• Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's new arrangements 'to be reviewed in 12 months'

    Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's new arrangements are set to be reviewed in 12 months' time. The review of the new approach is likely to include Queen Elizabeth, Prince Charles, Prince William and Prince Harry, all of whom attended a recent summit to discuss the issue at Sandringham. Following the meeting, it was announced that Prince Harry and Meghan are set to drop their HRH titles.

  • House Files Brief Arguing for Trump’s Removal From Office

    (Bloomberg) -- Donald Trump’s attorneys and the House Democrats managing his impeachment trial filed their first formal briefs in the case on Saturday, pursuing familiar arguments aimed more at influencing the voters than the senators who will be his jurors.In a 111-page trial brief, the seven Democratic impeachment managers say the president’s pattern of misconduct made him a “threat to the nation and the rule of law.” An initial six-page response from Trump’s own lawyers takes aim at the House Democrats who investigated Trump, calling the impeachment probe a “brazen and unlawful” attempt to overturn the 2016 election.The Senate will begin its first impeachment trial in 20 years on Tuesday, a process that will end with the lawmakers rendering judgment on whether Trump’s presidency should be ended over his efforts to force Ukraine’s government to open investigations into one of his political rivals. The Republican-led Senate is exceedingly unlikely to convict Trump, but the House managers are also targeting undecided voters, with polls showing Americans leaning toward replacing the president in November’s elections.Democrats called on senators to conduct a fair trial as part of the oath they took this week to “do impartial justice.”“President Trump has demonstrated his continued willingness to corrupt free and fair elections, betray our national security, and subvert the constitutional separation of powers-all for personal gain,” the brief says. “It is imperative that the Senate convict and remove him from office now, and permanently bar him from holding federal office.”The White House declined to participate in the House’s investigation, so their brief filing is the first time that Trump’s counsel addressed the merits of the case against him, rather than simply criticizing the process.‘Dangerous Attack’The president’s legal team, including Ken Starr, who served as independent counsel for the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, wrote that the articles are unconstitutional and that Trump “did nothing wrong.”“The articles of impeachment submitted by House Democrats are a dangerous attack on the right of the American people to freely choose their president,” Trump’s team said.House Democrats dismissed Trump’s response and said it demonstrates why he should be removed from office.“Rather than honestly address the evidence against him, the president’s latest filing makes the astounding claim that pressuring Ukraine to interfere in our election by announcing investigations that would damage a political opponent and advance his re-election is the president’s way of fighting corruption,” the seven impeachment managers said in a joint statement Saturday night. “It is not. Rather it is corruption itself, naked, unapologetic and insidious.”The White House is slated to file its more complete trial brief on Monday at noon, which will expand on the arguments in Saturday’s six-page filing.The president’s legal team will be led by White House counsel Pat Cipollone and the Trump’s private attorney, Jay Sekulow. Other members of the team expect to give discrete presentations on specific topics.Democratic officials close to the House impeachment managers refuted the White House’s claims Saturday that Democrats are trying to undo his election, saying Trump’s conduct is exactly what the framers of the Constitution had in mind when they set up the impeachment process. The officials also said that the House inquiry afforded Trump the same chances to defend himself as previous presidential impeachments.The House’s prosecution team -- seven impeachment managers led by Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff -- will have the option to respond to Trump’s initial legal arguments before the Senate reconvenes on Tuesday for the trial.Pressure CampaignMost of the evidence in Saturday’s House filing came from weeks of closed door depositions and open hearings with witnesses who participated in the planning for -- and fallout from -- a pressure campaign from Trump associates to get Ukraine to announce an investigation of Joe Biden and his son, Hunter.Trump and his allies frequently claim that Biden acted corruptly to protect Burisma, a Ukranian gas company where his son was a board member. The impeachment managers refute that claim in the filing.The theory is “baseless” and there is “no credible evidence” to support the allegation that Biden acted improperly when he encouraged Ukraine to remove a prosecutor who was facing corruption accusations, the brief said. Biden was carrying out official U.S. policy, a view that was shared by European allies and the International Monetary Fund, according to the filing.As leverage to demand an investigation of the Bidens, the White House blocked nearly $400 million in congressionally approved security aid for Ukraine, as well as a White House meeting sought by newly elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. The brief includes evidence from witnesses making those connections as part of a quid pro quo.The report also includes a finding released Thursday by the Government Accountability Office that Trump’s withholding of military assistance for Ukraine violated federal law.The managers quoted the nonpartisan congressional watchdog’s statement that “faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law.Senate Democrats said last week the GAO report bolsters their push to subpoena documents and witnesses that are relevant to the withholding of military aid.‘Ominous Pattern’The impeachment managers cite the administration directive for current and former officials to not participate in the House inquiry, as well as Trump’s own statements, as evidence of obstruction. They point to the 12 Trump officials who declined to appear for requested testimony, “nine of whom did so in defiance of duly authorized subpoenas.”The brief also accuses Trump of “intimidation tactics” against the witnesses who did appear, as well as “sustained attacks” on the intelligence community whistle-blower who filed a complaint about Trump’s actions regarding Ukraine.This is part of an “ominous pattern” of behavior for the president, the House prosecutors said in the brief, pointing to the way Trump responded to former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s nearly two-year investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 election.“Allowing this pattern to continue without repercussion would send the clear message that President Trump is correct in his view that no governmental body can hold him accountable for wrongdoing,” according to the brief. “That view is erroneous and exceptionally dangerous.“Although the articles of impeachment don’t rely on evidence from Mueller’s report, the House managers drew parallels between Trump’s behavior in the two episodes. Both included Trump associates in contact with a foreign power regarding a U.S. election, as well the president’s refusal to engage with investigators probing those interactions.“Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation -- like the House’s impeachment inquiry -- sought to uncover whether President Trump coordinated with a foreign government in order to obtain an improper advantage during a Presidential election,” the managers said.Obstruction of JusticeMueller said there was not enough evidence that the Trump campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy with Russia regarding the 2016 election. His report highlighted several episodes that could amount to obstruction of justice, but it left it up to Congress to weigh the severity of those offenses.”President Trump repeatedly used his powers of office to undermine and derail the Mueller investigation, particularly after learning that he was personally under investigation for obstruction of justice,” the brief says.The case that House prosecutors sent to the Senate references new evidence that wasn’t part of the impeachment inquiry, including material from Lev Parnas, an associate of Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani.Parnas, who was arrested in October and indicted on campaign finance violations, this month provided House committees with documents to reinforce accusations that the president was personally involved in efforts to pressure Ukraine to conduct investigations that would benefit him politically.At least four of the impeachment managers, including Schiff, are scheduled to appear Sunday on political talk shows. All of them will be back in Washington on Sunday, and they’ll do a walk-through of the Senate chamber Monday on the eve of the trial, the officials said.(Updates with impeachment managers response starting in ninth paragraph)\--With assistance from Laura Davison.To contact the reporters on this story: Billy House in Washington at bhouse5@bloomberg.net;Justin Sink in Washington at jsink1@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Kevin Whitelaw at kwhitelaw@bloomberg.net, Anna EdgertonFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.

  • Chinese Scientists Are Buying Return Tickets

    (Bloomberg Opinion) -- China’s most sprawling effort at revealing the universe’s deepest mysteries is a 1,640-foot-wide silver dish that settles comfortably between hills in a remote part of the country’s southwest. The Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical Telescope is more sensitive than any telescope on Earth. This month, the Chinese government announced that it had begun formal operations. FAST is expected to further human understanding of gravitational waves and cosmic rays, and - just possibly - detect extraterrestrial communications. But for the Chinese government, which spent $180 million on the massive instrument, the most important return on its investment will be the homecoming of Chinese scientists who have been living and researching abroad.According to a recent study in the journal Science and Public Policy, it’s been happening for a while. The number of Chinese scientists who departed the U.S. for China in 2017 was 69% higher than 2010 departures. The factors driving this phenomenon are complex but come down to the Chinese government’s decades-long investments in scientific education, research and facilities like FAST. Those efforts are likely to accelerate the return of China’s scientists in coming years, and they will bring economic, geopolitical and cultural benefits with them. In time, they could challenge the preeminence of American science.A rising tide of returnees was not preordained. As recently as the late 1970s, China’s universities and its science were a shambles. The Cultural Revolution had created a “missing generation” of scientists. To narrow the gap, Deng Xiaoping, China’s reformist leader, resolved to send thousands of students abroad. Eventually, he hoped, a few might come back and make improvements. As of 2017, China had allowed, and often paid for, 5.2 million students to get better educations abroad.China also invested extensively in universities and university enrollment, creating the world’s largest (and improving) population of engineers and scientists, while funding research and development at world-beating rates. From 2000 to 2017, Chinese spending on research and development grew more than 17% per year, compared with 4.3% per year in the U.S. The Americans kept a slim lead in total spending - the U.S.  accounted for 25% of global R&D spending in 2017, compared with 23% for China - but that gap is narrowing (and may have flipped in China’s favor in 2019).Spending is an imperfect measure of scientific leadership, but there’s no question that China has earned dividends from its efforts. Today it’s in the global vanguard for key fields, including artificial intelligence, nanotechnology and biotechnology.Those advances won’t bring back all of the young talent that’s left China over the decades - the U.S. is still the world’s scientific superpower - but they certainly help. The FAST facility is a good example of how this might work. Chinese scientists have been involved in radio astronomy for decades. But because the biggest and best radio telescopes were all abroad - notably, the Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico - Chinese radio scientists were reliant upon host scientists and countries for research opportunities and collaborators. The commissioning of FAST flips the tables. Li Di, FAST’s chief scientist, earned his doctorate at Cornell University, and previously worked as a research scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. Now he’s in China. International collaborators will be welcome at FAST, but China will set the agenda, allot the telescope time, and - ultimately - reap the bulk of the benefits.In the Science and Public Policy study released in December, researchers traced the career paths of Chinese scientists via the addresses associated with their scientific publications (a necessary approach, because of the lack of reliable data on either side of the Pacific). In 2017, 4,569 Chinese scientists left the U.S. for China, compared with 2,703 in 2010. Even more notable than the scale of the return is the quality. Twelve percent of China’s scientific publications were written by scientists with overseas experience, and the share of high impact publications - those that are regularly cited by other scientists - is higher than peers who remained in China. Those scientists, in turn, train younger Chinese scientists and connect them to the increasingly global nature of scientific inquiry in the 21st century.For now, there is still more talent flowing into the U.S. than out of it. But the quickening uptick of China’s scientific returnees should serve as a powerful reminder that scientific superpower status requires constant investment and a commitment to openness and collaboration across borders. For decades, the U.S. has attracted and benefited from Chinese scientific talent because it made those commitments. China’s research investments mean that the U.S. needs to reaffirm them, or risk ceding its accustomed role as the world's undisputed scientific leader.To contact the author of this story: Adam Minter at aminter@bloomberg.netTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Stacey Shick at sshick@bloomberg.netThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.Adam Minter is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He is the author of “Junkyard Planet: Travels in the Billion-Dollar Trash Trade” and the forthcoming "Secondhand: Travels in the New Global Garage Sale."For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinionSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2020 Bloomberg L.P.

  • Margot Robbie and Nicole Kidman dazzle on the SAG Awards red carpet

    Hollywood A-listers like Millie Bobby Brown, Joaquin Phoenix, Jennifer Aniston, Reese Witherspoon and Lupita Nyong'o made a splash on the red carpet.

  • Princess Mary 'in floods of tears' after terrifying burglary

    The Australian-born princess is said to be questioning everything about the Danish royal family's security.

  • Robert Kennedy Jr: 'We've destroyed the middle class'

    In a newly released interview with Yahoo Finance, activist and environmental lawyer Robert Kennedy Jr. lamented the widening gap between the rich and the poor in the U.S.

  • Harvey Weinstein claims there are 'stealth jurors' on case

    Harvey Weinstein has claimed that there are a number of "stealth jurors" on his trial. His lawyer Arthur Aidala filed legal documents earlier this week to claim that a number of the 12 jurors were holding "secret prejudices". Harvey you cant act for s**t with that walker you made it look like a prize on The Price is Right.