fortune gems 2 jili free
TSX Enjoys Moderate Gains
BellRing Brands (NYSE:BRBR) Given New $82.00 Price Target at Bank of AmericaHoliday travel season begins, a lost waltz and Trump's guitars | Hot off the Wire podcast
Jake Paul hit back at Gervonta Davis by rejecting the boxer’s claim he didn’t know who Amanda Serrano and Katie Taylor were. Last month, at the Dallas Cowboys ’ AT&T Stadium, Paul took on iconic heavyweight Mike Tyson - who made his first appearance in a professional boxing contest in 19 years - over eight rounds. The fight went the distance , with the younger Paul clinching victory on the judge's scorecards. Tyson managed to win the first two rounds, but Paul found his rhythm while the former world heavyweight champion appeared to run out of steam. Boos rained down from the crowd as neither fighter made much effort to do anything as the clock ran down on the two-minute rounds. Meanwhile, the co-main event saw Taylor and Serrano clash in a thriller that became the most-watched professional women’s sports event in U.S. history as 74 million viewers tuned in. People are now wondering what is next for Paul - and it might be Davis. The likes of Artur Beterbiev and Daniel Dubois have recently called out Paul to get vengeance for Tyson. Davis became the latest world champion to do so, questioning why Tyson even agreed to the fight before saying: “Tell him this is my call out. Jake Paul, what up? What’s up, Jake Paul?” Paul immediately responded to Davis on social media and appeared to reference the huge disparity in weight . He wrote: “You know better.” ‘The Problem Child’ then outlined what he meant, posting: “Floyd’s little son calling me out?...come on little tank, you know better. I saw you pretend like you didn’t know who Amanda Serrano & Katie Taylor are...do better & maybe 1 day I give u a platform to shine again after that budget basic press conference you just had.” Davis, who is facing Lamont Roach in March of next year, was speaking to the media while promoting his bout. He has taken issue with Tyson agreeing to fight Paul and ultimately losing. “Who told Mike Tyson to fight anyway?” Davis said. "Yeah, it tarnished Mike’s legacy. It definitely did. For some money." When asked if he thought Tyson ruined how people view his career, Davis doubled down adding: "Yeah, he did. He definitely did.” DON'T MISS Jake Paul trolls Tommy Fury after old rival pulled out of Darren Till fight Tyson Fury going into 'destroy mode' against Oleksandr Usyk as plan emerges Tyson Fury told risky plan for Oleksandr Usyk rematch is all wrong He then took to social media where the world No. 2 in the lightweight division slammed Paul. He branded the YouTuber-turned-Prizefighter a "bozo" for not getting the "job done" over an ageing Tyson, as the fight went the distance. Paul has previously claimed he would be “super down” to face Davis. It remains to be seen if a deal can get done, but this looks like a contest that could happen as Paul looks for his next opponent.Nioka Steakhouse is opening at 1 Honeysuckle Drive next week. Login or signup to continue reading Friday, December 13, owner Michael Hope, of Hope Estate, confirmed yesterday. The menu has been released, and it's an impressive one. Starters include olives and Guindilla peppers with grissini, chicken liver pate with Borettane onions and crusty bread, and duck and pistachio terrine. Small plates? Think bresaola with tomato, horseradish, beetroot, pistachio crumb, saffron mayo and pecorino romano; seared scallops with cauliflower cream, chorizo crumb, salmon roe and smoked extra virgin olive oil; prawn and white fish cappelletti with lobster bisque; and Sicilian-style grilled octopus with olives, potato, tomato and chilli, to name a few. Large plates include the braised Angus beef tortelloni with pancetta, carrot, sage and beef stock reduction; oven-baked spatchcock with charred baby capsicum, pumpkin puree, chimichurri and stock reduction; a 12-hour smoked beef brisket with colcannon potato, heirloom tomato, chorizo compote and red wine jus; a fillet of Aquna Murray cod with pasta fregola, tomato, lobster bisque and braised fennel; duo of duck breast and confit leg Sheppard's pie with celeriac, baby pear and black truffle jus gras; and a range of vegetarian and "from the garden" options. Hope Estate executive chef Anthony Fullerton has a keen interest in dry-aged beef and has been working with the Hope family to develop their Black Angus cattle. Michael Hope's son, Jonno, turned his attention to cattle farming in 2019 to utilise the spent grain from the family's brewery. The business soon branched out to the 530-hectare Nioka Farm, located at the foothills of the Barrington Tops in the Upper Hunter Valley. The cattle are grass-fed on the farm and then transported to the pastures adjacent to Hope Estate at Pokolbin, where they spend 120 days being fed spent grain from Hope Estate's brewery and distillery production. Prime cuts are then dry-aged in Hope's custom-made dry-ageing facility. The steakhouse was originally meant to open at Hope at Honeysuckle (Newcastle's former maritime centre) but has instead found a home at the former Hope Estate at The Landing. If visitors ask me where they should eat while they are in Newcastle, Nagisa Japanese Restaurant always gets a mention. The quality of the food, the extensive wine list, the friendly and professional service, the consistency ... it makes for a memorable dining experience. Last month the Yamba family hosted a celebratory 20 th anniversary lunch at Nagisa (which spilled over into their neighbouring Honeysuckle restaurant, Âpé Yakitori Bar). There was a Taiko drum performance and a large sake barrel, and the many guests were served a selection of 20 canapes to represent each of the 20 years the restaurant has been open. To the Yamba family and Nagisa staff past and present, congratulations on two decades of dining excellence in Newcastle. I heard from Rob Fonti last week, letting me know his Belmont restaurant, Salina, is still open for business (despite being on the market). It also has a new summer menu. New dishes include the homemade chocolate gelato, Pina Colada gelato and mango granita; lamb loin fillet with spinach, roast capsicum, goat's cheese, pear and lentil salad, broccolini and walnut salsa; fish of the day fillet with prawn, asparagus, peas, feta and risoni salad and sun-dried tomato tapenade; and the buffalo mozzarella with prosciutto, peach, avocado, pomegranate and grilled ciabatta. You can drop by for a Prosecco and a pizza in the rear garden courtyard, too. Rob says there has been "a good amount of interest and a couple of close offers, but not enough to seal the deal". The restaurant is listed for sale through Raine and Horne Newcastle. Teppanyaki fun I stopped by Fukusui Japanese Teppanyaki Restaurant at Warners Bay last week for a birthday dinner, having previously dined there a decade or more ago, and thoroughly enjoyed the experience. The restaurant relies on word of mouth, and it's obviously working. It was sold out on a Tuesday night. The chef was in fine form at the grill, flicking scrambled egg here and there and spinning utensils at his hip like a Wild West cowboy, entertaining us with his facial expressions alone. Kids love it, and the food is very good. Try the plum-flavoured jelly sparkling wine in a can. It's an interesting experience. The Oceane Hotel is opening at 29 Honeysuckle Drive "soon", according to its social media pages. Details are hard to come by. Pork Ewe Deli at Mayfield is taking Christmas orders (platters, foie gras, caviar, smoked seafood, cheeses, meat) until December 16. Chef Mitch Beswick has clocked up a decade at Muse Restaurant. Jjindakk at shop 1/50 Beaumont Street in Hamilton has updated its menu with corn cheese, beef bulgogi nachos and a spicy cheese buldak. Have you tried Guzman y Gomez 's breakfast range? I tried the Brekkie Taco the other day (flour tortilla, scrambled eggs, bacon or chorizo, Jack cheese, pico de Gallo, jalapeno ketchup) and was pleasantly surprised. There's also a Brekkie Burrito, Big Brekkie Burrito or avo on toast. CorEat Newcastle has just launched a good-looking December Degustation menu, $75 per person. DAILY Today's top stories curated by our news team. Also includes evening update. WEEKDAYS Grab a quick bite of today's latest news from around the region and the nation. WEEKLY The latest news, results & expert analysis. WEEKDAYS Catch up on the news of the day and unwind with great reading for your evening. WEEKLY Get the editor's insights: what's happening & why it matters. WEEKLY Love footy? We've got all the action covered. WEEKLY Every Saturday and Tuesday, explore destinations deals, tips & travel writing to transport you around the globe. WEEKLY Get the latest property and development news here. WEEKLY Going out or staying in? Find out what's on. WEEKDAYS Sharp. Close to the ground. Digging deep. Your weekday morning newsletter on national affairs, politics and more. WEEKLY Follow the Newcastle Knights in the NRL? Don't miss your weekly Knights update. TWICE WEEKLY Your essential national news digest: all the big issues on Wednesday and great reading every Saturday. WEEKLY Get news, reviews and expert insights every Thursday from CarExpert, ACM's exclusive motoring partner. TWICE WEEKLY Get real, Australia! Let the ACM network's editors and journalists bring you news and views from all over. AS IT HAPPENS Be the first to know when news breaks. DAILY Your digital replica of Today's Paper. Ready to read from 5am! DAILY Test your skills with interactive crosswords, sudoku & trivia. Fresh daily!Trump vows to block Japan’s Nippon Steel from buying U.S. Steel. Here’s how
Clinch School breaks ground for new CTE building(First of two parts) MANILA, Philippines—US President-elect Donald Trump has doubled down on his controversial immigration agenda, reigniting plans to strip naturalized citizens of their status and proposing to end birthright citizenship. These signal a sweeping crackdown on immigrants, both undocumented and legally settled, and stoke fresh anxieties among millions, including Filipinos in the US. Trump has pledged to implement the “largest deportation program in U.S. history” a cornerstone of his reelection campaign, with Vice President-elect JD Vance estimating the crackdown could result in up to one million removals annually. READ: Trump’s mass deportation plan: What it means for undocumented and legal immigrants This focus on immigration enforcement is not new; however. During Trump’s first term, his administration ramped up efforts to investigate cases of fraudulent naturalization, seeking to strip citizenship from individuals deemed to have obtained it illegally. Now, after defeating Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election, Donald Trump has vowed to intensify these efforts while also pursuing another contentious policy: ending birthright citizenship. READ: What’s next for Fil-Am family petitions if Trump wins? Donald Trump first vowed to end birthright citizenship during his 2015 presidential campaign and revisited the proposal in 2018. However, despite his repeated rhetoric, he never followed through with an executive order to implement the policy. Birthright citizenship is a legal principle rooted in the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, granting automatic citizenship to individuals born on American soil, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. It specifically states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” This doctrine, known as jus soli (right of the soil), has been a defining feature of US identity and inclusivity since its ratification in 1868. GRAPHIC: Ed Lustan / INQUIRER.net According to the American Immigration Council, the US applies a combination of: “The Fourteenth Amendment has served as a cornerstone to the commitment that every child born in the United States should be protected from discrimination and a caste-like system based on the race, ethnicity, country of origin, or immigration status of their parents,” said Bruce Lesley, president of bipartisan advocacy organization First Focus on Children. “[It] demonstrates the nation’s goal — after the Civil War — of striving to achieve fairness, inclusion, and opportunity. Over the last 156 years, it has provided millions of children every single year with a solid foundation to grow, thrive, and contribute to our society,” he added. The 14th Amendment was specifically designed to overturn the infamous Dred Scott v. Sandford decision, denying African Americans citizenship. Moreover, in the 1898 Supreme Court case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the court ruled that children born in the US to foreign parents — so long as they were not foreign diplomats or occupying military forces — are US citizens under the 14th Amendment. By ensuring that citizenship was determined by birthplace rather than ancestry, the amendment sought to eliminate racial and class hierarchies in determining who could belong to the nation. Removing birthright citizenship would represent a dramatic reversal of this vision, replacing it with a system in which citizenship is contingent on lineage or documentation status. “Citizenship is not merely an identity or status; it is foundational for accessing health care, nutrition, early education, housing, and much more. Creating bureaucratic obstacles risks delaying — or denying altogether — the support babies and children need at their most formative stages,” said Lesley. “Birthright citizenship confers simple and automatic nationality without impediments, such as the need for bureaucratic paperwork, legal barriers, bureaucratic interpretations, delays, errors, or the period of limbo status awaiting a decision from some currently unidentified bureaucracy,” he added. For millions of children born in the US to undocumented immigrants, this change would strip away their automatic claim to American citizenship. These children could become stateless, particularly if their parents’ home countries do not recognize them as citizens. Experts explained that this lack of legal status would jeopardize access to education, health care, and other vital services, creating an underclass of individuals marginalized from the very society in which they were born and raised. “The United States is among the only countries in the world that says even if neither parent is a citizen or even lawfully in the country, their future children are automatic citizens the moment the parents trespass onto our soil,” Trump said last year. Under Trump’s proposed policy, a child would only be granted citizenship if at least one parent is a US citizen or legal resident. In his campaign video posted in May 2023, Trump clarified that this policy would not be applied retroactively, suggesting it would only affect children born after its potential enactment. GRAPHIC: Ed Lustan / INQUIRER.net Donald Trump also emphasized that the policy aims to curb “birth tourism,” a practice Republicans argue involves foreign nationals traveling to the US late in pregnancy to ensure their children are born as US citizens. However, the scale of this phenomenon remains unclear, with limited data to support its prevalence. The exact number of children born annually to undocumented parents is uncertain. Estimates vary, but the Center for Immigration Studies, a group advocating for stricter immigration policies, has suggested that as many as 400,000 children are born each year to undocumented parents, with thousands possibly tied to birth tourism. In contrast, immigrant rights groups like the American Immigration Council highlight broader implications, citing census-based estimates that 3.7 million U.S.-born children currently have at least one undocumented parent. Adding to the complexity, a 2024 report from the Center for Migration Studies estimates there are approximately 4.7 million mixed-status households in the United States. Michael LeRoy, an immigration law and labor expert at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, emphasized in an interview that no president has the authority to unilaterally eliminate or alter a constitutional amendment. Despite this, he noted that the incoming president might still attempt to issue an executive order targeting birthright citizenship, even though “such an action would be blatantly unconstitutional.” The American Immigration Council points out that removing birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. would require a new constitutional amendment. This process would need a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and Senate and ratification by three-quarters of the states — which the advocacy group described as an almost impossible political hurdle. But since the US Senate and House are now Republican-dominated, Donald Trump could have his way. Alternatively, it would take a radical reinterpretation of the 14th Amendment by the US Supreme Court, a highly contentious and uncertain path. “While Congress or the President could try to restrict birthplace-based birthright citizenship through legislation or executive order, these actions would violate the Fourteenth Amendment,” said the American Immigration Council. Legal experts also agree that any such effort would be met with immediate legal challenges. Stephen Yale-Loehr, a professor of immigration law at Cornell University, told CBS News, “Any executive action that a president might try to end birthright citizenship would be challenged in court and would be likely struck down as unconstitutional.” During Donald Trump’s first term, his administration took an aggressive stance on denaturalization — the process of stripping US citizenship from naturalized individuals. Efforts were launched to investigate cases where people were suspected of gaining citizenship through fraud. Under “Operation Janus,” immigration officials reviewed decades-old fingerprint records to find discrepancies that could signal fraud in naturalization applications. By 2018, thousands of cases had been referred for potential denaturalization, with hundreds pursued in federal courts. The US Justice Department even created a special Denaturalization Section in 2020 to handle such cases. Officials claimed the focus was on individuals who posed national security threats, were war criminals, or had committed egregious acts of fraud. GRAPHIC: Ed Lustan / INQUIRER.net But the move sparked concerns, with critics arguing it could sow fear in immigrant communities. “Denaturalization is a drastic measure that should only be taken in the most extreme circumstances,” the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), a nonprofit civil rights organization, said. “These efforts to strip citizenship from Americans are systemic and chilling. They have made US citizens fearful that mistakes made years ago on their past applications could be used to target them, take away their citizenship, and destroy their lives,” the organization added. The Donald Trump administration’s focus on denaturalization marked a significant shift in immigration enforcement policies. Historically, denaturalization cases were pursued sparingly, averaging just 11 cases per year between 1990 and 2017. However, under Trump’s leadership, these efforts intensified dramatically. By 2018, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had already referred 95 cases for denaturalization to the Department of Justice (DOJ), signaling a stark departure from past practices. Eliminating birthright citizenship could have devastating consequences for millions of children and families, creating long-term social and economic challenges. According to a report from First Focus on Children, denying citizenship to US -born children of undocumented immigrants would leave many in legal limbo, without access to essential resources like education, health care, or housing. For children born and raised in the US, but unable to claim citizenship, this could mean being treated as outsiders in their own country. Stripping citizenship would also create a growing population of stateless individuals who struggle to get jobs, attend college, or participate fully in society. This would deepen inequalities, increase poverty, and strain community resources. For children, the harm isn’t just legal or financial — it’s deeply personal. Without citizenship, they might feel excluded or unwelcome in the only country they’ve ever known. “It’s important to remember that children rely on policymakers, advocates, and citizens to protect their interests because they cannot advocate for themselves. It is morally indefensible to enact a law that deprives them of their right to belong,” the report explains. Moreover, efforts to end birthright citizenship, coupled with the push for denaturalization, suggest that even those who meet all legal requirements or were born on US soil might not be secure in their place in the country. A report by Vox stressed that naturalized citizens, who often spend years navigating the rigorous legal process, now fear that even small mistakes in their applications could lead to losing their status. Critics argue that these policies create an atmosphere of fear and insecurity, making immigrants and their families feel like they’re never truly safe. For many, this undermines the idea of America as a nation of opportunity and inclusion, raising concerns that citizenship is becoming conditional — a privilege that can be taken away rather than a right that guarantees stability and belonging. (Next: How could Trump’s immigration agenda affect Filipinos?) RELATED STORIES: Trump 2.0: PH stays optimistic amid worries on aid, health care Trump 2.0 impact on PH: Quack health advocate brings uncertainty
USWNT beats Netherlands 2-1 in goalkeeper Alyssa Naeher's final matchTrump is stacking his White House roster with uber-rich backers - CNBC
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol's brief imposition of martial law marks a new warning for the worldwide fragility of democracy, even in a country hailed as a model of political transformation. Yoon's overnight attempt to shut down political activity, censor media and lock out opposition lawmakers stunned South Korea's longtime ally, the United States, which said it had no advance warning and issued a statement of concern. South Korea's transition to elected rule since a mass uprising in 1987 had been seen as so thorough that the United States increasingly spoke of its ally as a global partner. Meanwhile, Seoul billed itself as a new, ideal hub for international media as China clamped down on Hong Kong. President Joe Biden had even chosen Yoon as the host in March of his final Summit for Democracy -- a signature initiative of the outgoing US leader, who sought to champion liberal values globally, in an unstated repudiation of Donald Trump, who returns to the White House next month. But observers, while stunned by Yoon, said there were warning signs. Danny Russel, a top US diplomat for Asia under former president Barack Obama and who earlier served in South Korea, pointed to the deadlock in parliament where the opposition repeatedly sought impeachments against Yoon's administration. Yoon's move "was a complete surprise to me (but) yes, there were very obvious structural forces at work," he said. "There is a radically polarized political scene in Korea. The opposition has been pursuing scorched-earth political obstruction tactics," he said. But he pointed to the quick, large-scale protests that erupted after Yoon's declaration as a sign of a vibrant civil society ready to defend democracy. "One certainly would hope that this would serve as a wake-up call to both the ruling conservative party and the progressive opposition that both sides have gone too far and that there needs to be some process of reconciliation, of dealing with legitimate differences and grievances." Yoon himself had earlier shown signs of authoritarianism. In a national address last year, Yoon raged against supposed communists who have "disguised themselves as democracy activists, human rights advocates or progressive activists." A prosecutor, Yoon narrowly won the 2022 election on a platform of economic reform and advocated close ties with the United States as well as historic rival Japan. But his popularity swiftly slid and the opposition won the National Assembly. Celeste Arrington, a Korea expert at George Washington University, noted that Yoon had never held elected office before and had become increasingly frustrated. "This is really an extreme move that may signal, I think, the president's lack of political experience," she said. She said that martial law showed "some cracks in democracy" but that the quick reversal "gives me hope in the health and strength and vibrancy of democracy in South Korea." Bruce Klingner, a senior research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, expected Yoon's career to be over after attempting martial law, which constitutionally can only be imposed for wars or other emergencies. "Yoon's action is a damning reversal to decades of South Korean efforts to put its authoritarian past behind it," he said. The number of democracies worldwide soared starting in the late 1980s as the Soviet Union collapsed and student-led uprisings brought reforms elsewhere. But globally, democracy has been in retreat for the last 18 straight years, according to the Washington-based group Freedom House, which promotes political liberty. Democratically elected leaders have taken increasingly authoritarian steps in countries as diverse as India, Turkey and Hungary. V-Dem, another closely watched democracy index, had most recently ranked South Korea third in Asia after Taiwan and Japan. In the United States, Trump has rejected long-held norms, refusing to accept he lost to Biden four years ago -- culminating in his supporters violently rampaging through the US Capitol. Trump's rejection of democracy ultimately worked out for him: campaigning on the rage of 2020, he won last month's election. But experts said Yoon's power play -- and its reversal -- could in fact show a victory for democratic values. "Yoon is a deeply unpopular and ineffectual leader, but there was nothing I saw of people being dissatisfied with the way government runs," Alan Yu, a senior vice president at the left-leaning Center for American Progress, said after a recent trip to Seoul. Darcie Draudt-Vejares of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said that with the swift response to Yoon, "this crisis may ultimately strengthen Korean democracy by reaffirming civilian control and demonstrating institutional resilience." sct/nro