free gift code jili178

Knicks survive physical game with Magic, win sixth straight

A third of Brits will row about their baubles this , a poll found. A shocking 34 per cent of people said they row about Christmas decorations - especially where to put their baubles. A further half of Brits - 48 per cent - also said they row about the Christmas decorations because their partner doesn’t do enough to help. Another 26 per cent get into rows with partners about what present to give friends and loved ones. And 18 per cent get into arguments with their other half over how much to spend over the festive season on gifts and entertaining The dating site Illicit Encounters asked 2,000 UK adults what the biggest cause of stress with partners is over Christmas to come up with the findings. Spokeswoman Jessica Leoni said: "Who would have thought putting up the fairy lights and placing the Christmas baubles could be the cause of so much conflict? "But it appears bickering about decorations is almost as much a Christmas tradition as mince pies and bad cracker jokes. "Thousands are having tinsel tiffs every year whether its about classic garish decorations are something more classy." The poll also found a further 11 per cent of couples row over the cooking and how to include vegetarian options in order to keep all the family happy. Another six per cent fall out over visiting relatives and how long to stay. A further five per cent said they fall out over other Christmas related issues like what to watch on TV and who has to go alcohol free if driving on a night out. Come and join The Daily Star on , the social media site set up by ex-Twitter boss Jack Dorsey. It's now the new go-to place for content after a mass exodus of the Elon Musk-owned Twitter/X. Fear not, we're not leaving , but we are jumping on the bandwagon. So come find our new account on , and see us social better than the rest. You can also learn more about The Daily Star team in what Bluesky calls a . So what are you waiting for?! Let's

Microsoft's chief commercial officer sells $10.4 million in stockLive Music Market size is set to grow by USD 35.56 billion from 2024-2028, growing demand for live music experiences to boost the market growth, Technavio

Adams has 19 as CSU Northridge defeats Denver 89-60

Brock Bowers' record-setting day pushes Raiders to win vs. Saints: Key takeawaysDragon Quest III HD-2D Remake Review

Photographers captured a deeply divisive election, hurricanes and fires, and campus protests.Georgia quarterback Carson Beck announces plan to enter NFL draft after season-ending elbow injuryCarter's single White House term still stirs controversy after more than 40 years

Busy and full: highlights of Jimmy Carter’s life

‘A Very Special Day For All’: Trump Returns To World Stage Joining Reopening Celebrations At Notre Dame Cathedral

By John Hanna, The Associated Press TOPEKA, Kan. — Republicans made claims about illegal voting by noncitizens a centerpiece of their 2024 campaign messaging and plan to push legislation in the new Congress requiring voters to provide proof of U.S. citizenship. Yet there’s one place with a GOP supermajority where linking voting to citizenship appears to be a nonstarter: Kansas. That’s because the state has been there, done that, and all but a few Republicans would prefer not to go there again. Kansas imposed a proof-of-citizenship requirement over a decade ago that grew into one of the biggest political fiascos in the state in recent memory. The law, passed by the state Legislature in 2011 and implemented two years later, ended up blocking the voter registrations of more than 31,000 U.S. citizens who were otherwise eligible to vote. That was 12% of everyone seeking to register in Kansas for the first time. Federal courts ultimately declared the law an unconstitutional burden on voting rights, and it hasn’t been enforced since 2018. Kansas provides a cautionary tale about how pursuing an election concern that in fact is extremely rare risks disenfranchising a far greater number of people who are legally entitled to vote. The state’s top elections official, Secretary of State Scott Schwab, championed the idea as a legislator and now says states and the federal government shouldn’t touch it. “Kansas did that 10 years ago,” said Schwab, a Republican. “It didn’t work out so well.” Steven Fish, a 45-year-old warehouse worker in eastern Kansas, said he understands the motivation behind the law. In his thinking, the state was like a store owner who fears getting robbed and installs locks. But in 2014, after the birth of his now 11-year-old son inspired him to be “a little more responsible” and follow politics, he didn’t have an acceptable copy of his birth certificate to get registered to vote in Kansas. “The locks didn’t work,” said Fish, one of nine Kansas residents who sued the state over the law. “You caught a bunch of people who didn’t do anything wrong.” Kansas' experience appeared to receive little if any attention outside the state as Republicans elsewhere pursued proof-of-citizenship requirements this year. Arizona enacted a requirement this year, applying it to voting for state and local elections but not for Congress or president. The Republican-led U.S. House passed a proof-of-citizenship requirement in the summer and plans to bring back similar legislation after the GOP won control of the Senate in November. In Ohio, the Republican secretary of state revised the form that poll workers use for voter eligibility challenges to require those not born in the U.S. to show naturalization papers to cast a regular ballot. A federal judge declined to block the practice days before the election. Also, sizable majorities of voters in Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Carolina and the presidential swing states of North Carolina and Wisconsin were inspired to amend their state constitutions' provisions on voting even though the changes were only symbolic. Provisions that previously declared that all U.S. citizens could vote now say that only U.S. citizens can vote — a meaningless distinction with no practical effect on who is eligible. To be clear, voters already must attest to being U.S. citizens when they register to vote and noncitizens can face fines, prison and deportation if they lie and are caught. “There is nothing unconstitutional about ensuring that only American citizens can vote in American elections,” U.S. Rep. Chip Roy, of Texas, the leading sponsor of the congressional proposal, said in an email statement to The Associated Press. After Kansas residents challenged their state’s law, both a federal judge and federal appeals court concluded that it violated a law limiting states to collecting only the minimum information needed to determine whether someone is eligible to vote. That’s an issue Congress could resolve. Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach, a strong support of requiring new voters to provide proof of their U.S. citizenship when registering, answers questions during an interview with The Associated Press, Wednesday, Dec. 18, 2024, in his office in Topeka, Kan. (AP Photo/John Hanna) AP The courts ruled that with “scant” evidence of an actual problem, Kansas couldn’t justify a law that kept hundreds of eligible citizens from registering for every noncitizen who was improperly registered. A federal judge concluded that the state’s evidence showed that only 39 noncitizens had registered to vote from 1999 through 2012 — an average of just three a year. In 2013, then-Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, a Republican who had built a national reputation advocating tough immigration laws, described the possibility of voting by immigrants living in the U.S. illegally as a serious threat. He was elected attorney general in 2022 and still strongly backs the idea, arguing that federal court rulings in the Kansas case “almost certainly got it wrong.” Kobach also said a key issue in the legal challenge — people being unable to fix problems with their registrations within a 90-day window — has probably been solved. “The technological challenge of how quickly can you verify someone’s citizenship is getting easier,” Kobach said. “As time goes on, it will get even easier.” The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the Kansas case in 2020. But in August, it split 5-4 in allowing Arizona to continue enforcing its law for voting in state and local elections while a legal challenge goes forward. Seeing the possibility of a different Supreme Court decision in the future, U.S. Rep.-elect Derek Schmidt says states and Congress should pursue proof-of-citizenship requirements. Schmidt was the Kansas attorney general when his state’s law was challenged. “If the same matter arose now and was litigated, the facts would be different,” he said in an interview. But voting rights advocates dismiss the idea that a legal challenge would turn out differently. Mark Johnson, one of the attorneys who fought the Kansas law, said opponents now have a template for a successful court fight. “We know the people we can call,” Johnson said. “We know that we’ve got the expert witnesses. We know how to try things like this.” He predicted “a flurry — a landslide — of litigation against this.” Initially, the Kansas requirement’s impacts seemed to fall most heavily on politically unaffiliated and young voters. As of fall 2013, 57% of the voters blocked from registering were unaffiliated and 40% were under 30. But Fish was in his mid-30s, and six of the nine residents who sued over the Kansas law were 35 or older. Three even produced citizenship documents and still didn’t get registered, according to court documents. “There wasn’t a single one of us that was actually an illegal or had misinterpreted or misrepresented any information or had done anything wrong,” Fish said. He was supposed to produce his birth certificate when he sought to register in 2014 while renewing his Kansas driver’s license at an office in a strip mall in Lawrence. A clerk wouldn’t accept the copy Fish had of his birth certificate. He still doesn’t know where to find the original, having been born on an Air Force base in Illinois that closed in the 1990s. Several of the people joining Fish in the lawsuit were veterans, all born in the U.S., and Fish said he was stunned that they could be prevented from registering. Kansas Secretary of State Scott Schwab gavels a meeting of the state’s presidential electors in the state Senate chamber to a close, Tuesday, Dec. 17, 2024, at the Statehouse in Topeka, Kan. Schwab championed a proof-of-citizenship requirement for new voters as a legislator but now says states shouldn’t enact one. (AP Photo/John Hanna) AP Liz Azore, a senior adviser to the nonpartisan Voting Rights Lab, said millions of Americans haven’t traveled outside the U.S. and don’t have passports that might act as proof of citizenship, or don’t have ready access to their birth certificates. She and other voting rights advocates are skeptical that there are administrative fixes that will make a proof-of-citizenship law run more smoothly today than it did in Kansas a decade ago. “It’s going to cover a lot of people from all walks of life,” Avore said. “It’s going to be disenfranchising large swaths of the country.” Associated Press writer Julie Carr Smyth in Columbus, Ohio, contributed to this report. More in Nation-World News Netanyahu is getting prostate removed as he faces crises on multiple fronts Tornadoes in Texas and Mississippi kill 2, injure 6 as severe weather system moves east 179 killed as plane crashes and bursts into flames while landing in South Korea

the peanut farmer who tried to restore virtue to the White House after the Watergate scandal and Vietnam War, then rebounded from a landslide defeat to become a global advocate of human rights and democracy, has died. . The Carter Center said the 39th president died Sunday, , at his home in Plains, Georgia, where he and his wife, who died in November 2023, lived most of their lives. A moderate Democrat, as a little-known Georgia governor with a broad grin, effusive Baptist faith and technocratic plans for efficient government. His promise to never deceive the American people resonated after Richard Nixon’s disgrace and U.S. defeat in southeast Asia. “If I ever lie to you, if I ever make a misleading statement, don’t vote for me. I would not deserve to be your president,” Carter said. Carter’s victory over Republican Gerald Ford, whose fortunes fell after pardoning Nixon, came amid Cold War pressures, turbulent oil markets and social upheaval over race, women’s rights and America’s role in the world. His achievements included brokering Mideast peace by keeping Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin at Camp David for 13 days in 1978. But his coalition splintered under double-digit inflation and the 444-day hostage crisis in Iran. His negotiations ultimately brought all the hostages home alive, but in a final insult, Iran didn’t release them until the inauguration of Ronald Reagan, who had trounced him in the 1980 election. Humbled and back home in Georgia, Carter said his faith demanded that he keep doing whatever he could, for as long as he could, to try to make a difference. He and Rosalynn co-founded in 1982 and spent the next 40 years traveling the world as peacemakers, human rights advocates and champions of democracy and public health. Our founder, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, passed away this afternoon in Plains, Georgia. Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002, Carter helped ease nuclear tensions in North and South Korea, avert a U.S. invasion of Haiti and and Sudan. By 2022, the center had monitored at least 113 elections around the world. Carter was determined to as one of many health initiatives. the Carters built homes with Habitat for Humanity. The common observation that he was better as an ex-president rankled Carter. His allies were pleased that he lived long enough to see biographers and historians and declare it more impactful than many understood at the time. Propelled in 1976 by voters in Iowa and then across the South, Carter ran a no-frills campaign. Americans were captivated by the earnest engineer, and while an election-year Playboy interview drew snickers when he said he “had looked on many women with lust. I’ve committed adultery in my heart many times,” voters tired of political cynicism found it endearing. The first family set an informal tone in the White House, carrying their own luggage, trying to silence the Marine Band’s traditional “Hail to the Chief” and enrolling daughter, Amy, in public schools. Carter was lampooned for wearing a cardigan and urging Americans to turn down their thermostats. But Carter set the stage for an economic revival and sharply reduced America’s dependence on foreign oil by deregulating the energy industry along with airlines, trains and trucking. He established the departments of Energy and Education, appointed record numbers of women and nonwhites to federal posts, preserved millions of acres of Alaskan wilderness and pardoned most Vietnam draft evaders. , he ended most support for military dictators and took on bribery by multinational corporations by signing the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. He persuaded the Senate to ratify the Panama Canal treaties and normalized relations with China, an outgrowth of Nixon’s outreach to Beijing. But crippling turns in foreign affairs took their toll. When OPEC hiked crude prices, making drivers line up for gasoline as inflation spiked to 11%, Carter tried to encourage Americans to overcome “a crisis of confidence.” Many voters lost confidence in Carter instead after the infamous address that media dubbed his “malaise” speech, even though he never used that word. After Carter reluctantly agreed to admit the exiled Shah of Iran to the U.S. for medical treatment, the American Embassy in Tehran was overrun in 1979. Negotiations to quickly free the hostages broke down, and then eight Americans died when a top-secret military rescue attempt failed. Carter also had to reverse course on the SALT II nuclear arms treaty after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979. Though historians would later credit Carter’s diplomatic efforts for hastening the end of the Cold war, Republicans labeled his soft power weak. Reagan’s “make America great again” appeals resonated, and he beat Carter in all but six states. Born Oct. 1, 1924, James Earl Carter Jr. in 1946, the year he graduated from the Naval Academy. He brought his young family back to Plains after his father died, abandoning his Navy career, and . Carter reached the state Senate in 1962. After rural white and Black voters elected him governor in 1970, he drew national attention by declaring that “the time for racial discrimination is over.” Carter published more than 30 books and remained influential as his center turned its democracy advocacy onto U.S. politics, monitoring an audit of Georgia’s 2020 presidential election results. After Carter said he felt “perfectly at ease with whatever comes.” “I’ve had a wonderful life,” “I’ve had thousands of friends, I’ve had an exciting, adventurous and gratifying existence.” ___Microsoft EVP Takeshi Numoto sells $414,720 in stock

Britain's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs David Lammy has hailed the bold economic reforms of Dr Manmohan Singh as a legacy which continues to shape modern India. In a social media tribute to the former prime minister who was cremated in New Delhi on Saturday, David Lammy also credited Singh for laying the foundations of the "thriving" bilateral partnership between India and the UK. "Dr Manmohan Singh's bold economic reforms transformed India's economy," Mr Lammy said in a post on X on Friday evening. "His legacy continues to shape modern India, and his vision laid the foundations for today's thriving UK-India partnership. My deepest condolences to his family and the Indian people," he said. Manmohan Singh, who was prime minister between 2004 and 2014 and finance minister before that, has been widely hailed the world over as the architect of India's economic liberalisation. He died aged 92 and was laid to rest with full state honours in a ceremony attended by leading political dignitaries and included a 21-gun salute. Following his death on Thursday night, the government declared seven days of national mourning. Earlier, British High Commissioner to India Lindy Cameron took to social media to pay tribute to "a great Prime Minister, Finance Minister and global statesman who advanced India's interests through bold economic reforms and played a key role in putting India in its rightful place on the world stage and stabilising the global economy after the financial crisis". "The UK will always be proud of his invaluable partnership with three UK Prime Ministers, and proud of him as an alumnus of two of our great universities. My thoughts and wishes are with his family and the people of India," she said. Dr Singh's tenure overlapped with Labour prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown and Conservative David Cameron, who later wrote in his memoir that he "got on well" with this "saintly man" who was robust on the threats India faced. "On a later visit he told me that another terrorist attack like that in Mumbai in July 2011, and India would have to take military action against Pakistan," notes the former UK PM in 'For the Record', published in 2019. The Guardian' newspaper referenced Dr Singh's "trademark sky-blue turbans and home-spun white kurta pyjamas" in its obituary. "Singh, called India's 'reluctant prime minister' due to his shyness and preference for being behind the scenes, was considered an unlikely choice to lead the world's biggest democracy. But when Congress leader Sonia Gandhi led her party to a surprise victory in 2004, she turned to Singh to be prime minister," the newspaper notes. The BBC, in its obituary, hailed Dr Singh as one of India's longest-serving prime ministers who was considered the "architect of key liberalising economic reforms, as premier from 2004-2014 and before that as finance minister". "In his maiden speech as finance minister he famously quoted Victor Hugo, saying that 'no power on Earth can stop an idea whose time has come'. That served as a launchpad for an ambitious and unprecedented economic reform programme: he cut taxes, devalued the rupee, privatised state-run companies and encouraged foreign investment," reads the report. (This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.) Track Latest News Live on NDTV.com and get news updates from India and around the world

A look back at 2024 in photos

President of Panama José Raúl Mulino on Thursday ruled out any possible discussions with President-elect Donald Trump about control of the Panama Canal or any reduction in the transit fees imposed to U.S. ships that pass through it, asserting that there is “nothing to talk about” regarding the matter. The Panamanian president also refuted Trump’s claims of the presence of Chinese soldiers in the trade route, describing it as “nonsense.” Mulino made the assertions during a weekly press conference in which he stated he will wait for Trump to take office on January 20, 2025, before talking with the U.S. president-elect to reach agreements on issues of common interest, such as migration or terrorism — but he stressed there is no possibility of negotiating the “reality” of the status of the Panama Canal: “There is no possibility for this president to talk about anything that seeks to rethink the legal-political reality of the Panama Canal in Panamanian hands,” Mulino said . “If that is where the intention to talk comes from, there is nothing to talk about.” “The canal is Panamanian and belongs to Panamanians, there is no possibility of opening any kind of conversation about this reality, which has cost the country tears, sweat and blood,” he added. Last week, President-elect Trump started an ongoing debate over the Panama Canal, built by the United States in 1914 and whose control was handed over to Panama in 1999 as per the terms of a deal agreement signed by both nations under the administration of former U.S. President Jimmy Carter in 1977. Trump, through a Truth Social post, expressed that the United States should take back control of the Canal because of the “exorbitant” transit fees imposed to U.S. ships, which Trump described as a “rip-off.” In another Truth Social post , dated Wednesday, Trump asserted that Chinese soldiers are “lovingly, but illegally” operating the Panama Canal. Mulino dismissed Trump’s recent accusations as “nonsense,” claiming there is no foreign interference from China or any other country in the trade route while cataloging the U.S. President-elect’s claims as possible “geopolitical fears.” “There is absolutely no Chinese interference or participation in anything related to the Panama Canal. There are no soldiers from that nation in the canal, for God’s sake,” Mulino said. “There are no Chinese in the canal, as simple as that. Neither Chinese nor any other power.” “The whole world is free to visit the canal. If you find a Chinese soldier in the canal, personally, I will recognize President-elect Donald Trump for what he has said on that subject,” he added. Panama formally established diplomatic relations with China in June 2017 under the administration of President Juan Carlos Varela, cutting ties with Taiwan at the same time and embracing the Chinese Communist Party’s “One-China Principle,” which states that there is only one China in the world and Taiwan is a “province” of China. Mulino also refuted Trump’s claims that U.S. ships are “ripped off” with the Canal’s transit fees and ruled out any possible reduction in the fees. According to Mulino, Panama was paid a “pittance” from the Panama Canal up until the country was given control of the trade route. “In the canal, tolls are not set at the whim of the president or the [Canal’s] administrator. There is an established process for setting canal tolls that has been respected from day one to date. It is a public and open process,” Mulino said. “Since 1914, the toll paid by warships of any nation, including the United States, is calculated based on the tons of water displacement, as everyone else pays. There is no discrimination against any warship, whether from the United States or any other country,” he added . The United States reportedly accounts for 74 percent of all cargo transiting through the Panama Canal, with China amounting to 21 percent, followed by Japan, South Korea, and Chile. Jorge Quijano, former administrator of the Panama Canal, reportedly stated that the trade route’s toll system “is differentiated by market segment, and the country of origin, destination or ship registration is not important.” Quijano added that any increase in tolls and transit tariffs “must be analyzed based on our competitiveness as a country.” Quijano said that the Americans “have greatly benefited from the canal, and now, under these almost 25 years of Panamanian administration, the canal seeks to ensure that its benefits go to Panamanians.”Polls close in Ghana's general election overshadowed by worst economic crisis in a generation