiations between Russia and Ukraine fell apart amid disputes over how the West could protect Ukraine from another Russian invasion in the future. That issue — the shape of “security guarantees” for Ukraine — is likely to loom as the most complicated factor in any renewed talks after Trump returns to the White House, more important than how much Ukrainian territory Russia is allowed to keep control over. Until then, conditions appear ripe for further escalation — because Russia and Ukraine are jockeying for better negotiating positions before Trump takes office, and because Putin appears determined to deter a further expansion of Western aid to Ukraine that could bring the fighting deeper into Russian territory. “We’re in an escalatory spiral,” Charap said. Separate from any preparation for future negotiations, he added, that spiral “is a sort of dynamic of its own.” This article originally appeared in The New York Times . © 2024 The New York Times Company‘China Corner’ established at ISSI: CPEC expansion assured, says Fatemi Tariq Fatemi says there is something fascinating about Pakistan-China ties that has puzzled scholars for years Ambassador Syed Tariq Fatemi, Special Assistant to the Prime Minister (Foreign Affairs). — APP/File ISLAMABAD: Beijing has assured that the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) will not only continue to move forward, but will also be expanded. This was reaffirmed by the Chinese leadership during their latest meetings with the visiting prime minister. googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('div-gpt-ad-1700472799616-0'); }); Ambassador Syed Tariq Fatemi, Special Assistant to the Prime Minister (Foreign Affairs), stated this on Thursday with reference to the meetings between the Prime Minister and the Chinese leadership after attending the meetings. Speaking as the chief guest at the inaugural ceremony of the ‘China Corner’ at the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI), China Pakistan Study Centre (CPSC), he explained that there is something fascinating about the Pakistan-China relationship that has puzzled scholars of international relations abroad for years. Despite significant differences between the people and philosophies of the two countries, their relationship has continued to strengthen. Pakistan was among the first to recognise China and advocate for Chinese membership in the UN, he noted. Tariq Fatemi emphasised that through CPEC, Pakistan has been fortunate to be the first symphony in the Chinese orchestra of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Recognizing the cooperation between the two countries is beneficial not only for them but for the entire region. Pakistan’s Ambassador for China, Ambassador Khalil Hashmi, and Shi Yuanqiang, the deputy head of mission at the Chinese embassy, attended the ceremony as guests of honor. This is the first ‘China Corner’ established in a think-tank in Pakistan. In his welcome address, former Foreign Secretary and chief of the ISSI, Ambassador Sohail Mahmood, highlighted that ISSI has been a vital hub for research on China in Pakistan, with multiple institutional collaborations with Chinese think tanks and universities. The ISSI is also a dialogue partner for the Pakistan-China Think Tank Forum with the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations (CICIR) as part of the Joint Working Group of CPEC on International Cooperation. He informed that the ‘China Corner’ has a collection of over 600 physical and 5000 electronic books, journals, newspapers, and monographs related to China studies, available for scholars to utilise. He stressed that since the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, the Pakistan-China relationship has progressed into an all-weather strategic cooperative partnership, becoming an indispensable factor of stability in the region and beyond. It encompasses diplomatic, political, economic, security, defense, technological, educational, cultural, and people-to-people domains. Ambassador Khalil Hashmi stated that the Pakistan-China relationship has moved beyond traditional inter-state relations to become a comprehensive and unique partnership built on mutual trust, mutual support, and mutual respect as its foundational principles. The establishment of the ‘China Corner’ at ISSI is not only about studying China but also about building bridges and creating synergy between the two countries to collaborate effectively. It has great potential as a space where ideas can flourish and support the future of the Pakistan-China bilateral relationship. He encouraged students, scholars, researchers, policymakers, and practitioners to make full use of this platform. Shi Yuanqiang said that Pakistan and China are all-weather strategic cooperative partners and iron-clad friends. The friendship between the two countries has endured the test of time and is as solid as a rock and as stable as Mount Tai. The importance of the bilateral relationship is recognized by the highest levels of leadership in both countries, and China is prepared to work with Pakistan to build a Pakistan-China community of shared future. Dr. Talat Shabbir, Director of CPSC, stated in his inaugural remarks that the ‘China Corner’ will provide comprehensive access to information and resources about China’s governance model, economic policies, and diplomatic strategies. This repository will be a resource for fostering knowledge, dialogue, and collaboration, demonstrating a commitment to understanding China’s development narrative and leveraging this understanding for shared progress and prosperity.

By MATTHEW BROWN and JACK DURA BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — Donald Trump assigned Doug Burgum a singular mission in nominating the governor of oil-rich North Dakota to lead an agency that oversees a half-billion acres of federal land and vast areas offshore: “Drill baby drill.” That dictate from the president-elect’s announcement of Burgum for Secretary of Interior sets the stage for a reignition of the court battles over public lands and waters that helped define Trump’s first term, with environmentalists worried about climate change already pledging their opposition. Burgum is an ultra-wealthy software industry entrepreneur who grew up on his family’s farm. He represents a tame choice compared to other Trump Cabinet picks. Public lands experts said his experience as a popular two-term governor who aligns himself with conservationist Teddy Roosevelt suggests a willingness to collaborate, as opposed to dismantling from within the agency he is tasked with leading. That could help smooth his confirmation and clear the way for the incoming administration to move quickly to open more public lands to development and commercial use. “Burgum strikes me as a credible nominee who could do a credible job as Interior secretary,” said John Leshy, who served as Interior’s solicitor under former President Bill Clinton. “He’s not a right-wing radical on public lands,” added Leshy, professor emeritus at the University of California College of the Law, San Francisco. The Interior Department manages about one-fifth of the country’s land with a mandate that spans from wildlife conservation and recreation to natural resource extraction and fulfilling treaty obligations with Native American tribes. Most of those lands are in the West, where frictions with private landowners and state officials are commonplace and have sometimes mushroomed into violent confrontations with right-wing groups that reject federal jurisdiction. Burgum if confirmed would be faced with a pending U.S. Supreme Court action from Utah that seeks to assert state power over Interior Department lands. North Dakota’s attorney general has supported the lawsuit, but Burgum’s office declined to say if he backs Utah’s claims. U.S. Justice Department attorneys on Thursday asked the Supreme Court to reject Utah’s lawsuit. They said Utah in 1894 agreed to give up its right to the lands at issue when it became a state. Trump’s narrow focus on fossil fuels is a replay from his 2016 campaign — although minus coal mining, a collapsing industry that he failed to revive in his first term. Trump repeatedly hailed oil as “liquid gold” on the campaign trail this year and largely omitted any mention of coal. About 26% of U.S. oil comes from federal lands and offshore waters overseen by Interior. Production continues to hit record levels under President Joe Biden despite claims by Trump that the Democrat hindered drilling. But industry representatives and their Republican allies say volumes could be further boosted. They want Burgum and the Interior Department to ramp up oil and gas sales from federal lands, in the Gulf of Mexico and offshore Alaska. The oil industry also hopes Trump’s government efficiency initiative led by billionaire Elon Musk can dramatically reduce environmental reviews. Biden’s administration reduced the frequency and size of lease sales, and it restored environmental rules that were weakened under Trump . The Democrat as a candidate in 2020 promised further restrictions on drilling to help combat global warming, but he struck a deal for the 2022 climate bill that requires offshore oil and gas sales to be held before renewable energy leases can be sold. “Oil and gas brings billions of dollars of revenue in, but you don’t get that if you don’t have leasing,” said Erik Milito with the National Ocean Industries Association, which represents offshore industries including oil and wind. Trump has vowed to kill offshore wind energy projects. But Milito said he was hopeful that with Burgum in place it would be “green lights ahead for everything, not just oil and gas.” It is unclear if Burgum would revive some of the most controversial steps taken at the agency during Trump’s first term, including relocating senior officials out of Washington, D.C., dismantling parts of the Endangered Species Act and shrinking the size of two national monuments in Utah designated by former President Barack Obama. Officials under Biden spent much of the past four years reversing Trump’s moves. They restored the Utah monuments and rescinded numerous Trump regulations. Onshore oil and gas lease sales plummeted — from more than a million acres sold annually under Trump and other previous administrations, to just 91,712 acres (37,115 hectares) sold last year — while many wind and solar projects advanced. Developing energy leases takes years, and oil companies control millions of acres that remain untapped. Biden’s administration also elevated the importance of conservation in public lands decisions, adopting a rule putting it more on par with oil and gas development. They proposed withdrawing parcels of land in six states from potential future mining to protect a struggling bird species, the greater sage grouse. North Dakota is among Republican states that challenged the Biden administration’s public lands rule. The states said in a June lawsuit that officials acting to prevent climate change have turned laws meant to facilitate development into policies that obstruct drilling, livestock grazing and other uses. Oil production boomed over the past two decades in North Dakota thanks in large part to better drilling techniques. Burgum has been an industry champion and last year signed a repeal of the state’s oil tax trigger — a price-based tax hike industry leaders supported removing. Burgum’s office declined an interview request. In a statement after his nomination, Burgum echoed Trump’s call for U.S. “energy dominance” in the global market. The 68-year-old governor also said the Interior post offered an opportunity to improve government relations with developers, tribes, landowners and outdoor enthusiasts “with a focus on maximizing the responsible use of our natural resources with environmental stewardship for the benefit of the American people.” Related Articles National Politics | Judge delays Trump hush money sentencing in order to decide where case should go now National Politics | Republicans scramble to fill JD Vance’s Ohio Senate seat National Politics | Gaetz’s withdrawal highlights how incoming presidents often lose Cabinet nominees National Politics | What to know about Pam Bondi, Trump’s new pick for attorney general National Politics | Democrat Bob Casey concedes to Republican David McCormick in Pennsylvania Senate contest Under current Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, the agency put greater emphasis on working collaboratively with tribes, including their own energy projects . Haaland, a member of the Pueblo of Laguna tribe in New Mexico, also advanced an initiative to solve criminal cases involving missing and murdered Indigenous peoples and helped lead a nationwide reckoning over abuses at federal Indian boarding schools that culminated in a formal public apology from Biden. Burgum has worked with tribes in his state, including on oil development. Badlands Conservation Alliance director Shannon Straight in Bismarck, North Dakota, said Burgum has also been a big supporter of tourism in North Dakota and outdoor activities such as hunting and fishing. Yet Straight said that hasn’t translated into additional protections for land in the state. “Theodore Roosevelt had a conservation ethic, and we talk and hold that up as a beautiful standard to live by,” he said. “We haven’t seen it as much on the ground. ... We need to recognize the landscape is only going to be as good as some additional protections.” Burgum has been a cheerleader of the planned Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library in Medora, North Dakota. Brown reported from Billings, Montana.

What Benazir left behind

Winter Wonderland in the Heart of NYC: The Empire State Building Celebrates the Holiday Season with Extravagant Holiday Décor, Festive Movie Screenings, Special Lightings, and MoreA lot of ink has been spilled about the potential for artificial intelligence (AI), and with good reason. Since the dawn of AI early last year, companies have been flocking to the technology, which promises to streamline processes, create original content of all stripes, and dramatically increase productivity. The potential has businesses ponying up to reap the windfall of AI, and spending is increasing at a blistering pace. In fact, spending by the four horsemen of big tech -- Microsoft , Meta Platforms , Alphabet , and Amazon -- is expected to hit nearly $250 billion for the capital expenditures to support AI this year, with no end in sight. If there's one unquestionable beneficiary of all this spending, it's Nvidia ( NVDA -3.22% ) . The company supplies the graphics processing units (GPUs) that are powering the AI revolution and will likely ride that wave to become a founding member of the $10 trillion club. Yet, beyond its AI prowess, Nvidia has a number of other growth drivers that could help propel the stock to new heights. From humble beginnings Nvidia pioneered the GPU back in 1999 to render lifelike images in video games. This was made possible thanks to parallel processing, or the ability to conduct a multitude of mathematical calculations simultaneously. By breaking up a computing task into smaller, more manageable bits, Nvidia revolutionized an industry -- but that was just the beginning. The chipmaker soon pivoted, applying the same technology to a number of other applications and breaking ground across the tech landscape. Nvidia GPUs are now a staple in data centers, cloud computing, autonomous driving, machine learning, and, most recently, generative AI. The numbers tell the tale During the past 10 years, Nvidia's revenue has grown by 2,300% (as of market close on Wednesday), while its net income has surged 8,460%. While it's been a rollercoaster ride, the company's consistently strong financial performance has driven impressive growth in its stock price, which has soared 29,050%. In its fiscal 2025 third quarter (ended Oct. 27), Nvidia delivered record revenue of $35 billion, up 94% year over year and 17% sequentially. This drove adjusted earnings per share (EPS) of $0.81, up 103%. Fueling the results was the data center segment, which includes chips used in AI, data centers, and cloud computing. Revenue for the segment surged 112% to $30.8 billion, driven by unquenchable demand for AI. Given that demand, the runway ahead is long. Analysts at Goldman Sachs Research estimate the market for AI could top $7 trillion by 2030. Furthermore, thanks to the improving economy, businesses are more willing to invest in this new and revolutionary technology, a trend that will benefit Nvidia. Many ways to win The growing adoption of AI is clearly Nvidia's biggest opportunity, but there are others. Before the advent of AI, gaming had long been Nvidia's primary growth industry. That changed over the past few years when its dominance was usurped by AI. The segment still represents 10% of Nvidia's revenue, and it could see significant upside now that the economy is on the mend. Inflation took a toll on the gaming business, as users made do with their existing graphics cards, biding their time until conditions improved. Now, many industry experts believe pent-up demand is about to be unleashed, causing a long-awaited upgrade cycle, especially as we head into the holiday season. In the second quarter, Nvidia captured 88% of the discrete desktop GPU market, according to Jon Peddie Research. While the industrywide third-quarter results aren't yet available, Nvidia's dominance isn't expected to change. Furthermore, demand for videogame processors is expected to surge over the next five years, jumping from $3.6 billion in 2024 to $15.7 billion by 2029, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 34%, according to Mordor Intelligence. As the leading provider of cutting-edge gaming processors, Nvidia is likely to benefit from these secular tailwinds. Let's not forget the data center market, which was already experiencing robust growth thanks to the digital transformation. As the demand for cloud computing grows, so too does the need for data centers to support that growth. Nvidia controls an estimated 95% of the data center GPU market, according to CFRA Research analyst Angelo Zino. Furthermore, it's estimated that the data center market will more than double, climbing from $302 billion in 2024 to $622 billion by 2030, a compound annual growth rate of 10%, according to Prescient and Strategic Intelligence Market Research. While generative AI is making all the headlines, there are established branches of AI that are powered by Nvidia's processors -- including machine learning . The company dominates an estimated 95% share of that market, according to New Street Research. Nvidia's dominance and the expectations for continued growth in each of these markets give the company plenty of additional low-hanging fruit to pluck. The path to $10 trillion Nvidia currently sports a market cap of roughly $3.58 trillion, which means it will take stock price gains of 179% to drive its value to $10 trillion. According to Wall Street, Nvidia is poised to generate revenue of nearly $126 billion in fiscal 2025 (which ends in January), giving the stock a price-to-sales (P/S) ratio of roughly 28. Assuming its P/S remains constant, Nvidia would need to grow its revenue to roughly $352 billion annually to support a $10 trillion market cap. Wall Street is currently forecasting revenue growth for Nvidia of 47% annually over the next five years. If the company can achieve that benchmark, it could achieve a $10 trillion market cap as soon as 2028. While that might seem ambitious, I'm not the only one who believes it's only a matter of time. Beth Kindig, CEO and lead tech analyst for the I/O Fund, calculates that Nvidia will reach a $10 trillion market cap by 2030: Given the multiple paths for growth ahead and the rapid and accelerating adoption of AI, I think Kindig has done her homework. That said, Nvidia isn't for the faint of heart. This past summer, the stock plunged 27% in just six weeks between June and July as reports suggested the launch of its AI-centric Blackwell chips could be delayed. Cooler heads have prevailed since then, and the stock has run to new heights. But the lesson stands. Wall Street expects Nvidia to generate EPS of $4.20 in fiscal 2026, which begins in late January. That works out to roughly 33 times forward earnings (as of this writing). I think that an attractive price to pay for a company supplying the gold standard processors needed to power one of the most important technology shifts in a generation.Accel Entertainment Announces the Successful Closure of Its Acquisition of Fairmount Holdings, Fairmount Park, Inc. D/b/a FanDuel Sportsbook & Racetrack in Collinsville, Illinois, Broadening Accel’s Reach Into the Locals Gaming Market

Key details to know about the arrest of a suspect in the killing of UnitedHealthcare's CEO