web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > News Corporation (Page 123)

Dutch cop suspected of killing 2 children, self: police

A Dutch cop is suspected of fatally shooting two children and seriously wounding a woman before turning the gun on himself in a home late Monday, authorities said.

A police source told Reuters that the shooting took place in Dordrecht, a city about an hour’s drive south of Amsterdam.

Westlake Legal Group AMSTERDAM Dutch cop suspected of killing 2 children, self: police fox-news/world/world-regions/europe fox-news/world/crime fox news fnc/world fnc f7aef4d5-40f9-5d45-8baf-37b53d0f3c5c Bradford Betz article

Dutch authorities say three people were killed in an apparent murder-suicide Monday evening. (Rotterdam Police Force)

“Three people were killed in the shooting incident in Dordrecht’s Heimerstein (neighborhood),” read an official police statement on Twitter.

A fourth family member was “seriously injured,” police said.

NEW JERSEY WOMAN, 23, ALLEGEDLY STABBED MOM TO DEATH IN APARTMENT, FLED TO HOTEL: AUTHORITIES

It was not immediately clear if the 35-year-old officer was related to the children, who were aged 8 and 12, or to the 28-year-old injured woman. Police spokesman Wim Hoonhout told The Associated Press that “it seems like a family incident.”

Police were on the scene late Monday, cordoning off a residential home, Reuters reported. Photos from the scene showed a large police presence in a residential neighborhood and at least one ambulance parked in the street as people stood in the street looking on.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Dordrecht Mayor Wouter Kolff tweeted that there was “a very serious shooting incident,” and he was headed to the neighborhood.

The victims’ identities have not been released. The investigation is ongoing.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Westlake Legal Group AMSTERDAM Dutch cop suspected of killing 2 children, self: police fox-news/world/world-regions/europe fox-news/world/crime fox news fnc/world fnc f7aef4d5-40f9-5d45-8baf-37b53d0f3c5c Bradford Betz article   Westlake Legal Group AMSTERDAM Dutch cop suspected of killing 2 children, self: police fox-news/world/world-regions/europe fox-news/world/crime fox news fnc/world fnc f7aef4d5-40f9-5d45-8baf-37b53d0f3c5c Bradford Betz article

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Taliban talks dead: what comes next for the U.S. in Afghanistan?

Days after U.S. Army Sgt. First Class Elis Angel Barreto Ortiz and eleven civilians were killed in a Kabul suicide bombing – for which the Taliban claimed responsibility – President Trump said Monday that peace talks between the United States and Taliban leaders are dead.

So what comes next for war-ravaged Afghanistan and U.S. involvement in the war there that has raged for the past 18 years?

“The entire Afghan policy is currently in upheaval. What happens next depends on whether Trump will listen to Secretary Pompeo, who still believes a deal with the Taliban is the right thing,” Bill Roggio, Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and editor of the Long War Journal, told Fox News. “Or the growing chorus, including among influential Trump supporters, who oppose a bad deal with the Taliban.”

Roggio surmised that if the president does follow the advice of his secretary of state, talks could resume in a couple weeks. If not, the military will likely withdraw a number of troops without any agreement in place.

“To be clear, the US is under no obligation to make a deal with the Taliban to leave Afghanistan,” he stressed.

But in sharp contrast to the calm that inking a deal with the hardline Islamist faction was supposed to bring, Trump also tweeted Monday that over the past four days, the United States has “been hitting our enemy harder than at any time in the last ten years.”

HOW THE TALIBAN REMAINED DOMINANT IN AFGHANISTAN: TERRIFYING TACTICS AND AN ADVANCING WEAPONS ARSENAL

For the past twelve months, the U.S Special Envoy and former ambassador to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, had been hammering terms of an agreement in Doha, Qatar. Late last month – following nine intense rounds of talks – a deal reportedly reached its final stage, designed to bring an end to the U.S’s protracted engagement in Afghanistan.

According to news reports, the now sidelined accord was said to have stipulated the exit of 14,000 American forces through to the end of 2020. In exchange, the Taliban pledged that it would not allow the conflict-wracked nation to be a safe haven for terrorist groups that threatened the security of the U.S.

But the speed with which the fragile dialogue fell apart has caught experts and analysts by surprise.

“A little over a week ago, there was little opposition to the (peace) deal. Trump was right to halt it, it was a bad deal that absolves the Taliban’s role in providing a safe haven for Al Qaeda prior to and after 9/11,” Roggio said. “It would have been a humiliating defeat for the United States.”

Despite the efforts to reach a diplomatic conclusion to the stalemated conflict, Taliban-inspired attacks have continued with jarring frequency in recent months.

“With or without a large U.S. presence, the current civil war with the Taliban goes on. Kabul still controls vast internal security forces who can hold territory, and there is still foreign aid and logistical support coming in – China and India want a stable government in Afghanistan,” noted Miguel Miranda, an expert analyst in military technology in Asia. “This means the Afghan government won’t crumble overnight. But the Taliban can keep fighting, keep trying to capture cities and subvert local authorities. It’s a sad state of affairs.”

Miranda suspects the talks will resume at some point – likely after next month’s presidential elections in Afghanistan – with a deal centered on four conditions.

“The Taliban will not harbor terrorist groups, a U.S/NATO exit from the country, national dialogue for peace and a permanent ceasefire and a ‘normal’ country,” he conjectured.

Nonetheless, the negotiations have been fodder for criticism since they started, in large part because the Kabul government was not granted a seat at the table. The Taliban has maintained that the Ashraf Ghani leadership are not the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan and refused their participation.

Defense Priorities Policy Director Benjamin H. Friedman does not anticipate the now frozen arrangement to change the calculus.

“The United States will likely proceed with the initial withdrawal of forces regardless of the deal’s status, but it’s hard to say given the president’s fickleness,” he said. “We should proceed with a withdrawal with or without the Taliban’s permission since that is what is in our best interest.”

Westlake Legal Group AP19243304725498 Taliban talks dead: what comes next for the U.S. in Afghanistan? Hollie McKay fox-news/world/terrorism/al-qaeda fox-news/world/conflicts/afghanistan fox-news/world/conflicts fox news fnc/world fnc f80aa623-e13b-5d3e-8719-ac5f670991f3 article

Afghan security forces arrive during a fight against Taliban fighters in Kunduz province north of Kabul, Afghanistan, Saturday, Aug. 31, 2019. The Taliban have launched a new large-scale attack on one of Afghanistan’s main cities, Kunduz, and taken hospital patients as hostages, the government said Saturday, even as the insurgent group continued negotiations with the United States on ending America’s longest war. (AP Photo/Bashir Khan Safi)

According to a well-placed U.S. defense source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, a deal is not likely to be revived in the immediate future, in spite of the insistence of some U.S. officials that it isn’t all over.

“The Taliban will use this as propaganda, and many in the U.S. seem quite comfortable with the prospect of just sending in black ops when things pop up,” the source noted. “People are just tired of the whole situation and the president certainly doesn’t want it to become a campaign issue. I think we are going back to small hits and less (nation) building.”

AFGHAN WOMEN FEAR RENEWED CHAPTER OF SHARIA LAW AND REGRESSION OF RIGHTS UNDER TALIBAN’S THUMB

The view from Afghanistan is a mixture of both relief and concern, with many taken aback by Washington’s secret plan to host the Taliban delegation in Camp David this week, within days of the anniversary of 9/11, before Trump’s weekend announcement he was pulling the plug.

“The news of the Camp David meeting was shocking, and an insult to our terrorism victims. We’re thankful President Trump canceled it,” said Ahmad Muslem Hayat, a former Afghan military attaché in London. “But they will continue. The Taliban will try to increase its terror reign and kill more Afghan Army and U.S. troops.”

Sanjar Sohail, the publisher of Kabul’s Hasht e daily newspaper, concurred that the move to squash the secret meeting on American soil was the right one.

“The entire negotiations were a mistake from the start. It provided recognition and legitimacy to the Taliban, and we were worried after the last round of talks ended that the U.S. was going to abandon us,” he said. “There needs to be a ceasefire, the negotiations between the Taliban and the Afghan government.”

Westlake Legal Group AP19234555300525 Taliban talks dead: what comes next for the U.S. in Afghanistan? Hollie McKay fox-news/world/terrorism/al-qaeda fox-news/world/conflicts/afghanistan fox-news/world/conflicts fox news fnc/world fnc f80aa623-e13b-5d3e-8719-ac5f670991f3 article

FILE – In this May 28, 2019 file photo, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the Taliban group’s top political leader, third from left, arrives with other members of the Taliban delegation for talks in Moscow, Russia. U.S. envoy Zalmay Khalilzad and the Taliban have resumed negotiations on ending America’s longest war. A Taliban member said Khalilzad also had a one-on-one meeting on Wednesday, Aug. 21, 2019, with Baradar, the Taliban’s lead negotiator, in Qatar, where the insurgent group has a political office. (AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko, File)

But in the meantime, Afghans caught in the crossfire are bracing for an uptick in violence. And while the U.S. position going forward remains obscure, the Taliban hasn’t minced words – cautioning that the suspension of talks “will harm America more than anyone else.”

“It will damage its reputation, unmask its anti-peace policy to the world, even more, increase its loss of life and treasure and present its political interactions as erratic,” the organization said in a statement. “Such a reaction towards a single attack just before the signing of an agreement displays a lack of composure and experience.”

GET THE FOX NEWS APP 

And at least for the near future, Afghanistan’s bloodletting will continue.

“We will accept nothing less than the complete end of occupation and allowing Afghans to decide their own fate,” the Taliban added. “And we shall continue our jihad for this great cause and maintain our strong belief in ultimate victory, Allah willing.”

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6084657976001_6084652377001-vs Taliban talks dead: what comes next for the U.S. in Afghanistan? Hollie McKay fox-news/world/terrorism/al-qaeda fox-news/world/conflicts/afghanistan fox-news/world/conflicts fox news fnc/world fnc f80aa623-e13b-5d3e-8719-ac5f670991f3 article   Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6084657976001_6084652377001-vs Taliban talks dead: what comes next for the U.S. in Afghanistan? Hollie McKay fox-news/world/terrorism/al-qaeda fox-news/world/conflicts/afghanistan fox-news/world/conflicts fox news fnc/world fnc f80aa623-e13b-5d3e-8719-ac5f670991f3 article

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

U.S. Sows Confusion Over How Bahamas Residents May Enter After Hurricane Dorian

Westlake Legal Group gettyimages-1166589989-594x594_custom-0f55b2d573387cb5ff9e19acdf4f0c4db7a50066-s1100-c15 U.S. Sows Confusion Over How Bahamas Residents May Enter After Hurricane Dorian

People await evacuation at a dock in Marsh Harbour, Bahamas, on Saturday in the aftermath of Hurricane Dorian. Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption

Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images

Westlake Legal Group  U.S. Sows Confusion Over How Bahamas Residents May Enter After Hurricane Dorian

People await evacuation at a dock in Marsh Harbour, Bahamas, on Saturday in the aftermath of Hurricane Dorian.

Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images

The Trump administration says it has deployed “an enormous amount of resources” to southern Florida to receive residents of the Bahamas fleeing their hurricane-ravaged nation, but it is sending mixed signals about how Bahamians will be allowed into the U.S.

Acting Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Mark Morgan said Monday his agency has processed “thousands of folks” from two cruise ships as well as aircraft.

Speaking at the White House, Morgan admitted there has been some confusion surrounding the process by which Bahamian refugees are being allowed into the country, including passengers on a ferry boat who said they were turned away Sunday because they lacked travel visas.

Morgan said Border Patrol agents “will accept anyone on humanitarian reasons that needs to come here” whether they have proper travel documents or not. “We’ve already processed people that have travel documents and don’t have travel documents,” he said.

“This is a humanitarian mission,” Morgan said. “If your life is in jeopardy and you’re in the Bahamas and you want to get to the United States, you’re going to be allowed to come to the United States.” He said there would still be some vetting to “make sure that we’re not letting dangerous people in, taking advantage of this.”

Westlake Legal Group gettyimages-1167069105_custom-0f54aed1c85a1f383c787da89d8adba3c3ddc495-s1100-c15 U.S. Sows Confusion Over How Bahamas Residents May Enter After Hurricane Dorian

Acting Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection Mark Morgan speaks during a briefing at the White House on Monday. Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption

Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images

Westlake Legal Group  U.S. Sows Confusion Over How Bahamas Residents May Enter After Hurricane Dorian

Acting Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection Mark Morgan speaks during a briefing at the White House on Monday.

Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images

But a few hours later, President Trump appeared to contradict Morgan. “We have to be very careful,” Trump told reporters Monday afternoon, “Everybody needs totally proper documentation.”

Morgan said people found to have “long criminal records” will be turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “We’re not letting dangerous people in,” he said.

The administration has not yet decided whether to grant the Bahamians who enter the U.S. temporary protected status, allowing them to stay in the country. Trump said, “We’re talking to a lot of people about that.” Earlier, Morgan said it will depend on how long it takes to rebuild the islands. “We would not support returning them to a place where its not safe for them to be,” he said.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Emily Ratajkowski stuns in $50 Zara dress

Emily Ratajkowski knows a good deal when she sees one.

The model, 28, was one of a slew of high-profile celebrities who attended the Harper’s Bazaar Icons party at the Plaza on Friday of New York Fashion Week.

Westlake Legal Group Emily-Ratajowski-red-dress Emily Ratajkowski stuns in $50 Zara dress New York Post fox-news/style-and-beauty fnc/lifestyle fnc Emily Kirkpatrick article 179e69fd-2ac5-56cd-898a-d79ce715be98

Emily Ratajkowski showed that looking great doesn’t have to break the bank. (Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images for Harper’s BAZAAR)

But while the rest of the stars were wearing pricey couture gowns, this cover girl attended in a very budget-friendly look.

SEDUCTIVE ‘CHIN SHELF’ IS NEWEST INSTAGRAM POSE POPULAR WITH CELEBS

Ratajkowski arrived on the step-and-repeat in a $49.90 red dress from Zara featuring an asymmetrical cut and slinky, body-hugging silhouette.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

She paired the simple piece with black lace-up “Ophelia” heels by Merah Vodianova ($432), leaving her dark brown hair down in loose waves and adding a smokey eye and a nude lip.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR LIFESTYLE NEWSLETTER

The “Easy” actress shared a shot of herself in the outfit on her Instagram account, letting all her followers know she’s a pro at thrifty black-tie apparel by captioning it, “btw this dress is Zara.”

Westlake Legal Group Emily-Ratajowski-red-dress Emily Ratajkowski stuns in $50 Zara dress New York Post fox-news/style-and-beauty fnc/lifestyle fnc Emily Kirkpatrick article 179e69fd-2ac5-56cd-898a-d79ce715be98   Westlake Legal Group Emily-Ratajowski-red-dress Emily Ratajkowski stuns in $50 Zara dress New York Post fox-news/style-and-beauty fnc/lifestyle fnc Emily Kirkpatrick article 179e69fd-2ac5-56cd-898a-d79ce715be98

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Commerce Chief Threatened Firings at NOAA After Trump’s Dorian Tweets, Sources Say

Want climate news in your inbox? Sign up here for Climate Fwd:, our email newsletter.

WASHINGTON — The Secretary of Commerce threatened to fire top employees at NOAA on Friday after the agency’s Birmingham office contradicted President Trump’s claim that Hurricane Dorian might hit Alabama, according to three people familiar with the discussion.

That threat led to an unusual, unsigned statement later that Friday by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration disavowing the office’s own position that Alabama was not at risk. The reversal caused widespread anger within the agency and drew criticism from the scientific community that NOAA, a division of the Commerce Department, had been bent to political purposes.

Officials at the White House and the Commerce Department declined to comment on administration involvement in the NOAA statement.

The actions by the Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur L. Ross Jr., are the latest developments in a political imbroglio that began more than a week ago, when Dorian was bearing down on the Bahamas and Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter that Alabama would be hit “harder than anticipated.” A few minutes later, the National Weather Service in Birmingham, Ala., posted on Twitter that “Alabama will NOT see any impacts from Dorian. We repeat, no impacts from Hurricane Dorian will be felt across Alabama.”

Mr. Trump persisted in saying that Alabama was at risk and a few days later, on Sept. 4, he displayed a NOAA map that appeared to have been altered with a black Sharpie to include Alabama in the area potentially affected by Dorian.

Mr. Ross, the commerce secretary, intervened two days later, early last Friday, according to the three people familiar with his actions. Mr. Ross phoned Neil Jacobs, the acting administrator of NOAA, from Greece where the secretary was traveling for meetings and instructed Dr. Jacobs to fix the agency’s perceived contradiction of the president.

Dr. Jacobs objected to the demand and was told that the political staff at NOAA would be fired if the situation was not fixed, according to the three individuals, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the episode. Unlike career government employees, political staff are appointed by the administration. They usually include a handful of top officials, such as Dr. Jacobs, and their aides.

ImageWestlake Legal Group 09CLI-NOAA2-articleLarge Commerce Chief Threatened Firings at NOAA After Trump’s Dorian Tweets, Sources Say United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Jr Ross, Wilbur L Jr National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Hurricane Dorian (2019) environment

Commerce secretary Wilbur Ross in August. CreditEraldo Peres/Associated Press

However, a senior administration official who asked not to be identified when discussing internal deliberations said that the Birmingham office had been wrong and that NOAA had simply done the responsible thing and corrected the record.

That official suggested the Twitter post by the Birmingham forecasters had been motivated by a desire to embarrass the president more than concern for the safety of people in Alabama. The official provided no evidence to support that conclusion.

On Monday, Craig N. McLean, NOAA’s acting chief scientist, sent an email to staff members notifying the agency that he was looking into “potential violations” in the agency’s decision to ultimately back Mr. Trump’s statements rather than those of its own scientists. He called the agency’s action “a danger to public health and safety.”

Dr. Jacobs is scheduled to speak Tuesday at a weather industry conference in Huntsville, Ala.

On Monday, the National Weather Service director, Louis W. Uccellini, got a standing ovation from conference attendees when he praised the work of the Birmingham office and said staff members there had acted “with one thing in mind, public safety” when they contradicted Mr. Trump’s claim that Alabama was at risk.

A Presidential Storm Leaves Forecasters Rebuked

Sept. 6, 2019

Westlake Legal Group merlin_160193625_7150617c-bc42-4cac-9e83-7a70074d9efe-threeByTwoSmallAt2X Commerce Chief Threatened Firings at NOAA After Trump’s Dorian Tweets, Sources Say United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Jr Ross, Wilbur L Jr National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Hurricane Dorian (2019) environment

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Commerce Chief Threatened Firings at NOAA After Trump’s Dorian Tweets, Sources Say

Want climate news in your inbox? Sign up here for Climate Fwd:, our email newsletter.

WASHINGTON — The Secretary of Commerce threatened to fire top employees at NOAA on Friday after the agency’s Birmingham office contradicted President Trump’s claim that Hurricane Dorian might hit Alabama, according to three people familiar with the discussion.

That threat led to an unusual, unsigned statement later that Friday by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration disavowing the office’s own position that Alabama was not at risk. The reversal caused widespread anger within the agency and drew criticism from the scientific community that NOAA, a division of the Commerce Department, had been bent to political purposes.

Officials at the White House and the Commerce Department declined to comment on administration involvement in the NOAA statement.

The actions by the Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur L. Ross Jr., are the latest developments in a political imbroglio that began more than a week ago, when Dorian was bearing down on the Bahamas and Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter that Alabama would be hit “harder than anticipated.” A few minutes later, the National Weather Service in Birmingham, Ala., posted on Twitter that “Alabama will NOT see any impacts from Dorian. We repeat, no impacts from Hurricane Dorian will be felt across Alabama.”

Mr. Trump persisted in saying that Alabama was at risk and a few days later, on Sept. 4, he displayed a NOAA map that appeared to have been altered with a black Sharpie to include Alabama in the area potentially affected by Dorian.

Mr. Ross, the commerce secretary, intervened two days later, early last Friday, according to the three people familiar with his actions. Mr. Ross phoned Neil Jacobs, the acting administrator of NOAA, from Greece where the secretary was traveling for meetings and instructed Dr. Jacobs to fix the agency’s perceived contradiction of the president.

Dr. Jacobs objected to the demand and was told that the political staff at NOAA would be fired if the situation was not fixed, according to the three individuals, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the episode. Unlike career government employees, political staff are appointed by the administration. They usually include a handful of top officials, such as Dr. Jacobs, and their aides.

ImageWestlake Legal Group 09CLI-NOAA2-articleLarge Commerce Chief Threatened Firings at NOAA After Trump’s Dorian Tweets, Sources Say United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Jr Ross, Wilbur L Jr National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Hurricane Dorian (2019) environment

Commerce secretary Wilbur Ross in August. CreditEraldo Peres/Associated Press

However, a senior administration official who asked not to be identified when discussing internal deliberations said that the Birmingham office had been wrong and that NOAA had simply done the responsible thing and corrected the record.

That official suggested the Twitter post by the Birmingham forecasters had been motivated by a desire to embarrass the president more than concern for the safety of people in Alabama. The official provided no evidence to support that conclusion.

On Monday, Craig N. McLean, NOAA’s acting chief scientist, sent an email to staff members notifying the agency that he was looking into “potential violations” in the agency’s decision to ultimately back Mr. Trump’s statements rather than those of its own scientists. He called the agency’s action “a danger to public health and safety.”

Dr. Jacobs is scheduled to speak Tuesday at a weather industry conference in Huntsville, Ala.

On Monday, the National Weather Service director, Louis W. Uccellini, got a standing ovation from conference attendees when he praised the work of the Birmingham office and said staff members there had acted “with one thing in mind, public safety” when they contradicted Mr. Trump’s claim that Alabama was at risk.

A Presidential Storm Leaves Forecasters Rebuked

Sept. 6, 2019

Westlake Legal Group merlin_160193625_7150617c-bc42-4cac-9e83-7a70074d9efe-threeByTwoSmallAt2X Commerce Chief Threatened Firings at NOAA After Trump’s Dorian Tweets, Sources Say United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Jr Ross, Wilbur L Jr National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Hurricane Dorian (2019) environment

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Texas leads charge against Google in massive antitrust probe

Less than two months after the Justice Department initiated a wide-ranging antitrust review of big tech companies, 50 U.S. states and territories, led by Texas, Monday announced their own investigation into Google’s “potential monopolistic behavior.”

The announcement closely followed one from a separate group of states Friday that disclosed an investigation into Facebook’s market dominance. The two probes widen the antitrust scrutiny of big tech companies beyond sweeping federal and congressional investigations and enforcement action by European regulators.

A key issue in the states’ probe is whether Google abuses its market dominance in online search, advertising, and mobile operating systems to unfairly gain leverage in other markets, stifling innovation and harming consumers. Although anti-conservative bias among Google’s leadership has been documented and frequently draws the ire of top Republicans, the antitrust probes do not expressly relate to those concerns.

CALIFORNIA GOP REP SUES TWITTER FOR MILLIONS, ALLEGING ANTI-CONSERVATIVE ‘SHADOW BANS’ 

At the same time, President Trump tweeted ominously last month after meeting Google CEO Sundar Pichai in the Oval Office: “We are watching Google very closely!”

The president’s comment came after an individual whom Google called a “disgruntled former employee” alleged that the company was working to ensure Trump does not win re-election.

Westlake Legal Group AP19252147598365 Texas leads charge against Google in massive antitrust probe Gregg Re fox-news/tech/topics/big-tech-backlash fox-news/tech/companies/google fox news fnc/politics fnc article 8390d54a-e7ae-5cdb-a782-e133894ca3c5

FILE – In this May 1, 2019, file photo a man walks past a Google sign outside with a span of the Bay Bridge at rear in San Francisco. A group of states are expected to announce an investigation into Google on Monday, Sept. 9, to investigate whether the tech company has become too big. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu, File)

Nebraska attorney general Doug Peterson, a Republican, said at a press conference held in Washington that 50 attorneys general joining together sends a “strong message to Google.” The news conference featured a dozen Republican attorneys general plus the Democratic attorney general of Washington, D.C.

California and Alabama are not part of the investigation, although it does include the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Tara Gallegos, a spokeswoman for California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, declined to confirm or deny any state investigation and would not comment on the announcement by the other states.

Both sides of the political aisle have targeted Google and other large tech companies in recent weeks. Several 2020 presidential candidates, most prominently Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., have called for the tech giants to be broken up for alleged anticompetitive behavior — the most extreme remedy available under the Sherman Antitrust Act.

YOUTUBE REMOVED 100,000 VIDEOS AND 17,000 CHANNELS IN MAJOR ‘HATE SPEECH’ CRACKDOWN

AT&T and Standard Oil are among the most notable instances of companies being broken up by antitrust law. Perhaps the closest comparison to any attempt to split up Google would be the 2000 effort to break up Microsoft into two companies: one producing the Windows operating system, and the other producing software.

That remedy was approved by a trial judge but later overturned on appeal in favor of other sanctions, as experts argued that the operating system and software could not meaningfully be separated without undermining the quality of both products. Others pointed out that competitors could flourish — and point to Apple’s rise as vindication.

Regulators could focus on Google’s popular video site YouTube, an acquisition Google scored in 2006, as a possible entity to spin off.

“People’s whole internet experience is mediated through Google’s home page and Google’s other products.”

— Jen King, the director of privacy at Stanford’s Center for Internet and Society.

“Google’s services help people every day, create more choice for consumers, and support thousands of jobs and small businesses across the country,” a Google spokesperson told Fox News in an emailed statement last week. “We continue to work constructively with regulators, including attorneys general, in answering questions about our business and the dynamic technology sector.”

Google’s parent company, Alphabet, has a market value of more than $820 billion and controls so many facets of the internet that it’s fairly impossible to surf the web for long without running into at least one of its services. Google’s dominance in online search and advertising enables it to target millions of consumers for their personal data.

HUNDREDS OF GOOGLE EMPLOYEES SAY THEY REFUSE TO WORK WITH IMMIGRATION OFFICIALS ON CLOUD-COMPUTING WORK

Google said it expects the state authorities will ask the company about past similar investigations in the U.S. and internationally, senior vice president of global affairs Kent Walker wrote in a blog post Friday.

Critics often point to Google’s 2007 acquisition of online advertising company DoubleClick as pivotal to its advertising dominance.

Europe’s antitrust regulators slapped Google with a $1.7 billion fine in March for unfairly inserting exclusivity clauses into contracts with advertisers, disadvantaging rivals in the online ad business.

Westlake Legal Group sundar-pichai Texas leads charge against Google in massive antitrust probe Gregg Re fox-news/tech/topics/big-tech-backlash fox-news/tech/companies/google fox news fnc/politics fnc article 8390d54a-e7ae-5cdb-a782-e133894ca3c5

Google CEO Sundar Pichai appears before the House Judiciary Committee to be questioned about the internet giant’s privacy security and data collection, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Dec. 11, 2018. Pichai angered members of a Senate panel in September by declining their invitation to testify about foreign governments’ manipulation of online services to sway U.S. political elections. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) (AP)

Joining Paxton, a Republican, in the investigation are the attorneys general of almost all U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

Google has long argued that although its businesses are large, they are useful and beneficial to consumers.

“Google is one of America’s top spenders on research and development, making investments that spur innovation,” Walker wrote. “Things that were science fiction a few years ago are now free for everyone — translating any language instantaneously, learning about objects by pointing your phone, getting an answer to pretty much any question you might have.”

But federal and state regulators and policymakers are growing more concerned not just with the company’s impact on ordinary internet users, but also on smaller companies striving to compete in Google’s markets.

“On the one hand, you could just say, ‘well, Google is dominant because they’re good,'” said Jen King, the director of privacy at Stanford’s Center for Internet and Society. “But at the same time, it’s created an ecosystem where people’s whole internet experience is mediated through Google’s home page and Google’s other products.”

Experts believe the probe could focus on at least one of three areas that have caught regulators’ eyes.

A good first place to look might be online advertising. Google will control 31.1 percent of global digital ad dollars in 2019, according to eMarketer estimates, crushing a distant second-place Facebook. And many smaller advertisers have argued that Google has such a stranglehold on the market that it becomes a system of whatever Google says, goes — because the alternative could be not reaching customers.

“There’s definitely concern on the part of the advertisers themselves that Google wields way too much power in setting rates and favoring their own services over others,” King said.

Another visibly huge piece of Google’s business is its search platform, often the starting point for millions of people when they go online. Google dwarfs other search competitors and has faced harsh criticism in the past for favoring its own products over competitors at the top of search results. European regulators also have investigated in this area, ultimately fining Google for promoting its own shopping service. Google is appealing the fine.

Google’s open smartphone operating system, Android, is the most widely used in the world.

European regulators have fined Google $5 billion for tactics involving Android, finding that Google forced smartphone makers to install Google apps, thereby expanding its reach. Google has since allowed more options for alternative browser and search apps to European Android phones.

GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The Justice Department opened a sweeping investigation of big tech companies this summer, looking at whether their online platforms have hurt competition, suppressed innovation or otherwise harmed consumers. The Federal Trade Commission has been conducting its own competition probe of Big Tech, as has the House Judiciary subcommittee on antitrust.

Fox News’ Christopher Carbone and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6074144758001_6074130909001-vs Texas leads charge against Google in massive antitrust probe Gregg Re fox-news/tech/topics/big-tech-backlash fox-news/tech/companies/google fox news fnc/politics fnc article 8390d54a-e7ae-5cdb-a782-e133894ca3c5   Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6074144758001_6074130909001-vs Texas leads charge against Google in massive antitrust probe Gregg Re fox-news/tech/topics/big-tech-backlash fox-news/tech/companies/google fox news fnc/politics fnc article 8390d54a-e7ae-5cdb-a782-e133894ca3c5

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Declares Afghan Peace Talks With Taliban ‘Dead’

Westlake Legal Group 09dc-trumpafghan1-facebookJumbo Trump Declares Afghan Peace Talks With Taliban ‘Dead’ United States Defense and Military Forces Trump, Donald J Taliban September 11 (2001) Camp David (Md) Afghanistan War (2001- ) Afghanistan

WASHINGTON — President Trump declared that peace talks with the Taliban were “dead, as far as I’m concerned,” saying he called off a meeting at Camp David after the militant group in Afghanistan killed 12 people, including one American soldier.

Speaking to reporters on Monday as he left for a political rally in North Carolina, Mr. Trump said he did not intend to try to revive efforts to reach a peace accord with the Taliban that could accelerate the removal of American troops from the country.

“They are dead — they are dead. As far as I’m concerned they are dead,” Mr. Trump said of peace talks, accusing the group of the attack that killed an American soldier from Puerto Rico. “You can’t do that. You can’t do that with me. So they are dead as far as I’m concerned.”

The president’s declaration was the latest evidence of difficulty in the nine-month effort to negotiate an exit of American troops from Afghanistan after America’s longest war, which began after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

But it was unclear whether Mr. Trump’s angry denunciation would mean a permanent end to the talks. The president has demonstrated a willingness to swing from one extreme to the other in the conduct of foreign policy, for example alternately condemning and then praising Kim Jong-un, the leader of North Korea.

The long-running effort to negotiate peace in Afghanistan has split the administration, with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo supporting it, but with John R. Bolton, the national security adviser, opposing the talks.

Mr. Trump had promised during his presidential campaign to withdraw American troops from endless wars around the world, and has pushed to bring soldiers home from Afghanistan and Iraq. The president defended the idea of finalizing a peace agreement at Camp David, saying the famous presidential retreat had been used before to host people who “would not have been considered politically correct.”

But he said that it was his decision — and his alone — to cancel the meeting after word of the Taliban attacks.

“It was my idea, and it was my idea to terminate it,” Mr. Trump said. “I didn’t discuss it with anybody else. When I heard, very simply, that they killed one of our soldiers and 12 other innocent people, I said ‘There is no way I’m meeting on that basis.’”

To underscore that the peace talks with the Taliban were off, Mr. Trump asserted, without providing any evidence, that the United States military had “hit the Taliban harder in the last four days than they’ve been hit in over 10 years. So that’s the way it is.”

Today, though, the American military presence in Afghanistan is far lower than it has been in prior years, when tens of thousands of troops from the United States were engaged in much more aggressive and frequent engagement with the Taliban.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The 2020 Candidates Still Won’t Talk About The Main Cause Of Mass Incarceration

Westlake Legal Group 5d7669ac2300009b03512927 The 2020 Candidates Still Won’t Talk About The Main Cause Of Mass Incarceration

A long-overdue debate on reforming the criminal justice system has taken center stage in the Democratic presidential primary. Pete Buttigieg wants to cut the incarcerated population in half. Joe Biden, who helped to author the infamous 1994 crime bill as a senator, is urging “redemption and rehabilitation.” And Kamala Harris, a former prosecutor, just released a sweeping proposal to transform the system and end mass incarceration.

The Democratic front-runners all agree that the U.S. imprisons too many people (around 2.2 million in 2017) and that people of color have been disproportionately affected. Some, like Harris, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, have released comprehensive plans to address the crisis, which include efforts to tackle the root causes of crime, like poverty and homelessness, and calls to eliminate the mandatory sentencing laws ushered in by the war on drugs.

But largely absent in these proposals is a public reckoning with the primary cause of America’s high prison population: violent crime. Over half the people serving time in state prisons, which house the majority of the U.S.’s prisoners, are convicted of violent offenses, ranging from robbery to murder. Yet only Harris’ proposal explicitly mentions violent crime as an underlying driver of mass incarceration. Her plan would create a commission to study the issue and make policy recommendations.

Experts interviewed by HuffPost warned that meaningful reform requires changing how the U.S. punishes violent crime, not just ending the war on drugs. They also cautioned that drawing a hard line between violent and nonviolent crime, as some candidates have done on the campaign trail, obscures a more complicated reality.

“Frankly, those who think we can eliminate mass incarceration without dealing with violent crimes are committing a math error,” said Keith Wattley, executive director of UnCommon Law, a nonprofit law firm in California. “Most of these proposals are silent on the issue of serious and violent crimes. And silence really signals acquiescence.”

In the two double-feature Democratic presidential debates to date, the candidates (and, to be fair, the moderators) have devoted scant time to criminal justice. Beto O’Rourke brought up mass incarceration but framed it around marijuana legalization. Warren went after private prisons, which house only 8% of the country’s incarcerated population. Others talked about gun violence. Criminal justice advocates hope that at the next debate on Sept. 12. candidates will be pressed for a fuller discussion.  

Name The Problem

The rate of incarceration in the United States has more than quadrupled in the past four decades, and scholars are still debating why. 

A 2014 report by the National Academy of Sciences attributes the rise to mandatory sentences, longer sentences, overzealous prosecutors and harsher enforcement of drug laws. Policies such as “three strikes” laws, which require sentences of 25 years to life after a person is convicted of a third felony, and “truth in sentencing” laws, which force people to serve most of their sentences before qualifying for parole, have resulted in more people spending more time behind bars. 

But while the war on drugs undeniably contributed to mass incarceration, the majority of people in state prisons, which account for 88% of the total U.S. prison population, are there on convictions for violent crimes. Only 15% of people in state prisons are held for drug crimes. (Federal prisons, which house 12% of the U.S. prison population, are a little different. There, about 45% of inmates are convicted of drug offenses.)

The public is woefully misinformed about these facts. A 2016 poll by Morning Consult and Vox found that the majority of people erroneously believe that nearly half of all U.S. prisoners are incarcerated for drug offenses. When asked if they supported reducing prison time for nonviolent offenders, an overwhelming majority of respondents said yes. But only 29% felt the same way about people who committed a violent crime, even if the individual had a low risk of reoffending. 

John Pfaff, author of “Locked In” and professor at Fordham Law School, believes these attitudes are intertwined. 

“It’s because we believe that everyone’s in prison for drugs that we don’t have to ask these hard questions of violence,” he said. “Politicians are afraid to talk about it. So they talk about drugs and that reinforces people’s belief that everyone’s there for drugs. It’s a hard cycle to snap out of.” 

Pfaff commended Harris for noting the central role that violent crime plays in driving prison populations, but said he wished she’d gone further.

“It’s worth noting that she demands action now when it comes to how we handle drugs, but pushes the issue of violence to a commission ― even though we have the data to change how we approach violence now too,” he said.

The Plans

In some ways, the current debate over criminal justice reform is historic. Most 2020 Democratic candidates are now openly opposed to the death penalty and want to legalize marijuana ― positions relegated to the fringe in past election cycles. 

“The way they are talking about criminal justice is dramatically different from what we’ve heard before in a presidential campaign,” said Marc Mauer, executive director of The Sentencing Project. 

He praised the candidates for thinking systemically about the causes of crime and focusing on prevention. Warren’s plan, for example, connects the dots between adverse childhood experiences, such as poverty and homelessness, and later involvement in the criminal justice system. Sanders’ plan emphasizes the need to address the social and environmental conditions that lead to crime and calls for increased funding for violence interruption models.

But to truly reduce the prison population, the U.S. needs to shorten sentences, including for violent crimes, Mauer said. That will require comprehensive sentencing reform. 

In theory, a number of candidates have endorsed such reforms. Warren, Sanders and Biden, for example, have said they want to reduce or eliminate mandatory minimum laws, which require judges to sentence people to a specific prison term for a specific crime. But none of the candidates have explained what this would mean in practice: a radical rethinking of how we punish violence. 

“They are not articulating what the problem is, and difficult as it is, why it needs to be addressed,” said Mauer, who proposed a 20-year cap on sentences in his book “The Meaning of Life,” arguing that many people age out of crime and pose little risk to public safety. The U.S.’s excessively long sentences are an outlier compared to much of the world, he said, and the practice is counterproductive and costly.

Reconsidering how to handle people who commit violent crimes raises complicated and uncomfortable questions. The criminal justice system is riddled with cases like this man, who served 36 years behind bars for robbing a bank of $50 ― considered a violent crime ― when he was 22. But tougher are the cases that involve a serious injury or death. How long should someone who commits murder but who is no longer deemed dangerous be held in prison? Does it make sense for a woman who kills her abusive husband to spend the rest of her life behind bars? Should a person who sells drugs that are later connected to an overdose spend three decades in prison on homicide charges? Could some violent crimes be dealt with using alternatives to incarceration, such as restorative justice, as one group in Brooklyn is now doing? 

Mauer said he was encouraged by legislation written by presidential hopeful and Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) that would allow federal prisoners who have served more than 10 years of their sentence to petition a judge for a reduced sentence or early release. Crucially, the bill does not exclude people convicted of violent crimes. 

Still, in the press release touting the legislation, Booker talks only about the impact of the drug war. And on his campaign website, he promises to extend clemency to individuals serving excessive sentences ― but only for nonviolent drug crimes.

The Power Of The Pulpit

Presidents have limited power to reform the criminal justice system writ large, as states and local districts set their own policies, said Pfaff, the Fordham professor. The federal government can wield some influence by offering grant money to states that adopt certain programs or policies, but ultimately, its impact is minimal. 

Where presidents can do is set the agenda, he said.

“Imagine if someone like Warren or Sanders or Biden got up and said, ‘Look, we need to talk about how we punish violence. We are harsh on it in a way that baffles Europeans, in a way that flies in the face of what we know about what deters behavior, and we do it in a brutal and inhumane way that is often counterproductive,’” he said. “That statement alone would do more than any 50-page policy would do.” 

Wattley, the executive director of UnCommon Law, agreed. 

“It could set the tone for what people are willing to say, and what people are willing to risk,” he said. 

He urged the candidates to stop making a distinction between nonviolent and violent crimes when talking about the need for reform. 

The line is not as clear-cut as the public might imagine, he said. Some individuals convicted of drug crimes also committed violent crimes but pleaded to the lesser charge; some violent crimes are directly related to drug activity. 

“It’s one of those false distinctions, but the underlying causes [of the crime] are often the same,” he said. “We pretend that there’s an added evil component to people who commit violence. That’s just not my experience.” 

Kristen Bell, an assistant professor at University of Oregon School of Law, said she understands why candidates wouldn’t want to speak openly about changing how the country treats violence, especially as Democrats have long been branded as weak on crime by Republican opponents. 

“It’s hard as a politician who wants to get elected to run on a platform of releasing people from prison who have committed murder and rape, right?” she said. But stressing the difference between violent and nonviolent crimes sends the wrong message, she added. 

“It legitimizes the way we incarcerate people who commit violence and makes it seem like it’s OK and not in need of change,” she said.  

“That’s just not true. We need to be talking about them because they are the majority of people in prison.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Brexit Live Updates: Lawmakers Order Release of Private No-Deal Correspondence

Here’s what you need to know:

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_160177842_b22b4c6e-4d34-40ef-9232-53c6e2b1728c-articleLarge Brexit Live Updates: Lawmakers Order Release of Private No-Deal Correspondence Rudd, Amber (1963- ) Politics and Government Legislatures and Parliaments Leadsom, Andrea (1963- ) Johnson, Boris Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain Europe elections Conservative Party (Great Britain) British Pound (Currency) Bercow, John

Brexit has brought chaos to Britain’s Parliament proceedings.CreditAndrew Testa for The New York Times

At the center of the controversy around Mr. Johnson’s decision to suspend Parliament has been the question of why he really did it. Was it, as his office contended, an ordinary procedural move that had nothing to do with Brexit? Or was it expressly designed to keep lawmakers from intervening in the government’s hard-line Brexit plans?

What Is Brexit? What Does ‘No-Deal’ Mean?

Jan. 24, 2019

To answer that question, lawmakers on Monday night voted by a narrow margin — 311 to 302 — to force the government to publish private correspondence that would show its thinking.

The same vote will also force the government to publish a classified document known as Operation Yellowhammer, which outlines the government’s assessment of the impact of a no-deal Brexit. Many analysts fear that leaving without a formal agreement would lead to food and medicine shortages, among other calamities.

Dominic Grieve, a former Conservative lawmaker who was exiled by Mr. Johnson last week, said before the vote that public officials had told him the government’s handling of the suspension of Parliament “smacked of scandal.”

The government objected, with Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, questioning what legal right the government had to force workers to open up their private email accounts and messages.

John Bercow, the animated speaker of the House of Commons, said on Monday that he would step down by Oct. 31, the day Britain is scheduled to leave the European Union. He said he would not run should a general election be called before then.

“This has been, let me put it explicitly, the greatest honor and privilege of my life, for which I will be eternally grateful,” he said, becoming emotional as he thanked his wife and children for their support.

Video

Westlake Legal Group merlin_160490562_e960c6af-00aa-4484-8240-697ffbc08543-videoSixteenByNineJumbo1600 Brexit Live Updates: Lawmakers Order Release of Private No-Deal Correspondence Rudd, Amber (1963- ) Politics and Government Legislatures and Parliaments Leadsom, Andrea (1963- ) Johnson, Boris Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain Europe elections Conservative Party (Great Britain) British Pound (Currency) Bercow, John

John Bercow, the speaker of the House of Commons, announced that he would leave by Oct. 31, the day Britain is scheduled to exit the European Union.CreditCreditAgence France-Presse — Getty Images

He also warned lawmakers to respect the process of the parliamentary system, noting, “We degrade this Parliament at our peril.”

The role of speaker has traditionally been an impartial, background figure, but Mr. Bercow brought new aggression to the role throughout the fraught Brexit debates that have dominated discussions in Parliament for years.

His actions — particularly his criticism of Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s decision to suspend Parliament, and his decision to bar a third vote on Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement and effectively halt the government’s agenda — have made him some enemies in the Conservative Party.

Mr. Bercow’s plan to step down upends a Conservative Party plan to break with longtime convention and field a candidate to challenge him in the next general election. The party had said that Mr. Bercow broke the rules by allowing Parliament to take control of the Brexit process and hobble the government’s position.

Writing in the The Mail on Sunday, Andrea Leadsom, the secretary of state for business, energy and industrial strategy, accused Mr. Bercow of “a flagrant abuse of this process” and of “giving power to the opposition.”

“Bring back an impartial speaker,” she declared.

Last year, when Ms. Leadsom was leader of the House of Commons, Mr. Bercow was accused of calling her a “stupid woman” and “useless.” He admitted to muttering the words during a disagreement but denied insulting her personally.

Legislation that would require Britain to seek another Brexit extension from the European Union if there is no withdrawal agreement by Oct. 19 became law on Monday, a move that Prime Minister Boris Johnson bitterly opposed.

The opposition Labour Party and others have insisted that they will not consider Mr. Johnson’s request to hold a general election until after a no-deal Brexit was ruled out.

That sets the stage for another battle: whether, and when, to hold a general election. The vote on the snap general election is expected to take place between 9 p.m. and the early hours of Tuesday morning.

The success of the no-deal legislation is due in no small part to the decision last week by 21 members of Mr. Johnson’s Conservative Party to defy him on the question of whether to leave without a deal. They were expelled from the party for their defiance.

The Tory revolt against Mr. Johnson, and his ruthless purging of the rebels, have reverberated through British politics, threatening his hold on power.

The prime minister and many of his allies say that Britain must preserve the possibility of leaving without a deal in order to maintain leverage in negotiations with Brussels. Opponents of a no-deal withdrawal say it simply cannot be considered because of the potentially catastrophic consequences for the British economy.

After just one week’s work following the summer vacation, British lawmakers will be sent away again Monday night when Parliament is “prorogued,” or suspended, until Oct. 14, the prime minister’s office said.

Lawmakers will first vote on whether to hold a snap election with the expectation that, as they did last week, they will refuse to give Prime Minister Boris Johnson the two-thirds majority he needs to call a vote next month.

Then Parliament will be suspended after formal announcements in both chambers and a ceremony that includes a cry in Norman French.

The suspension means that, if Mr. Johnson loses on Monday, he would not be able to attempt votes later this week to try to secure the snap election before the Oct. 31 Brexit deadline.

Boris Johnson Will Prorogue Parliament

Westlake Legal Group brexit-calendar-update-600 Brexit Live Updates: Lawmakers Order Release of Private No-Deal Correspondence Rudd, Amber (1963- ) Politics and Government Legislatures and Parliaments Leadsom, Andrea (1963- ) Johnson, Boris Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain Europe elections Conservative Party (Great Britain) British Pound (Currency) Bercow, John

Before Boris Johnson decided to suspended Parliament,

lawmakers had about five weeks in session to debate a Brexit deal.

Parliament

returns

Break for party

conferences

Parliament scheduled

to return

E.U. summit

Britain leaves the E.U.

But Mr. Johnson’s latest move delays the return of lawmakers,

leaving less than three weeks until the Brexit deadline.

Parliament suspended after today

The queen’s speech

and debates will

add further delays

E.U. summit

Britain leaves the E.U.

Westlake Legal Group brexit-calendar-update-300 Brexit Live Updates: Lawmakers Order Release of Private No-Deal Correspondence Rudd, Amber (1963- ) Politics and Government Legislatures and Parliaments Leadsom, Andrea (1963- ) Johnson, Boris Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain Europe elections Conservative Party (Great Britain) British Pound (Currency) Bercow, John

Before Boris Johnson decided to suspended Parliament, lawmakers had about five weeks in session to debate a Brexit deal.

Parliament

returns

Break for party

conferences

Parliament

scheduled

to return

E.U. summit

Britain leaves

the E.U.

But Mr. Johnson’s latest move delays the return of lawmakers, leaving less than three weeks

until the Brexit deadline.

Parliament

suspended after today

The queen’s speech

and debates

will add

further delays

Britain leaves

the E.U.

The prime minister, who just had a humbling week in Parliament, will be spared any further appearances there for five weeks. But the absence of lawmakers at a moment of looming national crisis is likely to fuel criticism of Mr. Johnson’s hardball tactics and his determination to leave the European Union next month, without an agreement if necessary.

Lawmakers have passed a bill designed to prevent a no-deal Brexit, and the legislation received its final approval — a procedure known as royal assent — on Monday.

Mr. Johnson’s spokesman said that the prime minister would not break that law, but insisted that he would not request an extension to the Brexit deadline as the new legislation requires if he cannot reach a deal with the European Union or get Parliament’s approval for a no-deal exit.

How Mr. Johnson plans to achieve that was not explained.

The European Commission headquarters in Brussels.CreditFrancisco Seco/Associated Press

Ordinarily, this would be a week of unadulterated excitement in Brussels. On Tuesday, Ursula von der Leyen, who is set to become European Commission president on Nov. 1, is to present her college — or group — of commissioners who will lead different policy areas of the European Union bureaucracy for the next five years.

But Brexit is threatening to put a dampener on this twice-a-decade exercise, as questions of a possible extension to Britain’s withdrawal deadline raise concerns about how the country can remain a member of the bloc without having a commissioner.

The commission, which typically has one representative from each European Union country, has so far refused be drawn into speculation about a potential delay. Mina Andreeva, the commission spokeswoman, said on Monday that the bloc was working under the assumption that Britain would leave by the Oct. 31 deadline.

Other European Union members signaled that they were running out of patience. France, leading a group of nations skeptical of another extension, reiterated its position that any extension would have to come with a detailed plan of what Britain intends to do with the extra time.

“We are not going to do this every three months,” Jean-Yves Le Drian, the French foreign minister said, speaking with the Europe 1 radio program on Sunday.

The British Brexit negotiator, David Frost, is to return to Brussels on Wednesday to continue “technical discussions” with his European counterparts. These twice-weekly meetings in Brussels were heralded as a breakthrough by the British government, but they have so far yielded nothing in terms of an alternative to the Irish border backstop — a major sticking point in current talks.

Brexit supporters rallied outside Parliament last week.CreditAndrew Testa for The New York Times

Prime Minister Boris Johnson is expected to try again on Monday to call a general election, a move that is expected to suffer the same fate as a first effort that fell short last week.

Mr. Johnson’s working majority has quickly evaporated, and new elections would give him a chance to re-establish a stable power base. But mistrust among his opponents is so high that they would not support a new vote until the legislation blocking a no-deal exit was locked in.

That has created an unusual situation in which his opponents, who would normally jump at a chance to vote him out of office, are fighting an attempt to hold a new election, which can happen only after a two-thirds majority in Parliament supports it.

“It’s the most sensational paradox,” Mr. Johnson, who came to power less than two months ago, said on Friday. “Never in history has the opposition party been given the chance for election and has turned it down.”

Many lawmakers in the opposition Labour Party want to wait at least until November to hold an election. They fear that a strong victory in October would allow Mr. Johnson to reverse any no-deal legislation.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson has made clear that he wants Britain to leave the European Union by Oct. 31.CreditJessica Taylor/U.K. Parliament, via Shutterstock

The battle over an extension has raised the specter of whether Mr. Johnson would risk jail to get his way.

Mr. Johnson has made clear that he wants to complete Brexit by the end of October, declaring that he would rather be “dead in a ditch” than ask the European Union for another delay. But legal experts have warned that he could face jail time if he refused to abide by the bill to prevent a no-deal Brexit, which was approved on Friday and is set to become law on Monday.

On Saturday, the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, said, “We’re in quite extraordinary territory when the prime minister says he is above the law.”

A former top prosecutor, Lord MacDonald, told Sky News that if Mr. Johnson refused to request an extension, “that would amount to contempt of court, which could find that person in prison.”

The government appears willing to “test to the limit” the new law, with Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab telling reporters that the government would abide by the law, but that it would also “look very carefully” at its “interpretation” of the “bad” legislation.

Prime Ministers Leo Varadkar of Ireland, left, and Boris Johnson of Britain in Dublin on Monday.CreditCharles Mcquillan/Getty Images

Prime Minister Boris Johnson began the week in a different European capital, Dublin. But the message was the same as it was last week in London: His vow to leave the European Union without a deal was a non-starter.

“There’s no such thing as a clean break — or just getting it done,” the Irish prime minister, Leo Varadkar, said to Mr. Johnson, throwing his own words back at him.

On a chilly, gray day, with the Irish and British flags flapping behind them, Mr. Varadkar and Mr. Johnson both spoke of the need to find solutions. But the gulf between them seemed wide.

The Irish border remains the biggest barrier to a Brexit deal. All sides want to avoid the imposition of significant checks between Ireland, a member of the European Union, and Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom. A hard border could renew sectarian tensions that raged for decades.

Mr. Johnson has rejected the so-called backstop agreement reached by his predecessor, Theresa May, which would all but keep Northern Ireland inside the single European market for a few years, so that Ireland would not have to inspect goods flowing in from the north.

Mr. Johnson quashed any expectations that he had brought new proposals. He simply restated the case that he made last week to British lawmakers.

“We must get Brexit done because the U.K. must come out on Oct. 31, or else I fear permanent damage will be done to confidence in our democracy in the U.K,” Mr. Johnson said in Dublin on Monday. “I know that this problem of Brexit was not, to be perfectly frank, a conundrum that Ireland ever wished for.”

While both men emphasized the need for a deal, neither seemed to have high expectations for the visit. Mr. Varadkar noted it would be a “herculean task” for Mr. Johnson to negotiate a new deal before the Oct. 31 deadline.

Nicholas Soames was expelled from the Conservative Party for supporting a motion to stop Britain from leaving the European Union without a deal.CreditNeil Hall/EPA, via Shutterstock

There are fights, and then there are family fights, just as there are insults, and family insults.

From the moment last week when Prime Minister Boris Johnson expelled 21 Conservative rebel lawmakers who defied him in a critical vote, the Tories have been in full family fight mode, and the insults have been colorful, to say the least.

A barrage of insults came from Nicholas Soames, one of the lawmakers who was expelled from the party. Mr. Soames, a grandson of Winston Churchill, took pointed issue with Mr. Johnson — “Boris Johnson is nothing like Winston Churchill” — but especially with Jacob Rees-Mogg, the House of Commons leader who was widely lampooned after he reclined on the front bench of Parliament during the Brexit debate last week.

“He is in serious danger of believing his own shtick,” Mr. Soames told the Times of London on Saturday. “He is an absolute fraud, he is a living example of what a moderately cut double-breasted suit and a decent tie can do with an ultraposh voice.”

Mr. Soames then offered some earthier anatomical imagery before describing Mr. Rees-Mogg’s speech during the Brexit debate as “the lowest form of student union hackery, insolence and bad manners.”

And to think they were once on the same team.

Reporting was contributed by Mark Landler, Matina Stevis-Gridneff, Benjamin Mueller, Michael Wolgelenter, Yonette Joseph and Megan Specia.

‘They’re All Idiots’: Amid Brexit Chaos, Britons Lose Faith in Politicians

Sept. 6, 2019

Westlake Legal Group 06brexit-voices1-threeByTwoSmallAt2X Brexit Live Updates: Lawmakers Order Release of Private No-Deal Correspondence Rudd, Amber (1963- ) Politics and Government Legislatures and Parliaments Leadsom, Andrea (1963- ) Johnson, Boris Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain Europe elections Conservative Party (Great Britain) British Pound (Currency) Bercow, John
Parliament’s Next Brexit Brawl: When to Hold Elections

Sept. 5, 2019

Westlake Legal Group 05brexit1-threeByTwoSmallAt2X Brexit Live Updates: Lawmakers Order Release of Private No-Deal Correspondence Rudd, Amber (1963- ) Politics and Government Legislatures and Parliaments Leadsom, Andrea (1963- ) Johnson, Boris Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain Europe elections Conservative Party (Great Britain) British Pound (Currency) Bercow, John
Dominic Cummings, Boris Johnson’s Rasputin, Is Feeling the Heat of Brexit

Sept. 8, 2019

Westlake Legal Group merlin_160145592_44fc0844-ff95-46ab-bae8-8162fd36bde2-threeByTwoSmallAt2X Brexit Live Updates: Lawmakers Order Release of Private No-Deal Correspondence Rudd, Amber (1963- ) Politics and Government Legislatures and Parliaments Leadsom, Andrea (1963- ) Johnson, Boris Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain Europe elections Conservative Party (Great Britain) British Pound (Currency) Bercow, John
Boris Johnson Finds His Party Loyalists Aren’t as Loyal as Trump’s

Sept. 8, 2019

Westlake Legal Group 07tory-1-threeByTwoSmallAt2X Brexit Live Updates: Lawmakers Order Release of Private No-Deal Correspondence Rudd, Amber (1963- ) Politics and Government Legislatures and Parliaments Leadsom, Andrea (1963- ) Johnson, Boris Great Britain Withdrawal from EU (Brexit) Great Britain Europe elections Conservative Party (Great Britain) British Pound (Currency) Bercow, John

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com