Tag Archives: asks

King Charles asks UK parliament to allow brother and sister to act in his place

LONDON (Reuters) – King Charles asked the British parliament on Monday to amend the law to allow two more of his siblings to act on his behalf in his absence, adding them to a group which currently includes his disgraced brother Prince Andrew.

In a statement read out on his behalf in the House of Lords, the upper chamber of parliament, Charles, who on Monday turned 74, asked for the number of Counsellors of State to be increased to include his sister Princess Anne and youngest brother Prince Edward.

The Counsellors, who can act on behalf of the monarch in his absence to carry out all but his most key roles such as appointing a new prime minister, are selected from his spouse and the four adults next in line to the throne.

That currently means that in addition to Charles’s wife Camilla and his eldest son and heir Prince William, the grouping comprises the king’s younger son Prince Harry, younger brother Prince Andrew, and Andrew’s eldest daughter Princess Beatrice.

That has led to criticism from some commentators because neither Andrew nor Harry carry out official royal roles any more.

Andrew was stripped of most of his titles and removed from royal duties due to a scandal over his friendship with the late U.S. financier Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted sex offender, and he later settled a U.S. lawsuit in which he was accused of sexual abuse.

Meanwhile, Harry stepped down from royal duties in 2020 and moved to California with his wife Meghan.

“To ensure continued efficiency of public business when I’m unavailable, such as while I’m undertaking official duties overseas, I confirm that I would be most content should parliament see fit for the number of people who may be called upon to act as Counsellors of State … to be increased to include my sister and brother,” the king’s statement said.

The change will require parliament to amend the terms of the Regency Act.

(Reporting by Michael Holden; Editing by Gareth Jones)

Read original article here

Canadian town asks SpaceRyde to stop loud rocket engine tests

A Canadian town of 13,000 people wants a rocket startup to stop testing its engines there.

Residents of Trent Hills, an Ontario town about two hours east of Toronto, are asking the privately funded SpaceRyde rocket company to stop engine testing in the region, and the municipality has sought legal advice to help bring about that outcome, according to local reports.

“The sound can be heard for many miles and startles anyone in the nearby vicinity. Horses may bolt, and pets are distressed. Wildlife is disrupted,” alleges a petition (opens in new tab) n Change.org that had been signed by more than 700 people as of Tuesday (Nov. 8). 

“People’s safety is at risk as the startling noise may cause anyone horseback riding, bicycling, motorcycling, working on a ladder or rooftop to momentarily lose concentration as they process the alarming sound,” adds the petition.

SpaceRyde’s head of marketing, Jen Scholten, declined to comment on the petition and the reports when asked by Space.com on Monday (Nov. 7). “A lot has happened since its posting,” Scholten said, but did not offer further specifics.

Related: Nova Scotia spaceport project aims to launch clean-tech rockets

In early October, the municipality of Trent Hills referred the situation to legal counsel, asking “the site owner and occupier [for] a commitment to voluntarily cease rocket engine testing at the site,” local newspaper Trent Hills Now (opens in new tab) wrote. 

The municipality alleges SpaceRyde did not disclose its plans for the engine testing in its planning application for putting a facility on the site, which is near two main county roads. The allegations have not been proven in court, and SpaceRyde has said in reports (opens in new tab) that the rocket engine testing was covered under an accessory use of the property.

An employee next to a hybrid rocket during the grand opening of SpaceRyde headquarters in Concord, Ontario, Canada, on June 21, 2022.  (Image credit: Cole Burston/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

In a comment to Trent Hills Now (opens in new tab) in September, SpaceRyde co-founder Sohrab Haghighat noted that the engine-testing noise of 100 decibels is brief, infrequent and equivalent to a large truck briefly revving its engine on a road.

SpaceRyde always notifies local residents before tests occur, Haghighat said, and added that one local man told him the noise “is the sound of progress. It’s the sound of Canada one day going to space (with) its own rocket.”

SpaceRyde opened a 25,000-square-foot facility (2,300 square meters) in Concord in June and invited media as well as Canadian astronaut Chris Hadfield. The privately funded company has about 30 employees, according to media reports, and was founded in 2018. It is aiming to create a three-stage rocket that would fly to the stratosphere aboard a balloon, before firing its engines.

The town’s dispute with SpaceRyde is taking place while Canada rapidly expands its rocket industry. Canada’s government is considering a spaceport in Nova Scotia that aims to start suborbital launches next year. Several companies in the Toronto region are ramping up manufacturing for rocketry following years or decades of making parts for U.S. companies.

The small space industry in Canada is also growing as larger projects take hold in the community, such as the Canadian Space Agency’s commitment to put astronauts and hardware on moon missions like NASA’s Artemis 2, which aims to send people on a trip around the moon in 2024.

Elizabeth Howell is the co-author of “Why Am I Taller (opens in new tab)?” (ECW Press, 2022; with Canadian astronaut Dave Williams), a book about space medicine. Follow her on Twitter @howellspace (opens in new tab). Follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom (opens in new tab) or Facebook (opens in new tab).



Read original article here

Twitter Asks Dozens Of Laid-Off Staff To Return, Cites ‘Mistake’: Report

After Twitter is now reaching out to dozens of employees who lost their jobs.

After Twitter Inc laid off roughly half its staff on Friday following Elon Musk’s $44 billion acquisition, the company is now reaching out to dozens of employees who lost their jobs and asking them to return, Bloomberg News reported on Sunday.

Some of those who are being asked to return were laid off by mistake. Others were let go before management realized that their work and experience may be necessary to build the new features Elon Musk envisions, the report said citing people familiar with the moves.

Twitter recently laid off 50% of its employees, including employees on the trust and safety team, the company’s head of safety and integrity Yoel Roth said in a tweet earlier this week.

Tweets by staff of the social media company said teams responsible for communications, content curation, human rights and machine learning ethics were among those gutted, as were some product and engineering teams.

Twitter on Saturday updated its app in Apple’s App Store to begin charging $8 for sought-after blue check verification marks, in Elon Musk’s first major revision of the social media platform.

Twitter did not immediately respond to Reuters’ request for comment.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Featured Video Of The Day

What Munugode Poll Result In Telangana Means For TRS, BJP And Congress

Read original article here

Rich Eisen Recaps TNF and Asks, “Is This the Best Eagles Team Ever?” | The Rich Eisen Show – The Rich Eisen Show

  1. Rich Eisen Recaps TNF and Asks, “Is This the Best Eagles Team Ever?” | The Rich Eisen Show The Rich Eisen Show
  2. Rich Eisen’s Top 5 Most Disappointing NFL Teams So Far | The Rich Eisen Show The Rich Eisen Show
  3. Rich Eisen Previews NFL Week 9’s Most Intriguing Matchups | The Rich Eisen Show The Rich Eisen Show
  4. ‘What’s More Likely’ – Rich Eisen Talks Raiders, Chargers, Bucs-Rams, Bills, Vikings & More The Rich Eisen Show
  5. The Eagles are Unbeaten But are They the NFL’s Best Team (Asking for Bills Mafia) | Rich Eisen Show The Rich Eisen Show
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

In final days, Evers asks Wis. voters to worry about Michels

Comment

MADISON, Wis. — Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers learned long ago to lean into his lack of charisma, and he was at it again in an appearance before the Milwaukee Rotary in the final weeks of the race. “I’m not the flashiest guy in the room,” Evers said, pivoting quickly to portray Republican Tim Michels as the opposite — a “radical” and “dangerous” force who could be a threat to democracy.

“Mr. Michels supports policies that, frankly, I don’t believe the people in Wisconsin support,” Evers, a Democrat, told the group’s members.

Michels’ own closing argument dismisses such concerns as he promises voters progress on economic issues, safer streets and better schools.

“From my very first day in office to my very last day in office … I am always going to be about the Wisconsin economy and the hardworking people in this state,” Michels said at a rally in Waukesha, the heart of the conservative Milwaukee suburbs.

As Evers and Michels near the end of a race polls show as about even, the stakes couldn’t be higher in swing-state Wisconsin, one of the nation’s few remaining presidential battlegrounds. Whoever wins will be in office for the 2024 election, with the power to certify the results of that race — or reshape the state’s election machinery ahead of it.

Evers certified President Joe Biden’s win; Michels, who is endorsed by former President Donald Trump, has said that “maybe” the 2020 election was stolen, giving credence to baseless claims of election fraud. Michels has also been unclear about whether he would accept 2024 results, wants to do away with the state’s bipartisan elections commission and has promised to sign a raft of bills Evers vetoed that would make it more difficult to vote absentee.

Democrats said Michels provided evidence of his intentions this week when he said at a campaign rally, “Republicans will never lose another election in Wisconsin after I’m elected governor.” Michels’ spokesperson Brian Fraley said Michels merely meant Republicans would be rewarded for doing a good job.

Evers, the low-key 70-year-old who spent his career in education before knocking off then-Gov. Scott Walker in 2018, is counting on voters liking his approach and wanting to keep him as a check on the Republican Legislature, which has increasingly swerved to the right. He’s already vetoed more bills than any governor in modern state history.

Evers’ style makes him a difficult candidate to defeat, said Reince Priebus, the former White House chief of staff under Trump and a former Wisconsin GOP state chairman.

“Milquetoast is tougher to beat,” Priebus said. “Sort of do-nothing people who don’t have personalities are tougher to beat.”

Evers is hoping Biden’s low approval ratings do not weigh him down. Evers is trying to become the first governor in 32 years to win reelection who is the same party as the sitting president.

The 60-year-old Michels, whose last run for office was for U.S. Senate in 2004, has cast himself throughout the race as a political outsider. He touts his time in the U.S. Army and his background helping to run a family construction business, Michels Corp., that employs more than 8,000 people and made him a multimillionaire.

More money has been spent on television ads by Republican and Democratic groups in Wisconsin’s governor’s race than any other in the country, according to AdImpact, which tracks campaign spending. Michels has largely self-financed his run, spending about $19 million through late October.

Evers has campaigned on his effort to “fix the damn roads,” improving access to rural broadband Internet services and signing a middle-class tax cut passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature. He also reminded voters of near-record low unemployment throughout his term and federal COVID-19 relief money he’s passed along to small businesses and law enforcement.

He wants to send local governments and schools more money, plans that have been thwarted by the Republican-controlled Legislature in the past. Evers proposed sending voters a tax rebate earlier this year, spending down some of the state’s budget surplus, but Republicans blocked it.

Michels has spoken generally about “massive” tax reform, reducing crime, “reforming” education and “election integrity,” but is often short of details on what exactly he wants to do or how he plans to do it. He accuses Evers of failing to improve school performance, being soft on crime and not doing more to quell violent protests that erupted in Kenosha in 2020 after the police shooting of Jacob Blake, a Black man. Evers counters that he did all that was asked by local law enforcement.

Michels also faults Evers for not doing more to open the state during the COVID-19 pandemic. Evers says he was saving lives by following the recommendations of public health officials, doctors and scientists.

Michels has said he would sign all the Republican-backed bills that Evers vetoed, which includes measures expanding gun rights and cutting unemployment benefits. Michels wants to expand the taxpayer-funded private school voucher program, a move that former state schools chief Evers says would destroy public education, and says he’s open to breaking the Milwaukee school district into smaller ones.

Michels also said he’s open to lowering the state’s income tax to a nearly flat rate, a move that economists blasted as primarily benefiting the rich.

Michels has been at perhaps his most unclear when it comes to the one issue Evers hopes voters have on their minds when casting their ballots — abortion.

As he was straining to win his primary this summer, Michels repeatedly said the state’s 1849 near-total abortion ban was the “exact mirror” of his position. But he flipped in September, saying he would sign a bill with exceptions for rape and incest.

As political surrogates flood the state in the race’s closing days there have been two notable absences — Biden and Trump. Evers rarely talks about the president and Michels doesn’t mention Trump. Polls show both are unpopular in the state.

Trump won Wisconsin in 2016, and lost it in 2020, both times by a margin of less than a single point. Evers defeated Walker in 2018 by 29,227 votes — just a little more than 1 percentage point.

Evers, when encouraging Democrats to vote early, says he always expected it to be a close election.

Michels jokingly told his supporters last week that he expects a “Wisconsin landslide.”

“Before you get too excited … a Wisconsin landslide probably means we’re winning by two or three points,” he said.

Learn more about the issues and factors at play in the midterms at https://apnews.com/hub/explaining-the-elections.

And follow the AP’s election coverage of the 2022 elections at https://apnews.com/hub/2022-midterm-elections.

Read original article here

Graham asks Supreme Court to intervene after election ruling

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham on Friday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene after a lower court ordered him to testify before a special grand jury in Georgia investigating whether then-President Donald Trump and others illegally tried to influence the 2020 election in the state.

In a filing with the court, attorneys for Graham, a top ally of Trump’s, sought to halt his possible testimony while he continues to appeal the order to appear before the Fulton County special grand jury.

Graham’s office described the South Carolina Republican’s filing as an attempt “to defend the Constitution and the institutional interest of the Senate.” The lower court’s ruling, Graham’s office said, “would significantly impact the ability of senators to gather information in connection with doing their job.”

The legal move is the latest in Graham’s ongoing fight to prevent his testimony in a case that has ensnared allies and associates of the former president. Some have already made their appearances before the special grand jury, including former New York mayor and Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani — who’s been told he could face criminal charges in the probe — attorneys John Eastman and Kenneth Chesebro, and former White House counsel Pat Cipollone.

Paperwork has been filed seeking testimony from others, including former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

Graham, a four-term senator who last won reelection in 2020, was first subpoenaed in July by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, who opened her investigation shortly after a recording of a January 2021 phone call between Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger was made public. In that call, Trump suggested Raffensperger could “find” the votes needed to overturn his narrow loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

Willis wants to question Graham about two phone calls he made to Raffensperger and his staff in the weeks after the election.

During those calls, Graham asked about “reexamining certain absentee ballots cast in Georgia in order to explore the possibility of a more favorable outcome for former President Donald Trump,” Willis wrote in a petition seeking to compel his testimony.

Graham also “made reference to allegations of widespread voter fraud in the November 2020 election in Georgia, consistent with public statements made by known affiliates of the Trump Campaign,” she wrote. She said in a hearing last month that Graham may be able to provide insight into the extent of any coordinated efforts to influence the results.

Raffensperger said he took Graham’s question about absentee ballots as a suggestion to toss out legally cast votes. Graham has dismissed that interpretation as “ridiculous.” Graham has also argued that the call was protected because he was asking questions to inform his decisions on voting to certify the 2020 election and future legislation.

Graham challenged his subpoena in federal court, but a judge refused to toss it out. Graham then appealed to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and a three-judge panel ruled Thursday in favor of Willis. Graham can appeal to the full court.

Graham’s lawyers argued that the Constitution’s speech or debate clause, which protects members of Congress from having to answer questions about legislative activity, shields him from having to testify.

Graham is represented by former White House counsel Don McGahn, who was involved in a lengthy court fight over a congressional subpoena for his own testimony related to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election. After years of back-and-forth, the two sides reached an agreement and McGahn answered investigators’ questions in a private session.

Graham’s filing Friday was directed to Justice Clarence Thomas, who handles emergency appeals from Georgia and several other Southern states. Thomas can act on his own or refer the matter to the full court.

Trump’s lawyers recently submitted a Supreme Court application to Thomas asking the Supreme Court to step into a legal fight over the classified documents seized during an FBI search of Trump’s Florida estate.

Thomas has previously come under scrutiny for his vote in a different Trump documents case, in which he was the only member of the court to vote against allowing the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot to obtain Trump records held by the National Archives and Records Administration.

Thomas’ wife, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, is a conservative activist and staunch Trump supporter who attended the Jan. 6 “Stop the Steal” rally on the Ellipse and wrote to Meadows in the weeks following the election encouraging him to work to overturn Biden’s victory and keep Trump in office.

She also contacted lawmakers in Arizona and Wisconsin in the weeks after the election, though no evidence has emerged that she contacted Georgia officials. Thomas was recently interviewed by the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection, and she stood by the false claim that the 2020 election was fraudulent, despite the fact that numerous federal and local officials, a long list of courts, top former campaign staffers and even Trump’s own attorney general have all said there is no evidence of mass fraud.

___

Meg Kinnard can be reached at http://twitter.com/MegKinnardAP

___

Mark Sherman in Washington contributed to this report.



Read original article here

Graham asks Supreme Court to block his testimony in Georgia 2020 election probe

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) asked the Supreme Court on Friday to block his required appearance before a Georgia grand jury investigating possible attempts by President Donald Trump and his allies to disrupt the state’s 2020 presidential election.

A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit on Thursday turned down Graham’s attempt to block a subpoena from Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis (D), in which the lawmaker claimed a sitting senator is shielded from testifying in such investigations.

A district court judge had said Graham must appear, but narrowed the range of questions that prosecutors can ask.

Without a stay of the lower courts’ rulings, Graham’s lawyer, Donald F. McGahn, told the Supreme Court, “Sen. Graham will suffer the precise injury he is appealing to prevent: being questioned in state court about his legislative activity and official acts.”

McGahn, a former counsel to Trump, asked Justice Clarence Thomas, the justice designated to hear emergency requests from the 11th Circuit, for at least a temporary stay. He said Graham could be required to testify “in less than a month.”

Thomas could act on the request on his own or refer the matter to the entire court.

Mar-a-Lago classified papers had sensitive secrets about Iran, China

The Atlanta grand jury investigating alleged 2020 presidential election interference has already heard testimony from several Trump lawyers, including Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman and Boris Epshteyn. Willis also wants to question former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.

Graham would be asked to testify about calls he made to Georgia election officials soon after Trump lost the election to Joe Biden. Prosecutors say Graham has “unique knowledge” about the Trump campaign and the “multistate, coordinated efforts to influence the results” of the election in Georgia and elsewhere.

But Graham has said his actions were legitimate legislative activity protected by the Constitution’s “speech or debate clause.” The senator’s lawyers have said that they have been informed that Graham is a witness — and not a target — of the investigation.

Last month, a district court judge said prosecutors could not question Graham about portions of the calls that were legislative fact-finding. But the judge said Willis’s team could explore coordination with the Trump campaign in its post-election efforts in Georgia, public statements regarding the 2020 election and any efforts to “cajole” or “exhort” Georgia election officials.

The status of key investigations involving Donald Trump

In its order Thursday, the 11th Circuit panel agreed with the lower court judge that those actions “could not qualify as legislative activities under any understanding of Supreme Court precedent.” Two of the three judges on the panel were nominated by Trump.

Graham may still assert his rights, the court noted, if there is a dispute about certain questions.

McGahn said the case should not proceed without the Supreme Court weighing in. “The district court’s refusal to quash or at least stay this impermissible questioning—and the Eleventh Circuit’s cursory acquiescence, while misquoting the ‘Speech or Debate Clause,’ failing to invoke or apply the standard for a stay, and without so much as mentioning sovereign immunity—cries out for review,” he wrote.

McGahn said the district attorney can continue the investigation without Graham by questioning “other witnesses who are not immunized by the United States Constitution.”

Read original article here

American Airlines passenger ‘WEDGED’ between ‘OBESE people’ on flight, asks for ‘reparations’

An American Airlines passenger is asking the company for “reparations” after tweeting that she was “wedged” between two “obese people” on a three-hour flight.

Sydney Watson, who describes herself as an Australian/American political commentator, posted to Twitter on Monday stating that she was “literally – WEDGED between two OBESE people on my flight.”

“This is absolutely NOT acceptable or okay. If fat people want to be fat, fine. But it is something else entirely when I’m stuck between you, with your arm rolls on my body, for 3 hours,” Watson said.

In the tweet thread, Watson said that “If you need a seat belt extender, you are TOO FAT TO BE ON A PLANE.”

AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT RETURNS TO AIRPORT AFTER FUMES FILLED THE CABIN, PROMPTING EVACUATION

American Airlines plane
(iStock)

“Buy two seats or don’t fly,” Watson added.

Watson said that the flight attendant on the plane “has asked me 4 times if I need anything” and gave her “the ‘this is f–ked’ pity expression.”

According to Watson, she asked a brother to one of the women  she was sitting next to if he’d like to “swap seats.”

“He says, ‘no. That’s okay :)’ …and then I started shrieking internally,” Watson said.

“I don’t care if this is mean. My entire body is currently being touched against my wishes. I can’t even put the arm rests down on either side because there’s no f-ing room. I’m sick of acting like fatness to this extent is normal. Let me assure you, it is not” she said.

JUST ‘PLANE’ BAD ETIQUETTE: AIRLINE PASSENGER DRAPES HER LONG, THICK HAIR OVER THE BACK OF HER SEAT

American Airlines plane
(AP)

After calling out American Airlines, the company responded, tweeting: “Our passengers come in all different sizes and shapes. We’re sorry you were uncomfortable on your flight.”

“Holy s–t,” Watson said of American Airlines response to her experience.

“This is really their official reply to me being sandwiched between two obese humans,” Watson said. “So, I’m expected to have only a quarter of a seat when I fly? I just experienced getting sweat on, touched without my consent, smacked in the face and subjected to hours of no personal space. And your response is essentially ‘too bad’? Is that what I’m getting here?,” Watson said.

At one point during the flight, Watson said that she “elected to close my tray table and hold my cup of tea between my teeth because it’s jabbing her belly and I can’t get it down properly.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

An American Airlines jet at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport. Travel experts say it's usually safer to book flights directly through the airlines than through a third-party vendor.
(Max Faulkner/Fort Worth Star-Telegram/Tribune News Service via Getty Images)

Responding to media coverage of her experience, Watson said that she stands behind “everything I said” and tweeted “I’d like some reparations pls.”

Fox News has reached out to American Airlines and Watson for further comment.

Read original article here

Justice Dept. asks appeals court to end Mar-a-Lago special master

The Justice Department asked a federal appeals court to reverse a Florida judge’s order appointing a special master to review documents seized from Donald Trump’s home and club, arguing that the former president had no right to possess the seized materials after he left office and that there was no legal basis for an outside review.

While prosecutors had already appealed portions of U.S. District Court Judge Aileen M. Cannon’s special master appointment, Friday was the first time they appealed the entire court order. If the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit sides with the government, the special master’s review would stop — and criminal investigators once again would be permitted to access thousands of unclassified documents that FBI agents took from Mar-a-Lago in August.

The government said in its appeal that those unclassified documents are critical to its ongoing criminal probe of possible mishandling of classified material, obstruction and destruction of government records, and could help them conduct witness interviews and corroborate evidence.

Special masters and Trump’s Mar-a-Lago documents: What you need to know

“In short, the unclassified records that were stored collectively with records bearing classification markings may identify who was responsible for the unauthorized retention of these records, the relevant time periods in which records were created or accessed, and who may have accessed or seen them,” the filing reads.

The Atlanta-based appeals court said Trump’s lawyers have until Nov. 10 to file their response. As part of their appeal, Justice Department lawyers updated the number of documents taken from Mar-a-Lago, which was earlier said to be about 11,000 but now is about 13,000.

Trump’s lawyers asked two weeks after the search for an outside expert to sift through the seized materials — including 103 documents marked classified — to determine whether any are protected by attorney-client or executive privilege, and should be shielded from criminal investigators.

Witness who says Trump asked him to move boxes was former White House employee

Prosecutors argued in Friday’s 53-page filing that Trump has no right to assert either form of privilege over the government documents, rendering the review by a Brooklyn-based federal judge, Raymond J. Dearie, unnecessary.

Cannon had originally ordered the special master to review both the classified and nonclassified materials and barred the Justice Department from using any of the documents in its criminal investigation until that review was done. A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit overturned part of that decision, which removed the classified materials from Dearie’s review and allowed investigators to use those documents right away.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court rejected a petition from Trump’s lawyers that asked it to review part of the appeals court’s decision on narrow, technical grounds.

Cannon has said Dearie would have until December to complete his review of the nonclassified documents.

Read original article here

U.S. Treasury asks major banks if it should buy back bonds

Oct 14 (Reuters) – The U.S. Treasury Department is asking primary dealers of U.S. Treasuries whether the government should buy back some of its bonds to improve liquidity in the $24 trillion market.

Liquidity in the world’s largest bond market has deteriorated this year partly because of rising volatility as the Federal Reserve rapidly raises interest rates to bring down inflation.

The central bank, which had bought government bonds during the COVID-19 pandemic to stimulate the economy, is now also reducing the size of its balance sheet by letting its bonds reach maturity without buying more, a move which investors fear could exacerbate price swings.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

The Treasuries market has swelled from $5 trillion in 2007 and $17 trillion in early 2020, while banks are facing more regulatory constraints that they say make it more difficult to intermediate trades.

The Treasury is asking dealers about the specifics of how buybacks could work “in order to better assess the merits and limitations of implementing a buyback program.”

These include how much it would need to buy in so-called off-the-run Treasuries, which are older and less liquid issues, in order to “meaningfully” improve liquidity in these securities.

The Treasury is also querying whether reduced volatility in the issuance of Treasury bills as a result of buybacks made for cash and maturity management purposes could be a “meaningful benefit for Treasury or investors.”

It is further asking about the costs and benefits of funding repurchases of older debt with increased issuance of so-called on-the-run securities, which are the most liquid and current issue.

“The Treasury is acknowledging the decline in liquidity and they’re hearing what the street has been saying,” said Calvin Norris, portfolio manager & US rates strategist at Aegon Asset Management. “I think they’re investigating whether some of these measures could help to improve the situation.”

He said buying back off-the-run Treasuries could potentially increase liquidity of outstanding issues and buyback mechanisms could help contain price swings for Treasury bills, which are short-term securities.

However, when it comes to longer-dated government bonds, investors have noted that a major constraint for liquidity is the result of a rule introduced by the Federal Reserve following the 2008 financial crisis which requires dealers to hold capital against Treasuries, limiting their ability to take on risk, particularly at times of high volatility.

“The underlying cause of the lack of liquidity is that banks – due to their supplementary leverage ratios being capped – don’t have the ability to take on more Treasuries. I view that as the most significant issue right now,” said Norris.

The Fed in April 2020 temporarily excluded Treasuries and central bank deposits from the supplementary leverage ratio, a capital adequacy measure, as an excess of bank deposits and Treasury bonds raised bank capital requirements on what are viewed as safe assets. But it let that exclusion expire and big banks had to resume holding an extra layer of loss-absorbing capital against Treasuries and central bank deposits.

The Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee, a group of banks and investors that advise the government on its funding, has said that Treasury buybacks could enhance market liquidity and dampen swings in Treasury bill issuance and cash balances.

It added, however, that the need to finance buybacks with increased issuance of new securities could increase yields and be at odds with the Treasury’s strategy of predictable debt management if the repurchases were too variable in size or timing.

The Treasury is posing the questions as part of its regular survey of dealers before each of its quarterly refunding announcements.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Reporting By Karen Brettell and Davide Barbuscia; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama and Chris Reese

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

The Ultimate News Site