(Reuters) - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt gave Reuters a wide-ranging interview on Monday at his office in Washington, discussing issues from climate science to automobile emissions.  The following is a full transcript of the interview: REUTERS: You have said the EPA will focus on a “Back to Basics” approach under your leadership. What does this mean for how EPA enforces polluters? You have been critical of the idea of regulation by enforcement. PRUITT: I think what I’m speaking about there is a consent decree approach to enforcement, where you use judicial proceedings to actually engage in regulation. Enforcement should be about existing regulations that you’re actually enforcing against someone who may be violating that, very much in the prosecutorial manner. As attorney general [in Oklahoma], I lived that. There was a grand jury that I led. Being a prosecutor, I understand very much the importance of prioritization, of enforcing the rule of law, of addressing bad actors. That’s something we are going to do in a meaningful way across the broad spectrum of cases, whether it is in the office of air or the superfund area, or otherwise. REUTERS: Do you want to see states play a bigger role in enforcing polluters, even though some have less of a capacity to do so – financially and personnel wise? PRUITT: I think the state’s role is really, when you look at this office working with states it should be how do we assist, how do we engage in compliance and assistance with states. The office [at EPA that deals with enforcement] is called OECA, the Office of Enforcement, Compliance and Assistance, so those are the tools we have in the tool box to achieve better outcomes. So what we ought to be doing is working proactively with state DEQs [Departments of Environmental Quality] to get their state implementation plans [for federal regulations] timely submitted, provide assistance and technical support, drive a draft of state implementation plans and then actually work with them on how to achieve through those plans better outcomes and air and water quality. As far as enforcement is concerned we will actually work with states. We actually did that recently with Colorado, there was an oil and gas company that was emitting some 3,000 tons, is that what it was, it was quite a bit, of… it was an ozone case. In any event, we joined with Colorado in that prosecution. So sometimes states will do it, sometimes we will join with them. The importance is, in my view, that with respect to achieving good environmental outcomes, you need to use all of the tools in the toolbox to achieve that – compliance, assistance and enforcement – and use that enforcement in a meaningful impactful way to ensure that actions are addressed in a timely way. REUTERS: Some of the pending settlements that are out there – Harley-Davidson for example – where do they stand? And would you look at some of these previous settlements that were reached during the last days of the Obama administration and revisit them? PRUITT: Well, I’m not familiar with… I don’t know the latest on the Harley Davidson case… My review predominantly has been with respect to the consent decrees that were being used to engage in regulation. There is a distinction there. I want to make sure I’m saying that clearly. In one instance with respect to enforcement you have a regulation that has already been adopted and a standard that has to be met and a company that is not meeting the standard that was set by regulation. That is enforcement. This is what OECA should be working with the states to address. The part that has not been handled well over the past several years is the part where you have the EPA sued by third party, not an enforcement mechanism, but sued by an NGO, and that NGO is asking the court to compel this agency to take certain steps, either through change in statute or time lines set by statute and then the agency will acquiesce through a consent decree changing the very statutory framework. That is regulation through litigation and that is inconsistent with the authority in my view of this agency. That has nothing to do with enforcement. REUTERS: What are some examples that are egregious? PRUITT: There is a host of consent decrees that I’ve inherited that we are evaluating on a case by case basis to see what authority we have to address those. But again, that is not enforcement that is completely under the banner of regulation by litigation. Let me say to you that it is important because Congress has said that as you engage in rulemaking you follow the administrative procedures act, which is you propose a rule, you take comment, you respond to that comment on the record, you make an informed decision and then you finalize the rule. The reason that is important is that is how you build consensus. That is how you hear from people at the state level. That is how you hear from states. That is how you hear from industry. All these various voices are heard in that process and you make a more robust and informed decision. And the merits of the rule, I think, are received better that way. And when you do it through one case, through litigation, and it is passed on to the rest of the country, voices are subverted in that process and it is not good decision-making.  REUTERS: With the cheat devises used by automakers to skirt EPA vehicle emission standards, did you think that some of those penalties were too harsh? PRUITT: Look, what VW and Fiat… you’ve got this Fiat case that is on the horizon as well. The emails and the communications that I’m aware of: it was strategic and intentional and should be dealt with very aggressively. They knew very, very well what they did. I wouldn’t call what was done too light at all. I’m fact, I would tell you that as we look forward… what VW did was very, very troublesome and we need to make sure it doesn’t happen again. REUTERS: Will you model EPA enforcement after what you did in Oklahoma as attorney general? PRUITT: It is a completely different role that I had as attorney general. In fact, as I said during my confirmation process, the AG is not the enforcement arm at the state level with respect to permitting. That is DEQ. The environmental unit that we set up in the previous administration was not set up to address enforcement. It was actually set up to address a nuisance claim that was filed against a company on poultry waste that we dealt with in other ways with the state of Arkansas. Long and short of it, the role that I have here is very different from the role. As it turned out we were not the front-line enforcer. It was the DEQ and the state regulatory bodies. Now we did provide assistance to them through general counsel, and they provided support and input to them. But as far as a standalone enforcement arm, that was handled by the individual agencies in the state of Oklahoma. Which is different than here [at EPA]. We have a robust, very important role of enforcement here. We are coordinating with the regions, making sure there is consistency across the regions…I tried to explain it during the confirmation hearing. Look at Superfund. People don’t usually equate that with enforcement. Under the CERCLA statute [the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980] we have joint and several liability with respect to potential responsible parties, and a large percentage of our portfolio at the Superfund is through responsible parties, private funding. I think the agency has not done the best job historically at holding those private parties accountable for the amount of waste and remediation that needs to take place. We have tremendous authority. I’m going to have a very thoughtful and meaningful enforcement response to Superfund to make sure that we are achieving good outcomes for citizens across the country with respect to that entire portfolio of 1,336 or so sites. Again, that is not often thought about in terms of enforcement. We think about air, we think about permitting, but we don’t often think about remediation under CERCLA and I think we have got a lot of room for improvement and opportunity to get accountability in that area. I’ve got a report on my desk that spent thirty or so days. I’m doing the task force recommendations right now, on how to better achieve accountability from enforcement across the board. REUTERS: But the administration’s proposed budget for FY2018 proposes severe budget cuts across the board, including to Superfund … PRUITT: But there aren’t. There aren’t budget cuts across the board. We have a Continuing Resolution until the end of April that funded us around $8 billion or so, and Congress is going through that process with respect to what the funding levels are going to be on Superfund. So the fact that we have a proposed budget… Congress is having that discussion and there haven’t been any budget cuts taking place at this point and we’re working with Congress to make sure that there is adequate funding to address both the enforcement side and the Superfund side. REUTERS: When you saw the president’s budget proposal which called for a 31 percent cut to the EPA budget, did it worry you? PRUITT: I think there are certain parts of the agency that there is room for true legitimate cuts, and there are other parts of the agency where that is not the case - as it is in every department. But to take something like Superfund and say that whatever the proposed budget was means that we can’t do what we need to do as far as our reform and accountability is just simply not accurate. Most of the challenges I’ve seen from the Superfund program have been related to attitude management leadership and less about money. But as I told Congress during the budget and nomination process, if I determine that we need more moneys there, we’ll ask Congress, because that’s the priority. Enforcement and Superfund are included in that category. When you’re funding [inaudible] million dollars you’ve got room to cut. But I can tell you this, the core mission of the agency – improving air and water quality, addressing remediation as far as the superfund sites – those types of priorities … REUTERS: There have been reports about the EPA launching what has been called a red team-blue team review of climate change science. Can you tell us more about this?  Will this lead to a re-evaluation of the 2009 endangerment finding that carbon dioxide endangers human health? PRUITT: I’m thinking about it. Steve Koonin, professor at NYU, did a very exciting piece in the Wall Street Journal called Red Team Blue Team. I scheduled time with Steve in my office the week that article came out. I didn’t know it was coming out… So Steve and I were meeting about some other things, and we didn’t really focus on that, but I took the opportunity to talk to him about it and … we’re considering it. I think the American people deserve and honest, open, transparent discussion. What do we know? What don’t we know? Does it pose an existential threat, what can be done about it? etc… There are lots of questions that have not been asked and answered. Who better to do that than a group of scientists? Red team scientists and blue team scientists getting together and having a robust discussion about that for all the world to see. So, I’m not a scientist, I’m an attorney. That does beg the question because there is a follow-up question to that, which is what can be done about it [climate change] that is statutory and legal? But as I’ve shared with senators in the confirmation process, Congress has never responded to this issue. If you ask people that amended the Clean Air Act in 1990, including [former Michigan Democratic] Congressman Dingle, he is endlessly quoted as saying that if you try to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act of 1990 that it would create “a glorious mess.” So the Clean Air Act was truly set up to address local and regional air pollutants. So, you hear often about the regulation of GHG and CO2, but there has to be a determination of what can be done. What are the tools in the toolbox? If the tools are not in the toolbox to address this issue, I can’t, and this agency can’t, just simply make it up. We can’t re-imagine authority. The past administration tried to do that with its Clean Power Plan. It was extraordinary what the Supreme Court did [in its 2014 ruling on the Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA case. The court backed the EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gases from mobile and stationary sources but threw out its “tailoring rule,” which revised the statutory thresholds for requiring federal air permits for greenhouse gases.]  It said a lot. It said the authority the previous administration was trying to say that they had in regulating carbon dioxide wasn’t there. So there are two parts to this question: what do we know/what don’t we know? And two, what is the response…the statutory response? The red team blue team is intended to be a response that provides answers to the American people… the American people deserve, in my view, an open transparent honest discussion about this issue…. So we are contemplating being a part of that process. REUTERS: The consensus has been overwhelming that climate change has been caused by human beings… PRUITT: That’s not the question.  It is not a question about whether the climate is warming. It is not a question about whether human activity contributes to it. It is a question about how much we contribute to it? How do we measure that with precision? And by the way, are we on an unsustainable path? And what harm...is it causing an existential threat? There is another great piece in the New York Times by Brett Stephens, I think it was, that talked about the climate of complete certainty. His whole premise is that there is a basis of consensus we know but the politicians have done what? Created an elasticity approach. They’ve stretched it so far that it’s reached a point where the credibility is being strained. That article, along with the red-team blue-team, I think those book-end this approach where we have a discussion about that. Some of the blue team scientists – they say oh we are not going to participate in that. Why not? Why don’t you want to participate? It’s like the New York Yankees according to them. It’s like the New York Yankees playing a Little League team. If you’re going to win and if you’re so certain about it, come and do your deal. They shouldn’t be scared of the debate and discussion. That’s what science is all about. That’s what scientific debate is about. Let’s get red team scientists in. Let’s get blue team scientists in. Let’s let them question one another. That would be exciting to see. REUTERS: But what would it look like? PRUITT: It’s in its formative stages. The idea is a good idea because it’s an idea that advances science. It advances discussion. It advances transparency. It advances for the American people to consume and participate through this debate because there is not consensus on this issue. How do we know that? There has been no policy response. That’s why we haven’t seen Congress act because there has been such a question. It’s not a question about whether warming is happening or whether we are contributing to it. That’s not what we are debating. It’s how much? To what degree? The precision of measurement. Does it pose a meaningful threat? Is it unsustainable? There is a host of questions that will be asked and answered during the process. It’s exciting.  REUTERS: But how would this be brought to the public? Would you put it on television? PRUITT: “I think so. I think so. I mean, I don’t know yet, but you want this to be open to the world. You want this to be on full display. I think the American people would be very interested in consuming that. I think they deserve it.” REUTERS: How do you guarantee the objectivity of scientists? Make sure there are no conflicts of interest? PRUITT: That’s why the red team blue team matters. Steve modeled this after national security and defense [exercises] - they kind of check one another. There is a consumption, an evaluation and interpretation. They will check one another.   REUTERS: Congress hasn’t legislated on the endangerment finding. Will this scientific review lead to a review of the endangerment finding? PRUITT: You have the 2007 Massachusetts vs. EPA ruling which most people misinterpret. Mass vs. EPA didn’t say to the EPA that you must regulate CO2. What Mass vs. EPA said is that you must make a decision whether you regulate or not. You can’t just simply not make a decision. That was whole thing about Mass vs. EPA. And then what happened in post script. What happened post script was in 2009 with the endangerment finding but that was for mobile sources. That’s another thing that important. The endangerment funding was focused on mobile sources –cars – and section 111 [of the Clean Air Act]– what the [Obama administration] Clean Power Plan dealt with – was stationary sources. And they are separate requirements under section 111 of the Clean Air Act. There are a lot of process/ legal-related issues here that the previous administration didn’t comply with. But the endangerment finding is only on the mobile side. When I say Congress hasn’t responded, you’ve had a court case and an endangerment finding and then you’ve had an agency engage in regulatory response – by the way using tools currently in the Clean Air Act – and failed twice. They tried to respond to the endangerment finding by regulating under section 111 and failed and failed with the UARG decision (with the tailoring rule). So the question is begged – what are the tools in the toolbox? I talked about that in my confirmation hearing. I’ve talked about that with individual senators. It’s something that Congress has to ask and answer. We have no authority except that which Congress gives us. We can’t just simply make it up. The previous administration made it up with WOTUS [the Waters of the United States act]. They re-imagined authority in defining the Waters of the United States to include things that included dry creek beds and puddles. It just went too far and the sixth circuit struck that down or put a stay in place and did the same with CO2. This Supreme Court has been very, very clear that this agency, like any other agency in the federal government, can’t simply re-imagine authority and a large authority beyond the statutory text. The scientific review – the red team blue team discussion – is intended to have an open transparent debate about something that is a policy issue that is extremely important in this country that is not taking place. The endangerment finding in 2009 was based on IPCC [United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] information not on the science of this agency. The red team blue team is intended to provide that type of vehicle, mechanism, to have an open debate, discussion. REUTERS: So you might take a look at the endangerment finding? PRUITT: That’s not what this is about. What this is about is exactly what I described. REUTERS: Let’s move on to the California waiver, which allows California to set its own more stringent emissions standards for vehicles. Is that something the EPA will review or change? PRUITT: It’s not under review right now. REUTERS: Will you review it in the future? PRUITT: The governor of California and I have traded correspondence with respect to California’s role – very important. Congress has recognized it. They were regulating air quality before the Clean Air Act was adopted in 1972, which is why the California waiver exists. We’ve reached out to the California governor as part of our CAFE midterm review in 2018. I’m hopeful that the state of California, the governor there, will respond with reciprocity and we are working through that process. REUTERS: Are there any meetings taking place now with automakers? PRUITT: I don’t know what conversations have taken place between automakers and California. The president and I were in Detroit announcing that the midterm review was going to take place when it should have taken place which is April of 2018, which is 16 months early, which occurred January this year. We restored process there and order there. We’re going through the process now and we’ve reached out to California and believe that it is important to have a holistic discussion with California and we’re optimistic that they will respond with reciprocity. REUTERS: On the Renewable Fuel Standard- How seriously is the EPA taking the proposal by Trump advisor and billionaire investor Carl Icahn to move the point of obligation? PRUITT: As you know, 18,000 comments were submitted. That was actually the process that began late in the last administration. We are still reviewing those comments. But the RFS is something – look, it’s a statute that Congress has passed. And Congress – I take seriously the importance of enforcing a statute that Congress has passed and there are some challenges to that statute as you know. there are targets that have been put in prescriptively in the statute such as billions of gallons of cellulosic being blended into the fuel supply when I think the last numbers we had as far as produced numbers are around 190 million that’s actually production. That’s a problem and it makes it tough administering the statute. I think whatever waiver authority we use we use it judiciously. Tied to production and actual market demand. Our job is to fulfill the objectives as best as possible of the statute and we’re going to do that. The RVOs [renewable volume obligations] were supposed to be published every year in November. The past administration didn’t do that timely.  We are. We are going to have those out in November. We’re on path to do that which is very good for people across the country to know what is expected of them. That’s going to be done timely. We just released our proposed volume numbers and the preamble and in the language of the RVOs we talked about production demand market realities with respect to those advanced fuels. We are seeking to do our job there in a very meaningful way. There is a lot of discussion on Capitol Hill about the statute and perhaps a bipartisan approach to update the statute because it actually expires in 2022 and so there’s a lot of discussion about trying to update the statute. It’s well received here and I encourage Congress to continue that. REUTERS: What is your strategy with your legal defense of your moves to undo the Obama era rules? The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals last week denied your bid to delay the Obama administration’s regulations on methane. PRUITT: There are various authorities. That (methane case) was a case about our authority to stay certain rules. That’s distinct from withdrawing rules. On WOTUS [the Waters of the United States rule] we’ve actually proposed a withdrawal. I signed that on June 27 on energy dominance week. I think that our section 307 stay that we used there was because we were up against the compliance time and try to use authority that we thought was well established. We are going to respond to that accordingly. But going forward… I think it was a case focused on the facts of that particular case. I don’t think it says anything to us with respect to authority we have to stay under section 705 of the administrative procedures act or section 307 of the Clean Air Act. Those are well established procedures we have. We will use them accordingly as necessary. That’s what we are doing on the Clean Power Plan. We have a proposed rule to withdraw the CPP. What comes next is yet to be determined but what we do know with regards to that particular rule is that SCOTUS has issued a stay against it which means there is a likelihood of success on the merits as far as it being inconsistent with statutory authority and so it’s not wise of this agency to use resources to advance the defense of a rule that maybe deficient. We are going to withdraw that and see what our authority is- the tools in the toolbox on that particular issue. REUTERS: On Paris and climate change, polls show younger people are more supportive of U.S leadership on climate change. How do you explain your decision to a younger generation? PRUITT: That’s not what Paris was about.  I get what you’re saying but here’s the deal though. It was not about whether the U.S. is going to continue leading on reducing our CO2 footprint because Paris didn’t actually do that. Paris was a bumper sticker. Go back and read the articles about the criticism that was levied on the environmental left. They were very critical and dismissive of the Paris agreement. You know why? Because China didn’t have to do anything until 2030 and India conditioned all of their obligations upon receiving two and a half trillion dollars of aid. Russia, India and China contributed 0 dollars to the Green Climate Fund. People have short memories there. We are already at pre 94 levels and we exited Kyoto in 2001 and from 2000 to 2014 we reduced our CO2 foot print by 18 plus percent. That’s better than others across the globe. When people really want action and meaningful outcomes with regards to this, we are doing it.  We are at pre-1994 levels. Paris was not in my view – it shouldn’t be symbolic or optical with respect to whether progress or no progress is being made in CO2 reduction. REUTERS: What do you think about the argument some major fossil fuel companies like Exxon and Cloud Peak Energy (coal company) made that it is better for the US to remain in the Paris agreement because it gives them a competitive advantage? I don’t understand that argument. I just simply don’t understand that argument because if they are saying that the technology that is being developed domestically that we are not going to be able to export and other countries will be interested in? Where is the evidence of that? China is still building coal facilities to the tune of almost one a day. They had 800 planned and they have scaled that back. India is going to continue burning coal.  What we ought to be doing is exporting technology and innovation to help them do it cleaner. It is not the job of this agency and it shouldn’t be the job of any regulatory body to force or pick winners and losers in the energy mix. We need fuel diversity as far as the generation of electricity because you can only get so much natural gas through the pipelines. So if there is an attack on your infrastructure with regards to the pipes and how natural gas is delivered to generate electricity, what do you do? You have to have a solid amount of hydrocarbons – coal stored on site – that allows you to address peak demand. If GDP growth is going to continue at 3 percent, then you’ve got to have [fuel] diversity- it’s energy security across the board. It’s unwise in business to have one client or two clients. It’s unwise in electricity to have one source or two sources. In Oklahoma – 18 percent of our electricity is wind generated. This is an all of the above approach and EPA should not get in the business of foisting upon the markets decisions to say don’t burn fossil fuels. The past administration was unapologetic. That’s not what regulation should be about. Now Paris? Paris was a bad business deal for this country at the end of the day. It put us at an economic disadvantage. The US has never been about agreeing to targets. In this case, 26 - 28 percent [**the U.S. pledge for emissions reductions under the Paris agreement] in this instance. Every rule that the previous administration adopted…Their entire climate action plan – fell 40 percent short. It was failed from the very beginning. So why did they go to Paris and agree to 26-28 percent targets? Because it provided exposure domestically. Third party groups – NGOs – could sue this agency and say you need to do more under section 115 of the Clean Air Act [a section of the CAA that enables the United States to work cooperatively with other nations to address trans-boundary air pollution].  So there was legal exposure and we were already leading the world with respect to CO2 reduction. To interpret the president – who said by the way engagement, renegotiate or another agreement – but the Paris agreement is bad for this country and doesn’t achieve good environmental outcomes. We have nothing to be apologetic about with regards to what we are already going. It was absolutely a decision of courage and fortitude and truly represented an America First strategy with respect to how we are leading on this issue. Germany is burning more coal. REUTERS: Didn’t the US position on Paris isolate the United States at G20? PRUITT: The past administration was all about words. This administration is all about action. Look at the actions this country has taken. We have reduced our greenhouse gas levels to pre 1994 levels primarily through technology and innovation, not through government mandate. We have nothing to be apologetic about with the rest of the world. And if we really want to do something about reducing the CO2 footprint, then hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling need to be exported to China and India and Europe because that has created the greatest reduction in CO2. And nuclear. Why is Germany going away from nuclear? They are abolishing their nuclear portfolio and increasing what? Their CO2 emissions. Why doesn’t anyone talk to chancellor Merkel about that? REUTERS: Do you ever talk to your kids about climate change? Do they agree with you? PRUITT: My kids are wonderfully talented individuals and their world view is wonderful. They look at these issues in a smart way and I think they would probably echo the things that I have shared.

Summary: ई. पी. ए. प्रशासक स्कॉट प्रुइट के साथ रॉयटर्स के साक्षात्कार का प्रतिलेख


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Presidential candidate Donald Trump on Wednesday lashed out at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s scathing criticism of his stance on trade, highlighting divisions within the Republican Party that threaten unity ahead of the Nov. 8 election. At a campaign rally in Maine on Wednesday, Trump called the nation’s largest business association “controlled totally by various groups of people who don’t care about you whatsoever.” He said new trade deals should be negotiated because foreign countries are taking advantage of America. “Every country that we do business with us look at us as the stupid people with the penny bank,” Trump said Wednesday at the rally in Bangor, Maine. The Washington-based lobbying group, which represents the United States’ largest companies and business interests, is typically a reliable backer of Republican policies.  But on Tuesday it took issue with Trump’s vocal opposition to trade deals, calling his proposals “dangerous” ideas that would push the United States into another recession. Trump said the Chamber’s argument that his policies would cause a trade war were incorrect because the United States was already at a deficit.  “We’re already losing the trade war, we lost the trade war,” Trump said. “Nothing can happen worse than is happening now.” In speeches on Tuesday, Trump called for renegotiating or scrapping the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with Canada and Mexico, calling it a job killer, and reiterated opposition to the pending Trans-Pacific Partnership among the United States and 11 other Pacific Rim countries. He also lambasted China’s trade and currency policies. The Chamber has consistently backed trade deals.      The public squabbling between the presumptive Republican nominee and the business group was unusual, one of a series of reminders that Trump still struggles to unite his party behind his campaign. The Republicans and many business leaders tend to share policy goals and work in lockstep, and many business leaders have traditionally been big donors to Republican candidates. So far, the Chamber’s political action committee has donated $134,000 to federal candidates or their committees, with $127,500 of that total going to Republicans, according to U.S. government campaign finance records. Billionaire Republican donor Paul Singer, who bankrolled an effort to try to defeat Trump during the campaign’s nominating phase, said on Wednesday that a Trump presidency and his trade positions would almost certainly lead to a global depression. “The most impactful of the economic policies that I recall him coming out for are these anti-trade policies,” Singer said during a panel discussion at the Aspen Ideas Festival in Colorado, according to CNBC. But opposing trade deals has proven a winning strategy for Trump among voters concerned about the loss of manufacturing jobs.  Art Laffer, an economic adviser to President Ronald Reagan who supports Trump, said he did not like the tone of Trump’s speech on Tuesday but thought it was an improvement over his past comments on trade. “It’s not terribly alarming to me,” Laffer said. “I didn’t see any 45 percent tariffs across the board. ... “I saw negotiating better trade deals rather than throwing away all the trade deals we have now. He points out the flaws in these trades, and that’s all true,” Laffer said. “I don’t like the tone of it, but I dislike the tone less today than I did three weeks ago.” Peter Navarro, a Trump trade policy adviser, defended the candidate’s position. “Here’s the central point to understand: The White House has been utterly and completely soft on China’s illegal trade practices,” said Navarro, a professor at the University of California, Irvine. “The status quo is the worst of all possible worlds for the United States.”  Trump also took fire from for his positions on trade from Democrats. In a call organized by rival Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, U.S. Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, a former businessman and tech entrepreneur, said that while the country needed to do a better job protecting workers, more resources should be put into training them for a new economy. He also noted that it was unusual to see a Republican standard-bearer and the Chamber divide.  “You’ve really got a special circumstance when the U.S. Chamber of Commerce” responded to Trump’s economic plan with a “full-fledged onslaught,” Warner said. “No one could have predicted this kind of election season.” Clinton held no public campaign events on Wednesday but did announce she would appear next week with President Barack Obama, the first time this year that he and his former Secretary of State have campaigned together.

Summary: व्यापार समझौतों के लिए ट्रम्प के विरोध ने पार्टी के आंतरिक विरोध को बढ़ावा दिया


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on Wednesday dismissed Republican lawmakers’ charges that government attorneys and agents investigating allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election are biased against President Donald Trump. Republicans have attacked Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who has charged four Trump associates in his investigation, which is also looking into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Moscow officials. Testifying before the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, Rosenstein said he was “not aware” of any impropriety by Mueller’s team. When the committee’s ranking Democrat asked if he had any good cause for firing Mueller, he replied: “No.”         Russia denies the conclusions by three U.S. intelligence agencies that Moscow used hacking and disinformation to affect the election, and Trump says there was no collusion.     At the hearing, Republicans on the committee increased their criticism of Mueller, highlighting text messages between two Federal Bureau of Investigation employees, including an agent on his investigating team, as evidence of bias against Trump. So far, however, congressional Republicans have stopped short of calling on Trump to fire Mueller. Republicans said they had reviewed more than 300 anti-Trump text messages exchanged last year between FBI lawyer Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, an FBI agent who worked on Mueller’s probe. Members of the committee read aloud the contents of some of the text messages between Strzok and Page.      Some texts call Trump an “idiot” and a “loathsome human,” according to copies of a sampling of the texts reviewed by Reuters. In one July 2016 exchange they poked fun at Trump’s campaign during the Republican National Convention. “My god, I’m so embarrassed for them. These are like second-run stars,” Page responded to Strzok. “And wow, Donald Trump is an enormous d*uche.” The texts showed “extreme bias against President Trump, a fact that would be bad enough if it weren’t for the fact that these two individuals were employed as part of the Mueller ‘dream team’ investigating the very person for whom they were showing disdain,” said Bob Goodlatte, the Republican chairman of the Judiciary Committee. In some of the texts seen by Reuters, however, Strzok did not seem excited about Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, either. Describing himself as a “conservative Democrat,” he in one text openly worried about her getting elected, and at one point complained that certain news media outlets were biased for downplaying her ties to the oil and gas industry. “This is clear and utter bias by the media specifically the NYTIMES, WAPO, and CNN who if you look at all of them have large donors for Clinton,” he wrote.        Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller, said the special counsel properly removed Strzok from the probe after the Justice Department inspector general brought the texts to light, and added he was confident Mueller is not letting political bias color the investigation. He also said he thinks Mueller is the “ideal choice” to lead the investigation, and said that just because a person is affiliated with a political party does not mean he or she will be biased. He said he had discussed the issue of bias with Mueller and that Mueller “is running that office appropriately.”

Summary: वरिष्ठ न्याय अधिकारी ने ट्रम्प जांच में पक्षपात के रिपब्लिकन आरोपों को खारिज किया


BEIJING (Reuters) - Attacks on China s legal or political system using the trial of Taiwanese activist Lee Ming-che will prove futile, China s Taiwan Affairs Office said on Wednesday after Lee s wife and supporters rejected the authority of the court that tried him. Lee, a community college teacher known for his pro-democracy and rights activism, went missing on a trip to mainland China in March. Chinese authorities later confirmed that he was being investigated on suspicion of damaging national security. Lee confessed on Monday to attempting to subvert the Beijing government, according to videos of his hearing released by Chinese authorities. His wife and supporters said the trial was not fair and that they did not recognize the court s authority. An Fengshan, a spokesman for the Taiwan Affairs office, told a regular briefing that  any attempts to use this case for political means, to influence or slander the mainland s handling of the case in accordance with the law, or to attack the mainland s political or legal systems will all be futile . The legal rights of Lee and his family had been upheld and guaranteed, he said. A meeting between Lee and his wife and mother had been arranged after the hearing at the request of his family, An said. The hearing process was broadcast by the court in videos and on social media website Weibo in what An said was an  open  trial. Activists who had traveled to Yueyang to support Lee said after the trial they had been barred from attending, saying that was proof the case was not truly open or fair. Releasing videos and transcripts of court hearings has become increasingly common in China as part of a push for greater judicial transparency and oversight. However, rights activists say that holding  open  trials in sensitive cases allows authorities to demonstrate state power as a deterrence, with statements and verdicts usually agreed in advance. Ties between Beijing and Taipei have been strained since President Tsai Ing-wen, leader of the independence-leaning Democratic Progressive Party, took office last year. Tsai s refusal to say that Taiwan and China are part of one country has angered Beijing, as have her comments about human rights on the mainland. Beijing maintains that Taiwan is part of China and has never renounced the use of force to bring it under its control. Proudly democratic Taiwan has shown no interest in being governed by the Communist Party rulers in Beijing.

Summary: चीन ने कहा कि चीनी कानून पर हमला करने के लिए ताइवान के कार्यकर्ता के मुकदमे का उपयोग करना व्यर्थ है


BOGOTA (Reuters) - Colombia s FARC rebel group included footwear and orange juicers in the list of assets it will hand over for victim reparations, drawing ire on Thursday from officials who maintain the guerrillas have extensive criminal wealth and sparking the government to announce a special verification commission. The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) agreed under a 2016 peace deal with the government to hand over all funds and property to pay reparations to victims of forced disappearance, rape, displacement, kidnapping and land mines. The group has for decades extorted landowners and business people, earned ransoms from hostage takings and sold coca, the base ingredient in cocaine, to drug traffickers. Officials said on Thursday that the list, which was originally given to the United Nations and has not been made public, included many items that have little or no monetary value and made a mockery of victims.  Pots, orange juicers, lemon juicers, plates, boots, which will be depreciated and don t have a commercial value and which above all will not be a source of reparation for victims,  Attorney General Nestor Humberto Martinez told journalists. Martinez added the full list should be released. The list will be reviewed by a special commission in a bid to find missing assets, verify their origin and decide how they will be managed, the government said later on Thursday.   Those assets which have not been inventoried and are later discovered will obligatorily mean punishment and an ordinary justice procedure against members of the FARC,  justice minister Enrique Gil said. All assets will be directed toward victims  reparation, interior minister Guillermo Rivera added, and not to reintegration programs for the FARC fighters themselves. Colombian officials have previously accused the FARC of possessing large amounts of cash, as well as ranches, businesses and luxury homes, including some located abroad. A lawyer representing the FARC, Enrique Santiago, told local radio that the group had not earned an income in years and had to spend extensively to maintain its more than 7,000 fighters, after calling off kidnappings and extortion during peace talks. The rebels finished handing over more than 8,000 weapons to the U.N., which oversaw their demobilization, earlier this month. On Sunday the group will kick off a conference that looks set to cement its transition into a political party.

Summary: कोलंबिया एफ. ए. आर. सी. विद्रोहियों ने संपत्ति की सूची में जूते, रसोई की आपूर्ति शामिल की


BRUSSELS/LONDON (Reuters) - Britain has offered to pay much of what the European Union was demanding to settle a Brexit  divorce bill , bringing the two sides close to agreement on a key obstacle to opening talks on a future free trade pact, EU sources said on Tuesday. The offer, which British newspapers valued at around 50 billion euros (44.3 billion pounds), reflected the bulk of outstanding EU demands that include London paying a share of post-Brexit EU spending on commitments made before Britain leaves in March 2019 as well as funding of EU staff pensions for decades to come. A British government official said they  do not recognise  this account of the talks going on ahead of a visit by Prime Minister Theresa May to Brussels this coming Monday. EU officials close to the negotiations stressed that work was still continuing ahead of May s talks with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and his chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier. But EU diplomats briefed on progress said the British offer was promising and that, on the financial settlement, the two sides were, as one said,  close to a deal . Nonetheless, others cautioned that Britain had yet to make a fully committed offer and that essential agreement from the other 27 member states could not yet be taken for granted. The EU set the condition of  significant progress  on three key elements of a withdrawal treaty before it would accede to London s request for negotiations on a free trade pact that could keep business flowing after Brexit in 16 months. It set a deadline of Monday for that progress to be made if EU leaders were to give a green light at a summit on Dec. 14-15. On the issue of the rights of EU citizens in Britain, EU negotiators are still pressing Britain to accept that European judges should have a final say on enforcing those rights. If the financial settlement, which many British businesses have argued May should make in order to avoid a disruptive  cliff edge  departure from the single market, is forthcoming, the thorniest outstanding issue is that of the Irish border.  Ireland remains the most difficult issue,  a senior EU diplomat said after Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar avoided a disruptive snap election when his deputy resigned on Tuesday at the insistence of the party propping up his minority government. Britain has yet to satisfy EU - including Irish - demands that it clarify how it would avoid a  hard border  with customs posts on land between Northern Ireland and the EU. Many fear that would disturb the fragile peace in the British province.  On the Brexit bill, Juncker has estimated Britain would owe roughly 60 billion euros. EU officials say Brussels is willing to work with May to massage those figures in order to help her win backing from hardline Brexit supporters who have in the past insisted that Britain owes Brussels nothing. Britain s Financial Times said London agreed to assume liabilities worth up to 100 billion euros, but said net payments over many decades could fall to less than half that amount. The European Commission declined to comment. Britain s Brexit ministry said  intensive talks  were continuing and the two sides were trying to find a way to  build on recent momentum in the talks  to take them to the next stage. Sterling rallied around 1 percent against the U.S. dollar as investors took the reports as a sign that the risk of Britain leaving the EU without a deal, which is widely seen as damaging to the economy, had diminished.

Summary: ब्रिटेन यूरोपीय संघ के साथ ब्रेक्सिट विधेयक पर समझौते के करीब-सूत्र


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump has no intention of firing the special counsel investigating charges of Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. election, even though he questioned the official’s impartiality in an interview, the White House said on Friday. White House spokesman Sean Spicer told reporters that while Trump “retains the authority” to dismiss special counsel Robert Mueller, “he has no intention of doing that.” Trump voiced concern in a TV interview on Fox News on Friday about what he said was the close relationship between former FBI Director James Comey and Mueller, who was named to take over the Russia investigation after Trump fired Comey. “He’s very, very good friends with Comey, which is bothersome,” Trump told Fox News. “Look, there has been no obstruction. There has been no collusion. There has been leaking by Comey.” Lawmakers investigating allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election have raised questions about whether Comey’s May 9 firing was an attempt by Trump to stop the Russia probe. While White House officials have said the firing was due to concerns about Comey’s actions at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Trump told an interviewer the Russia investigation was one of his concerns in taking the action. But the president insists his campaign did not collude with Russia and that his firing of Comey did not obstruct justice. “There’s been no collusion, no obstruction and virtually everybody agrees to that,” Trump told Fox, adding that Mueller “is an honorable man and hopefully he’ll come up with an honorable solution.” Russia denies it meddled in the U.S. presidential election. In excerpts from a separate interview, Trump criticized President Barack Obama for inaction in the face of Russian meddling.  “Well I just heard today for the first time that Obama knew about Russia a long time before the election, and he did nothing about it,” Trump said, according to excerpts from a Fox News interview to be broadcast on Sunday.  In congressional testimony on Wednesday, Jeh Johnson, who headed the Homeland Security Department under Obama, said his department had warned about hacking into voter databases. When asked why the Obama administration did not do more to warn the public, he said: “We were very concerned that we would not be perceived as taking sides in the election, injecting ourselves into a very heated campaign.”

Summary: जाँचकर्ता मुलर को बर्खास्त करने का ट्रम्प का इरादा नहीं हैः व्हाइट हाउस


NEW YORK (Reuters) - A wealthy Turkish gold trader charged in the United States with violating U.S. sanctions against Iran sought support from and invoked the name of Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan to advance his business, U.S. prosecutors said. The allegations against the trader, Reza Zarrab, had been detailed in a Monday federal court filing in Manhattan, but the Turkish lira fell more than 1 percent against the U.S. dollar after Bloomberg News reported the filing on Friday. Erdogan has not been accused of wrongdoing, but the case has complicated the U.S. relationship with Turkey, a crucial Middle East ally.  Benjamin Brafman, a lawyer for Zarrab, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Turkish government officials could not immediately be reached. Prosecutors accused the Iranian-born Zarrab and co-conspirators of handling hundreds of millions of dollars for Iran s government and Iranian entities from 2010 to 2015, in a scheme to evade U.S. actions. Nine people have been criminally charged, but only Zarrab and a banker from Turkey s Halkbank, Mehmet Hakan Atilla, are in U.S. custody. A trial is scheduled for Nov. 27. But in a filing late Friday, Atilla s lawyers requested a delay to January 2018, citing the amount of work still be done,  much of it  in Turkey, and the difficulty of trial preparation with Atilla housed in a Manhattan jail.  In Monday s filing, prosecutors said  the government anticipates that the evidence introduced at trial will show that Turkish government and banking officials were integral to the sanctions evasion scheme.  The filing detailed recorded phone conversations and documents that according to prosecutors suggest Zarrab was looking out for Erdogan s interests. It said one call occurred on April 16, 2013, when Zarrab spoke with another defendant about his efforts to buy a bank to establish a conduit for Iranian transactions. Prosecutors said Zarrab and Erdogan, then Turkey s prime minister, had spoken four days earlier at a wedding.  I explained it that day at the wedding,  Zarrab told the co-defendant, according to prosecutors.  I will go back and will say, Mr. Prime Minister, if you approve, give me a license, I will go though BDDK (the Turkish bank regulator) even if I bought the bank anyway.  In a separate filing, Atilla s lawyers have said Zarrab has  essentially not participated  in the case and that Atilla might be the only defendant appearing at trial. This raised speculation that Zarrab might be preparing a guilty plea or to cooperate, or that charges against him may change. The case is U.S. v. Zarrab et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 15-cr-00867.

Summary: अमेरिका का कहना है कि ईरान के मुकदमे का सामना कर रहे तुर्की के सोने के व्यापारी ने एर्दोगन संबंधों का आह्वान किया


RIYADH (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia s powerful Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said on Sunday an attack on an Egyptian mosque that killed more than 300 worshippers would galvanize an Islamic military coalition that aimed to counter  terrorism and extremism . Top defense officials from 40 Muslim-majority nation s met in Riyadh on Sunday. They are part of an alliance gathered together two years ago by Prince Mohammed, who is also Saudi defense minister.  The crown prince has said he would encourage a more moderate and tolerant version of Islam in the ultra-conservative kingdom. Prince Mohamed told delegates that Friday s attack in Egypt  was a very painful occurrence and must make us contemplate in an international and powerful way the role of this terrorism and extremism . Gunmen carrying the flag of Islamic State attacked the mosque in North Sinai. The group of Muslim nations, called the Islamic Military Counter Terrorism Coalition, has yet to take any decisive action. Officials say the group would allow members to request or offer assistance to each other to fight militants. This could include military help, financial aid, equipment or security expertise. The group, which will have a permanent base in Riyadh, would also help combat terrorist financing and ideology.  The biggest threat from terrorism and extremism is not only killing innocent people and spreading hate, but tarnishing the reputation of our religion and distorting our belief,  Prince Mohammed told officials from the Middle East, Africa and Asia. Iraq and Syria, at the forefront of the battle against Islamic State, are not members, nor is mainly Shi ite Muslim Iran, the regional rival to mostly Sunni Saudi Arabia. Qatar, originally part of the alliance, was not invited to Sunday s meeting after Riyadh led a group of states seeking to isolate Doha, saying it supported terrorism. Doha denies this. Abdulelah al-Saleh, a Saudi lieutenant general and the coalition s secretary general, said Qatar was excluded to help build a consensus for launching operations. He also said the group was not aimed at creating a Sunni bloc to counter Iran.  The enemy is terrorism. It s not sects or religions or races, its terrorism,  Saleh told reporters. Saleh said military initiatives had been proposed to the group s ministerial council, but he did not elaborate. Despite agreement on principles, members voiced different priorities at the meeting. Yemen s delegation said the focus should be Iran, al Qaeda and Islamic State, while Turkey called for  support from our friends  against Kurdish separatists. Critics say the coalition could become a means for Saudi Arabia to implement an even more assertive foreign policy by winning the backing of poorer African and Asian nations with offers of financial and military aid. Alongside leading a diplomatic charge against Qatar, Saudi Arabia is also leading a war against Iran-aligned Houthi rebels in its neighbor Yemen,  Saleh said Riyadh would pay the 400 million riyal ($107 million) bill for the coalition s new center, but said other nations could offer financial support for specific initiatives.

Summary: मिस्र हमला सऊदी समर्थित मुस्लिम सैन्य गठबंधन को बढ़ावा देगाः क्राउन प्रिंस


UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump criticized the United Nations for bloated bureaucracy and mismanagement on his first visit on Monday to U.N. headquarters, calling for “truly bold reforms” so it could be a greater force for world peace. Ahead of his maiden speech to the annual U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, Trump hosted a short event to boost support for changes to the United Nations. “In recent years the United Nations has not reached its full potential because of bureaucracy and mismanagement, while the United Nations on a regular budget has increased by 140 percent and its staff has more than doubled since 2000,” Trump said. “The United Nations must hold every level of management accountable, protect whistleblowers and focus on results rather than on process,” Trump said.  “I am confident that if we work together and champion truly bold reforms the United Nations will emerge as a stronger, more effective, more just and greater force for peace and harmony in the world,” Trump said in his first remarks at the U.N. in New York since his inauguration as president in January. In a building where long statements are commonplace, Trump spoke for just four minutes.  Some 128 countries were invited to attend Monday’s reform meeting after signing on to a U.S.-drafted 10-point political declaration backing efforts by U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres “to initiate effective, meaningful reform.” U.N. Security Council veto powers Russia and China did not sign the declaration.  Businessman Trump, who complained during his 2016 election campaign about the United States paying a disproportionate amount of money to the United Nations, made the point again on Monday. “We must ensure that no one and no member state shoulders a disproportionate share of the burden and that’s militarily or financially.”  The United States is the biggest U.N. contributor, providing 22 percent of its $5.4 billion biennial core budget and 28.5 percent of its $7.3 billion peacekeeping budget. The contributions are agreed on by the 193-member General Assembly. Guterres, who also took office in January, told the meeting: “To serve the people we support and the people who support us, we must be nimble and effective, flexible and efficient.” He agreed that U.N bureaucracy was a problem that kept him up at night.     “Our shared objective is a 21st century U.N. focused more on people and less on process,” Guterres said. “Value for money while advancing shared values – that is our common goal.” Trump also said that all peacekeeping missions should “have clearly defined goals and metrics for evaluating success.” The United States is reviewing each of the U.N. peacekeeping missions as annual mandates come up for Security Council renewal in a bid to cut costs. The United States is a veto-wielding council member, along with Britain, France, Russia and China. On Sunday night, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson met with U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi.  When asked if the U.N. refugee agency could perform its current missions if the United States cut its voluntary contributions to the budget, according to a pool report Grandi answered: “I would say no.” “U.S. aid is vital to what we do to support refugees around the world and to find solutions to their situations,” Grandi said.

Summary: पहली यात्रा में, ट्रम्प ने सुधार का आग्रह किया ताकि संयुक्त राष्ट्र पूरी क्षमता से काम ले सके


(Reuters) - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has issued waivers on certain federal requirements for the sale, production and blending of gasoline to avoid supply shortfalls in the aftermath of Tropical Storm Harvey and as Hurricane Irma approaches Florida, the agency said Thursday. The EPA said winter-grade gasoline will be allowed to be sold through September 15 in most states in the country other than those on the West Coast and in the Rocky Mountains. It also temporarily waived federal requirements covering the production and blending of winter gasoline through September 26, it said.

Summary: ई. पी. ए. ने तूफानों के कारण बिक्री, गैसोलीन के उत्पादन पर आवश्यकताओं को माफ कर दिया


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders on Wednesday backed President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court pick and called on Republican Senate leaders to consider his nominee. Sanders, a U.S. senator who represents Vermont, in a statement said refusing to consider Judge Merrick Garland would be “unprecedented.”

Summary: डेमोक्रेटिक पार्टी के राष्ट्रपति पद के उम्मीदवार सैंडर्स ने ओबामा के कोर्ट पिक का समर्थन कियाः बयान


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Obama is optimistic about Brazil’s ability to meet political and economic challenges in the wake of a recent International Monetary Fund assessment, the White House said on Tuesday. “The United States and President Obama himself have confidence in the durability of the Brazilian democracy to weather those challenges,” said White House spokesman Josh Earnest.

Summary: अमेरिका को विश्वास है कि ब्राजील राजनीतिक, आर्थिक चुनौतियों का सामना कर सकता हैः व्हाइट हाउस


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Some conservatives in Washington were fuming on Tuesday after an Obamacare rollback bill was tweaked by Republican leaders to delete a provision meant to crack down on illegal immigrants getting federal healthcare insurance coverage. The development posed another problem for Republican leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives and President Donald Trump, who are trying to win congressional approval of the wider bill, the first big legislative test for Trump since taking office. The provision would have allowed the Treasury Department to access data at the Department of Homeland Security to verify that healthcare tax credits went only to U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents, not to illegal immigrants. In a largely procedural move, it was dropped from the bill after the Senate Parliamentarian determined that the Senate Finance Committee, which handles tax credits under the bill, does not have purview over the Department of Homeland Security. Republican Representative Lou Barletta issued a statement on Monday evening, after the change was made, saying he could no longer support the bill, citing the obscure provision.  “I am concerned that the bill lacks sufficient safeguards for verifying whether or not an individual applying for health care tax credits is lawfully in this country and eligible to receive them,” said the Pennsylvania lawmaker. The provision had been a key issue for conservative groups  the Trump administration is trying to win over in its efforts to pass the bill known as the American Health Care Act, Trump’s plan to repeal and partly replace Obamacare. Some conservatives have criticized the bill since Republican House leadership unveiled it earlier this month, dubbing it “Obamacare Lite” because they say it falls short in repealing Democratic former President Barack Obama’s 2010 healthcare law. Republican leaders recrafted the bill on Monday in hopes of satisfying conservative and moderate critics. Trump visited Capitol Hill Tuesday seeking to win more support for the bill. Lauren Aronson, spokeswoman for the tax-writing House Committee on Ways and Means, said the bill keeps the underlying policies of Obamacare that specify only U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents are eligible for the tax credits. The bill was expected to go before the full House for a vote on Thursday.

Summary: ओबामाकेयर रोलबैक से आप्रवासन प्रावधान में कटौती, रूढ़िवादियों को नाराज कर रही है


HO CHI MINH CITY (Reuters) - Outgoing U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said on Friday he was confident the next administration would stick to the same peaceful principles on Asian security as the current one, despite hawkish comments from President-elect Donald Trump’s cabinet picks. Referring to the disputed South China Sea, Kerry told a university audience in Ho Chi Minh City that countries, big or small, should refrain from provocation and any dispute should be resolved peacefully in accordance with international law. Kerry said he was “confident the next administration will continue to adhere to the same good faith with the policies that I just articulated.” His comments came after his nominated replacement, Rex Tillerson, said the United States must send a clear signal to China that its island-building in the South China Sea must stop and that its access to those islands must not be allowed. On Thursday, Trump’s pick to lead the Pentagon, retired Marine General James Mattis, said Russia, China and Islamist militants were presenting the biggest challenge to the U.S.-led world order since World War Two, and called for Congress to lift spending caps undermining military readiness. China claims most of the energy-rich South China Sea,  through which about $5 trillion in ship-borne trade passes every year. Neighbours Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam also have claims. China has reclaimed seven reefs in the area, building man-made islands with anti-aircraft and anti-missile batteries, satellite images show. The United States would have to “wage a large-scale war” in the South China sea to prevent Chinese access to the islands, the influential state-run Chinese tabloid, the Global Times, said on Friday. “Tillerson had better bone up on nuclear power strategies if he wants to force a big nuclear power to withdraw from its own territories,” the paper said. The Philippines, which is seeking to improve ties with Beijing, said any U.S. action to drive China from the artificial islands would be its own prerogative, and in its own national interest. Foreign Secretary Perfecto Yasay was replying to a question during a television interview about Tillerson’s comments. “They said that they would prevent China from doing or undertaking these kind of activity. If it wants to do that, they have the force to do so, let them do it,” Yasay said. China has built several artificial islands in the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines, which an arbitration tribunal in The Hague last year ruled unlawful. Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte reiterated last month he wanted to avoid confrontation with China and saw no need to press Beijing to abide by the ruling. Yasay earlier said the Philippines wanted to strengthen ties with the United States and that Washington should be an “influential force” in Asia and help maintain balance there. He said he hoped the new government in Washington would refrain from criticising countries, as the Obama administration had over the Philippines’ deadly drugs war, and he welcomed Tillerson’s views that decisions and comments should be based on facts.

Summary: केरी ने कहा कि उन्हें विश्वास है कि ट्रम्प प्रशासन एशिया में शांतिपूर्ण नीतियों पर कायम रहेगा


(Reuters) - Hurricane Irma threatens to knock out power to more than 4.1 million homes and businesses served by Florida Power & Light (FPL), affecting around nine million people based on the current storm track, the utility s chief executive said on Friday.  Everyone in Florida will be impacted in some way by this storm,  Eric Silagy said at a news conference, urging FPL customers to be prepared for a multiweek restoration process. FPL is the biggest power company in Florida serving almost half of the state s 20.6 million residents. Outages across the state will likely top 4.1 million customers since other utilities, including units of Duke Energy Corp, Southern Co and Emera Inc, will also suffer outages but have not yet estimated how many. Irma poses a significantly bigger menace to power supplies in Florida than Hurricane Harvey did in Texas because Irma is packing 150 mile-per-hour winds (240 km/h) that could down electric lines and close nuclear and other power plants.  This storm is unprecedented as far as strength and size. We are preparing for the worst and will likely have to rebuild parts of our service territory,  Silagy said, noting the kinds of winds expected could snap concrete poles. Irma s winds have rivaled the strongest for any hurricane in history in the Atlantic, whereas Harvey s damage came from record rainfall. Even as Houston flooded, the power stayed on for most, allowing citizens to use TV and radio to stay apprised of danger, or social media to call for help.  When Harvey made landfall in Texas it made it fully inland and weakened pretty quickly. Irma, however, could retain much of its strength,  said Jason Setree, a meteorologist at Commodity Weather Group. Irma has killed several people and devastated islands in the Caribbean.  Current forecasts put almost the entirety of the Florida peninsula in the path of the storm, which made landfall in the Caribbean with wind speeds of 185 mph. The threat of the Category 4 storm, the second highest rung on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale, is grave enough that FPL plans to shut its two nuclear power plants in the state, and officials warned that it may have to rebuild parts of its power system, which could take weeks. One of those nuclear plants, Turkey Point, is located south of Miami near the southern tip of Florida, putting it near where Irma is expected to make landfall early Sunday morning. The other nuclear plant, St. Lucie, is on a barrier island on the east coast about 120 miles (193 km) north of Miami. Most Florida residents have not experienced a major storm since 2005, when total outages peaked around 3.6 million during Hurricane Wilma. Some of those outages lasted for weeks. Setree compared the projected path of Irma to Hurricane Matthew in 2016, which knocked out power to about 1.2 million FPL customers in October. FPL, a unit of Florida energy company NextEra Energy Inc, restored service to most customers affected by Matthew in just two days. In a statement this week, FPL estimated about half of its near five million customers - particularly in the trio of populous southeast counties Miami-Dade, Palm Beach and Broward - had not experienced a major hurricane since 2005. FPL said it had invested nearly $3 billion since 2006 to strengthen its grid, including placing 60 main power lines underground and installing nearly five million smart meters and other devices. Other utilities in the Sunshine State said in statements that they had also invested in intelligent, self-healing devices. Smart meters allow utilities to see outages as they occur, rather than waiting on customer calls, and utilities also use automated devices that can reenergize lines without damage that were taken offline because of contact with trees or other objects, said Jay Apt, director of the Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center in Pittsburgh. Olivia Ross, a spokeswoman for CenterPoint Energy, which serves the greater Houston area, said these devices helped the utility keep the lights on for more people in the aftermath of Harvey as some issues were resolved remotely. But such devices can only do so much. Harvey s outages were limited to 312,000 customers, of which CenterPoint was responsible for about 109,000, as it quickly lost force after landfall and turned into a tropical storm. By contrast, Ross noted, Hurricane Ike in 2008 caused 2.1 million of CenterPoint s customers to lose power when it hit the Texas coast near Houston.

Summary: तूफान इरमा फ्लोरिडा में 90 लाख से अधिक लोगों की बिजली काट सकता हैः उपयोगिता


SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Twitter Inc on Thursday accused Russian media outlets Russia Today (RT) and Sputnik of interfering in the 2016 U.S. election and banned them from buying ads on its network, after criticism the social network had not done enough to deter international meddling.  RT and Sputnik condemned the decision, saying Twitter had encouraged ad spending with its sales tactics, while Russia’s foreign ministry said the ban was due to U.S. government pressure and that it planned to retaliate.  San Francisco-based Twitter said in an unsigned statement on its website that election meddling is “not something we want” on the social network. It cited a report this year from U.S. intelligence agencies and said it had also done its own investigations of RT and Sputnik. “We did not come to this decision lightly, and are taking this step now as part of our ongoing commitment to help protect the integrity of the user experience on Twitter,” the company said. Twitter, Facebook Inc and Alphabet Inc’s Google have all recently detected that suspected Russian operatives used their platforms last year to purchase ads and post content that was politically divisive. Russia has denied interfering in the election. Twitter said it would take the estimated $1.9 million it had earned from RT global advertising since 2011 and donate the money “to support external research into the use of Twitter in civic engagement and elections.” The company said it would allow RT and Sputnik to maintain regular, non-ad Twitter accounts in accordance with its rules. RT, an English-language news channel, accused Twitter’s sales staff of pressuring it to spend big on advertising in 2016 ahead of the election.  “The more money RT spent, the bigger the reach to American voters that Twitter would provide,” RT said, describing the Twitter sales pitch. It said it never “pursued an agenda of influencing the U.S. election through any platforms, including Twitter.” Twitter declined to comment on any discussions with advertisers. A former Twitter employee said the sales pitch to RT is similar to what the company uses to lure advertisers to Twitter, which has struggled to turn a profit.  On Thursday, Twitter said it may become profitable for the first time next quarter after slashing expenses and ramping up deals to sell its data to other companies, which could help to break its reliance on advertising for revenue. Facebook and Google did not immediately respond to questions about whether they would limit Russia media ad spending. In April, Reuters reported that RT and Sputnik were part of a plan by Russian President Vladimir Putin to swing the U.S. presidential election to Donald Trump and undermine voters’ faith in the American electoral system, according to three current and four former U.S. officials. On Oct. 19, U.S. lawmakers, alarmed that foreign entities used the internet to influence last year’s election, introduced legislation to extend rules governing political advertising on broadcast television, radio and satellite to also cover social media. General counsels for Twitter, Facebook and Google will testify on Nov. 1 before public hearings of the Senate and House intelligence committees on alleged Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election.  “Twitter is wisely positioning itself to be able to tell the committees that the company has taken steps to address the issues raised,” Adam Sharp, a former Twitter executive, told Reuters on Thursday. The Russian foreign ministry said the ban was a “gross violation” by the United States of the guarantees of free speech.  “Retaliatory measures, naturally, will follow,” ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said, according to the RIA news agency. Sputnik, a news agency, said on its website that Twitter’s move was regrettable, “especially now that Russia had vowed retaliatory measures against the U.S. media.”  Some analysts said transparency, rather than a ban, would have been a better approach. Unlike Facebook, Twitter allows anonymous accounts and automated accounts, or bots, making the service more difficult to police.  “Banning any particular person, group or country is just bad policy - in other parts of the world, platforms will come to be viewed as a tool of U.S. or other foreign policy and it will give authoritarian regimes more excuses to ban speech,” Albert Gidari, who as a lawyer has represented tech companies, said in an email. Gidari is now privacy director at Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society.  A U.S. lawmaker, Representative Adam Schiff, applauded Twitter’s move.  “Serving as a platform for free expression does not require assisting foreign powers in their efforts to push propaganda, whether by promoted tweets or other means,” Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said in a statement.

Summary: ट्विटर ने चुनाव में हस्तक्षेप का हवाला देते हुए दो रूसी मीडिया आउटलेट्स के विज्ञापनों पर प्रतिबंध लगा दिया


PARIS (Reuters) - France appeared to backtrack on Tuesday on efforts to mediate between Iraq s government and Kurdish regional authorities, saying a visit by Iraqi Prime Minister Haider Abadi would center on bilateral ties and fighting Islamist militants. Abadi is due in Paris on Wednesday for a two-day visit. While the invitation had been made prior to an independence vote held in Iraqi Kurdistan last month, President Emmanuel Macron s office on Friday issued a statement offering to help ease tensions between Baghdad and the Kurds. That drew a response from Abadi s office on Saturday in which Iraqi officials made clear that the invitation was not related to the Kurdish independence referendum.  President (Macron) ... recalled the importance of preserving unity and Iraq s (territorial) integrity while recognizing the rights of the Kurdish people,  the Elysee statement had said.  With the priority to fight Islamic State and the stabilization of Iraq, Iraqis must remain united.  But a statement issued on Tuesday by France s foreign ministry made no reference to the Kurdish referendum. At a briefing by Macron s office ahead of the visit, senior officials repeatedly avoided answering questions related to the Kurdish crisis, saying the visit was important to boost bilateral ties, assess the fight against Islamic State and discuss general reconciliation in Iraq.  At a time when the reconquest of territories held by Islamic State has seen considerable progress in the last few months, France wants to give the relationship with Iraq new momentum in all sectors and develop its cooperation, economic ties and political dialogue,  the foreign ministry statement said. A French diplomatic source said Paris  objective had been to try and get some form of dialogue going between the two leaders. With the Kurds being isolated by regional powers Turkey and Iran and the United States taking a tough stance on last month s vote, there was an opportunity for Paris, which has good ties with both Baghdad and Erbil, to try to act as a go-between.  The priority is to get dialogue going within the framework of the constitution,  one diplomat said. When asked on Tuesday whether France wanted to play a mediation role and had also invited Kurdish President Masoud Barzani to Paris, a French presidential source said it supported all efforts to get dialogue going and had not heard of any such invitation.  You can sense there s a certain amount of embarrassment about this,  said a second French diplomat.

Summary: कुर्द मुद्दे को दरकिनार करते हुए फ्रांस ने कहा कि इराक की अबादी पेरिस यात्रा संबंधों को बढ़ावा देने के लिए है


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump blasted close rival Ted Cruz on Monday, threatening to file a lawsuit challenging his eligibility for the White House if the Texas senator does not take down his “false ads.” The New York billionaire, whose campaign has long been littered with insults, called Cruz “totally unstable” and said he is “the single biggest liar I’ve ever come across, in politics or otherwise, and I have seen some of the best of them.” Speaking at a news conference in South Carolina, Trump said     he could “fight back” by bringing a lawsuit against Cruz over the fact that he was born in Canada, which Trump argues makes him ineligible to become president.  “If he doesn’t take down his false ads and retract his lies, I will do so immediately,” he said. Cruz scored a key early victory in the Republican race to pick a nominee for the Nov. 8 presidential election when he won the Iowa caucuses earlier this month, and has been attacking Trump on a range of issues.  Trump said the Republican National Committee should intervene to stop Cruz from misrepresenting his views and policies on issues such as abortion, gun rights, healthcare and potential Supreme Court nominees. He said he had signed a pledge with the RNC agreeing not to run a third-party candidacy, and to support the eventual Republican nominee, and the RNC should do its bit to keep the campaign fair. “The bottom line is the RNC is controlled by the establishment ... and special interests,” Trump told reporters. “I signed a pledge, but it’s a double-edged pledge. As far as I’m concerned, they’re in default on their pledge.” Trump’s remarks, days ahead of Saturday’s Republican primary in South Carolina, came after increasingly bitter exchanges between the two candidates in recent weeks. Cruz has hammered Trump on key issues, and said on Saturday that if elected he would appoint liberals to the Supreme Court. Trump has long said that Cruz may not be constitutionally qualified to serve as president because he was born in Canada. The U.S. Constitution says only “natural born” citizens can become president of the United States. Born in Calgary, Alberta, to a U.S. citizen mother and a Cuban father, Cruz has accused Trump of bringing up his birthplace simply because Cruz is leading some polls. Last month, Cruz said Trump, who led the movement questioning whether the Hawaiian-born President Barack Obama was really from the United States, had asked his lawyers to look into the issue of Cruz’s birth in September and concluded there were no issues.  (Reporting by Andrea Shalal; Editing by Frances Kerry) SAP is the sponsor of this content. It was independently created by Reuters’ editorial staff and funded in part by SAP, which otherwise has no role in this coverage.

Summary: ट्रंप ने 'झूठे विज्ञापन' जारी रहने पर जन्म स्थान को लेकर क्रूज पर मुकदमा करने की कसम खाई


NEW YORK (Reuters) - Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy delivered a downbeat address on Wednesday, outlining plans to slash government spending and admitting to “a visceral feeling” that there was no going back to the prosperity of pre-recession years. The short and somber address came on the heels of a presentation by Malloy’s top budget official, who called for $570 million of reductions next year on top of millions in cuts and tax hikes in previous years. “Our national economy, while making progress from the Great Recession, was fundamentally changed,” Malloy, a Democrat, said at his annual state of the state address. “A shifting workforce, the rapid rise of technology, and stagnant wage growth have made this recovery tougher for everyone, everywhere.” Connecticut has consistently lagged the national economic recovery and has been hit by job losses in its key financial and high-tech manufacturing industries.  The state has one of the worst funded pension systems in the nation. With required payments set to balloon to $6 billion by 2032, the system presents a significant risk to the budget. “Connecticut is not going back to that pre-recession reality,” Malloy told the Democrat-dominated legislature. “It just doesn’t exist anymore.” Connecticut’s woes show how U.S. states have shared unevenly in the recovery since the financial crisis of 2007-2009. Andrew Cuomo, governor of neighboring New York, felt confident enough to tout a $100 billion infrastructure plan in January. “It’s been a really hard recovery,” said Douglas Offerman, an analyst at Fitch Ratings. “The old paradigm that you would exceed your past peak in every expansion doesn’t appear to be holding right now.” Ben Barnes, Malloy’s top budget official, said the replacement of higher-paying jobs with lower- and middle-wage positions had been a “major story” in Connecticut’s budget ills.  Barnes proposed cuts of 5.75 percent to the budgets of state agencies, which could mean the elimination of several thousand jobs. He said cuts to discretionary spending would amount to 15 percent over two years.  At the start of the legislative session, Malloy urged lawmakers to pass an early budget and not wait until the last day of the fiscal year on June 30. But he said he would not circumvent the process. The governor proposed overhauling the way the state runs its budget to bring the process more in line with revenue projections, shifting away from a “current services” model. He also said lawmakers should implement a spending cap.

Summary: कनेक्टिकट के गवर्नर का कहना है कि मंदी से पहले की समृद्धि में कोई वापसी नहीं


CHISHAWASHA, Zimbabwe (Reuters) - Robert Mugabe s face  glowed  with relief when he agreed to step down as Zimbabwe s president last week under pressure from the military and his party after 37 years in power, the priest who mediated his resignation said on Sunday. Father Fidelis Mukonori, a Jesuit priest who is a close Mugabe friend, laughed off a report by the privately owned Standard newspaper that Mugabe cried and lamented the betrayal by close lieutenants when he agreed to resign.   When he finished his signature his face just glowed, no weeping unless there were angels weeping somewhere,  Mukonori told Reuters after mass at the Chishawasha Catholic mission just outside the capital Harare.  For me it was a sign that he was accepting that  ah this is done , he is relieved, not that he is aggrieved but relieved.  He said Mugabe realized it was the end of the road two days before he resigned, when he saw 60,000 Zimbabweans protesting and demanding he quit at the Harare grounds where he was inaugurated as prime minister in 1980.  His signed resignation letter was read out on Tuesday, as parliament heard a motion to impeach him. Sources have told Reuters Mugabe was defiant when he met army top brass on Nov. 16 - which was the start of an extraordinary five-day standoff between Mugabe and Zimbabwe s supreme law on one side, and the military who had seized power, his party and Zimbabwe s people on the other. The 93-year-old president finally accepted defeat only after he was sacked by his ZANU-PF party and faced the ignominy of impeachment.  Mugabe s fall after 37 years in power was spurred by a battle to succeed him that pitted his former deputy Emmerson Mnangagwa, who had stood by him for 52 years, and Mugabe s wife Grace, who is 52.     Mnangagwa was sworn in as president on Friday and all eyes now are on whether he will name a broad-based government or select figures from Mugabe s era. Mukonori said Mugabe had wanted a gradual and smooth transition of power to Mnangagwa, whom he had fired as vice president two weeks ago, but this was thwarted after Mnangagwa failed to immediately return from exile in South Africa. The Standard newspaper, which has been critical of Mugabe and his government over the years, urged Mnangagwa to  walk the talk on graft . At his swearing in ceremony, Mnangagwa said he valued democracy, tolerance and the rule of law and would tackle corruption. He has also urged citizens not to undertake  vengeful retribution . The new government is already moving to bring some of Mugabe and his wife s close associates to court. Former finance minister Ignatius Chombo faced magistrates on Saturday on corruption charges. He did not enter a plea.  Chombo was among several members of a group allied to Grace who were detained and expelled from the ZANU-PF after the military seized power in  Operation Restore Legacy  which it said was meant to remove the  criminals  around Mugabe.  Chombo, who told the court he was forcibly removed from his home on Nov. 15 by armed men in military uniform, was detained until Monday when his bail application will be heard. He was led away in leg irons together with ousted head of the ZANU-PF s influential youth league Kudzanai Chipanga.

Summary: जिम्बाब्वे के मुगाबे के इस्तीफे के बाद राहत मिलीः पादरी


PALM BEACH, Fla./WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Top White House aides Steve Bannon and Jared Kushner met and agreed to “bury the hatchet” over their differences, a senior administration official said on Saturday, in a bid to stop infighting that has distracted from President Donald Trump’s message. Bannon, Trump’s chief strategist, and Kushner, an influential adviser and Trump’s son-in-law, met on Friday at the request of White House chief of staff Reince Priebus who told them that if they have any policy differences, they should air them internally, the official said. The development at the president’s Mar-a-Lago retreat in Palm Beach, Florida, came at the end of what has been a relatively smooth week for Trump. Trump ordered airstrikes against Syrian targets that drew praise in many parts of the world and staged an error-free summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping, complete with his wife, Melania, wearing a red dress to symbolize the main color of the Chinese flag. Priebus’ message to Bannon and Kushner was to “stop with the palace intrigue” and focus on the president’s agenda, the official told Reuters. Both aides left having agreed that it was time to “bury the hatchet and move forward,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Four former advisers to the president said Trump is accustomed to chaos in his decades-long career as a real estate developer but that even he has grown weary of the infighting. “He’s got a long fuse for that kind of thing,” said one former adviser. “I imagine he has gotten tired of this.” The White House dismissed persistent talk that Trump might be on the verge of a staff shakeup. “The only thing we are shaking up is the way Washington operates as we push the president’s aggressive agenda forward,” spokeswoman Lindsay Walters said. The Trump White House has been a hotbed of palace intrigue since he took office on Jan. 20. But the drama has intensified after the failed effort to get healthcare legislation approved by the House of Representatives and the rocky rollout of an executive order attempting to temporarily ban citizens of six Muslim-majority nations from entering the United States. Bannon, former chief of the conservative news organization Breitbart News, has been at odds with Kushner and Gary Cohn, the head of the White House National Economic Council, an administration official and the four former advisers said. The former Trump advisers said Kushner, husband of Trump daughter Ivanka Trump, is trying to tug the president into a more mainstream position, while Bannon is trying to keep aflame the nationalist fervor that carried Trump to his unexpected election victory on Nov. 8. Bannon is getting some of the blame for the administration’s early stumbles because, one former adviser said, “The president demands results.”In what was viewed as a sign of Bannon’s declining influence, he was removed from his seat on the National Security Council this week. Administration officials said this was done at the urging of national security adviser H.R. McMaster, with whom Bannon had clashed. Some of the former Trump advisers said Priebus is at fault for not gaining control of the feuding and said Cohn, a former Goldman Sachs executive, would be a candidate to replace him. Priebus is the former chairman of the Republican National Committee and bucked many in his party by putting the weight of the RNC behind Trump when it was clear he would be the party’s presidential nominee. “”Reince is chief of staff,” said a source familiar with the issue. “He’s not going anywhere.” Republican strategist Charlie Black, who has known Trump for 30 years, said he did not think a shakeup was imminent and that Trump’s White House reflects his traditional approach to running his business. “He’s always had a spokes-to-the-wheel management style,” said Black. “He wants people with differing views among the spokes.” Bill Daley, a former White House chief of staff to President Barack Obama, who got pushed out in a shakeup himself after roughly a year into the job, said it appears that inside the Trump White House there’s a struggle for “the soul and brain of the president.”

Summary: ट्रम्प के सहयोगी मिले और 'महल की साज़िश' को समाप्त करने के लिए सहमत हुएः सूत्र


(Reuters) - The U.S. Senate Banking Committee has set a hearing date for President Barack Obama’s two nominees to the Securities and Exchange Commission, a move that follows Democrats’ complaints about a backlog of nominations. The committee’s hearing for the nominees, Democrat Lisa Fairfax and Republican Hester Peirce, will take place on March 15, more than five months after Obama announced their selection, according to a schedule published on Tuesday.   Senate Banking Committee Democrats, in a letter on Feb. 22, asked the panel’s chairman, Republican Senator Richard Shelby, to “clear the backlog” of 16 nominations by Obama to posts related to financial oversight, national security and other areas. If confirmed, Fairfax and Peirce would restore the SEC’s commission to five members. The agency has been overseen by three commissioners since last year when Republican Daniel Gallagher and Democratic Luis Aguilar stepped down.  The situation has heightened the agency’s challenges in recent years of getting a consensus. Only three SEC commissioners remain: Kara Stein is a Democrat; Mike Piwowar, a Republican; and Chair Mary Jo White, an independent. On Feb. 22, White said that she intends to wait until the SEC once again has a full five-member panel before moving forward to appoint a new head of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, a body created in the wake of the Enron scandal to police corporate auditors. Another topic that has proven particularly controversial at the SEC are regulatory waivers. Banks and other companies that break criminal laws or face civil fraud charges must apply to the agency for waivers to keep operating normally. Last year, Commissioner Stein began publicly dissenting on waivers, saying the agency was too often rubber-stamping them and creating a policy of “too-big-to-bar.” Obama tapped Fairfax and Peirce after months of delays and pressure from liberal groups to nominate someone who will be tough on Wall Street.

Summary: अमेरिकी सीनेट बैंकिंग पैनल ने ओबामा के एसईसी नामितों के लिए सुनवाई निर्धारित की


SYDNEY (Reuters) - Australian police said on Friday they had seized a record 1.2 tonnes of methamphetamine with a street value of more than A$1 billion ($771 million) after a raid in a remote area of the west Australian coast. Eight Australian men were charged with offences carrying a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, police in Western Australia state said in a statement.  We are striking at the top end of drug trafficking before it gets further down the distribution chain,  Western Australia Police Commissioner Chris Dawson said. The drugs were collected from a ship called the Valkoista, police said, and were then offloaded into a white hire van at a dock in Geraldton, about 375 km (230 miles) north of the Western Australia capital, Perth. Tactical police intercepted the van as it reversed away from the dock. Police arrested the van s three occupants, all from the eastern Australian state of New South Wales. Three others were arrested on the Valkoista and the remaining two were charged in Perth. Police said they suspected the drugs were destined for Australia s more populous east coast.

Summary: ऑस्ट्रेलियाई पुलिस ने रिकॉर्ड 1 अरब ऑस्ट्रेलियाई डॉलर का मेथामफेटामाइन जब्त किया


NEW DELHI (Reuters) - Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was in the final phase of campaigning on Thursday to retain power in his home state and stave off the most serious challenge yet from a combined opposition. The election for a new legislature in the western state of Gujarat this weekend is turning out to be a greater challenge for Modi than anticipated, the polls show, as rival parties seize on discontent caused by a slowing economy. Gujarat is where Modi earned his spurs as a business-friendly chief minister who cut red tape and graft and turned it into an economic powerhouse. But an unpopular national tax and a shock move last year to withdraw most currency in a fight against graft has hurt Gujarat, like the rest of the country, and its businessmen are making loud complaints.  Three big polls carried out in the run-up to the vote on Saturday and next week have predicted a victory for Modi s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) but with a greatly reduced majority.  An ABP-CDS poll this week gave the BJP 91-99 seats in the 182-member state house and the main opposition Congress 78-86, suggesting a close fight. To win a party needs 92 seats.  The surveys have often gone wrong, though, and Modi himself remains far more popular across the country than his rivals including Rahul Gandhi who is leading the Congress charge to weaken Modi in his home base.  Modi has thrown himself into the campaign, addressing dozens of rallies over the past month, saying he alone could deliver on development. On Thursday, he was due to address party colleagues on their mobile phones to ensure a strong voter turnout. Amit Shah, the president of the BJP, said the party had full confidence in Modi s ability to deliver an emphatic victory.  He knows that only an absolute majority in Gujarat polls will legitimize his reforms and silence critics,  Shah said. Votes from the election will be counted on Dec.18 and the results announced the same day. Gujarati businesses - who form the core of Modi s support base - have complained about the new Goods and Services Tax as aggravating tough economic conditions. Jagdip Desai, a sanitary ware manufacturer, said the complex tax procedures had come on top of slowing demand and he had to fire 3,000 workers.    Modi will have to pay a political price for our financial distress.

Summary: भारत के मोदी चुनाव में घरेलू आधार की रक्षा के लिए लड़ते हैं