Mozambique's next president Daniel Chapo, new to national politicsTime magazine gave Donald Trump something it has never done for a designee: a lengthy fact-check of claims he made in an accompanying interview. The accompanies a transcript of what the president-elect told the newsmagazine’s journalists. Described as a “12 minute read,” it calls into question 15 separate statements that Trump made. It was the second time Trump earned the Time accolade; he also won in 2016, the first year he was elected president. Time editors said it wasn’t a particularly hard choice over other finalists Kamala Harris, Elon Musk, Benjamin Netanyahu and Kate Middleton. Time said Friday that no other Person of the Year has been fact-checked in the near-century that the magazine has annually written about the figure that has had the greatest impact on the news. But it has done the same for past interviews with the likes of Joe Biden, Netanyahu and Trump. Such corrections have been a sticking point for Trump and his team in the past, most notably when ABC News did it with Democrat Kamala Harris this fall. There was no immediate response to a request for comment on Friday. In the piece, Time called into question statements Trump made about border security, autism and the size of a crowd at one of his rallies. When the president-elect talked about the “massive” mandate he had received from voters, Time pointed out that former President Barack Obama won more electoral votes the two times he had run for president. The magazine also questioned Trump’s claim that he would do interviews with anyone who asked during the campaign, if he had the time. The candidate rejected a request to speak the magazine said. “In the final months of his campaign, Trump prioritized interviews with podcasts over mainstream media,” reporters Simmone Shah and Leslie Dickstein wrote.
Daily Post Nigeria Soku Oil Wells: Rivers, Bayelsa governors agree to resolve differences Home News Politics Metro Entertainment Sport News Soku Oil Wells: Rivers, Bayelsa governors agree to resolve differences Published on December 28, 2024 By Matthew Atungwu Governor Siminalayi Fubara of Rivers State and his Bayelsa State counterpart, Douye Diri, have reiterated their commitment to fostering peaceful coexistence between the two states amid the controversies over the ownership of Soku Oil Wells and Bayelsa State’s landed properties in Port Harcourt. The governors made this commitment when Governor Diri led a delegation of Bayelsa State officials on a Christmas visit to Governor Fubara at the Government House, Port Harcourt, reciprocating an earlier visit by the Rivers State Governor to Yenagoa. Governor Diri, during the meeting, expressed gratitude for Governor Fubara’s peaceful approach to resolving the long-standing issues. He commended his counterpart for working with him to reach a truce over the contentious Soku Oil Wells and the takeover of Bayelsa State properties by the past administration, which had led to a Supreme Court case by his administration. Governor Fubara stressed the historical ties between the two states, which were once united as Rivers State, emphasizing the importance of cooperation. He reaffirmed his administration’s efforts to resolve the disputes amicably in the best interest of both states. Fubara also emphasized the need to strengthen the BRACE Commission—a regional body comprising Bayelsa, Rivers, Akwa Ibom, Cross River, and Edo States—to promote development and regional integration. Related Topics: bayelsa rivers Soku Oil Wells Don't Miss Kwara: Gov Abdulrazaq mourns late Chief of Staff, Abdulquadri Mahe You may like Rivers: You’ve been shamed – APC chieftain mocks Ganduje, Okocha over court ruling Presidential media chat: Tinubu should’ve cautioned Wike over Rivers crisis – Idam Rivers: Fubara still member of PDP – Woko Court nullifies APC congresses in Rivers ‘We’ll use peace, artificial intelligence to defeat troublemakers’ – Gov Fubara Court convicts man for murder of minor in Rivers, defers sentencing Advertise About Us Contact Us Privacy-Policy Terms Copyright © Daily Post Media Ltd
Hyderabad: GEMS organises GeoMap quizOlympic champion cyclist Evenepoel sustains fractures and a dislocated collarbone in training crashApartheid misused regarding Israel Israel is not an “apartheid” state. The term “apartheid” refers to a system of institutionalized racial segregation and discrimination implemented in South Africa from 1948 to 1994. It involved laws and policies that enforced racial discrimination and segregation in all aspects of life. Israel, however, is fundamentally different and does not fit the definition of apartheid. Israel is a democratic state where all citizens, regardless of their ethnicity or religion, have equal rights under the law. Arab citizens of Israel have the right to vote, run for office and serve in the Israeli parliament. The previous government included an Arab party, and the judicial system has many Arab judges, including on the supreme court. Arab citizens also have access to the same public services, including education and health care, as Jewish citizens. The legal and political systems in Israel do not enforce racial segregation. Arab citizens live in the same cities and neighborhoods as Jewish citizens, attend the same universities and work in the same industries. While there are social and economic disparities between Jewish and Arab citizens, these are not the result of institutionalized policies of segregation. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a complex, multifaceted issue that involves territorial disputes, security concerns and historical grievances. It is not a simple case of racial discrimination or segregation. Efforts to resolve the conflict through negotiations and peace agreements have been ongoing for decades, and many Israelis and Palestinians continue to work toward a peaceful and just solution. INBAL ELAZAR Champaign