8383 bet365 mx

8383 bet365 mx

Man City goalkeeper Ederson causes CHAOS after charging out of his box and leaving an open goal for Feyenoord's equaliser in 3-3 draw

(The Center Square) – Although it remains unclear how many Democratic Senators will vote for the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act, some House members in the party have explained why they voted yes, despite a provision restricting military-funded transgender surgeries for minors. The nearly $900 billion bill passed the House 281-140 Wednesday, with 200 Republicans and 81 Democrats voting in favor versus 124 Democrats and 16 Republicans voting against it. Most of the NDAA consists of bipartisan agreements, such as pay raises for service members, strengthened ties with U.S. allies, and funding of new military technology. But a critical point of contention is a Republican addition that would prohibit the military’s health program from covering any gender dysphoria treatments on minors that could "result in sterilization.” The must-pass bill is so critical that nearly 40% of House Democrats voted in favor–but not without expressing their disappointment. Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., condemned Republican colleagues who, she said, “chose to sully this bill with political culture wars;” nevertheless, she voted in favor. “While it doesn't address everything we asked for and consider important, including the full ability of parents to make their own decisions about healthcare for their children, it marks a rare moment of productive bipartisan agreement on what is arguably the most crucial legislation we take up as a body each year,” Houlahan said. The bill’s provision does not forbid service members’ children from receiving transgender therapy. It forbids the military’s health insurance provider, TRICARE, from covering treatments on minors that “may result in sterilization.” Reps. Greg Landsman, D-Ohio, and Terri Sewell, D-Ala., also voted in favor of the bill despite their displeasure at the ban. “The NDAA is a hugely important bill. We had to pass it, which is why I voted yes,” Landsman posted on X Friday. “However, the anti-trans language that was attached to it was mean and awful and should never have been included.” “I have serious concerns about some remaining provisions that were placed in the bill for political purposes,” Sewell said Wednesday. “Still, the responsibility to support our service members and provide for our national security is one that I do not take lightly, which is why I ultimately chose to support the bill.” Besides the importance of annual military funding, another reason some House Democrats assented to the legislation is because they were successful in axing other House Republican amendments, such as a plan to eliminate reimbursements for service members who travel to obtain abortions. The Senate is expected to pass the bill within the next few days, after which President Joe Biden is expected to sign it into law.

LAS VEGAS (AP) — A team that previously boycotted at least one match against the San Jose State women's volleyball program will again be faced with the decision whether to play the school , this time in the Mountain West Conference semifinals with a shot at the NCAA Tournament on the line. Five schools forfeited matches in the regular season against San Jose State, which carried a No. 2 seed into the conference tournament in Las Vegas. Among those schools: No. 3 Utah State and No. 6 Boise State, who will face off Wednesday with the winner scheduled to play the Spartans in the semifinals on Friday. Wyoming, Nevada and Southern Utah — which is not a Mountain West member — also canceled regular-season matches, all without explicitly saying why they were forfeiting. Nevada players cited fairness in women’s sports as a reason to boycott their match, while political figures from Wyoming, Idaho, Utah and Nevada suggested the cancellations center around protecting women’s sports. In a lawsuit filed against the NCAA , plaintiffs cited unspecified reports asserting there was a transgender player on the San Jose State volleyball team, even naming her. While some media have reported those and other details, neither San Jose State nor the forfeiting teams have confirmed the school has a trans women’s volleyball player. The Associated Press is withholding the player’s name because she has not publicly commented on her gender identity and through school officials has declined an interview request. A judge on Monday rejected a request made by nine current conference players to block the San Jose State player from competing in the tournament on grounds that she is transgender. That ruling was upheld Tuesday by an appeals court. “The team looks forward to starting Mountain West Conference tournament competition on Friday,” San Jose State said in a statement issued after the appeals court decision. “The university maintains an unwavering commitment to the participation, safety and privacy of all students at San Jose State and ensuring they are able to compete in an inclusive, fair and respectful environment.” Chris Kutz, a Boise State athletics spokesman, said in an email the university would not “comment on potential matchups at this time.” Doug Hoffman, an Aggies athletics spokesman, said in an email Utah State is reviewing the court’s order. “Right now, our women’s volleyball program is focused on the game this Wednesday, and we’ll be cheering them on,” Hoffman wrote. San Jose State, which had a first-round bye, would be sent directly to the conference title game if Utah State or Boise State were to forfeit again. If the Spartans make the title game, it's likely the opponent would not forfeit. They would face top-seeded Colorado State, No. 4 Fresno State or No. 5 San Diego State — all teams that played the Spartans this season. The conference champion receives an automatic bid to the NCAA Tournament. AP college sports: https://apnews.com/hub/college-sports

Trump again calls to buy Greenland after eyeing Canada and the Panama CanalNancy Pelosi sparks health fears as she's hospitalized after fall on trip to Europe

(Reuters) – Barcelona manager Hansi Flick praised his players as they bounced back from consecutive LaLiga disappointments with what he described as a great performance to thump French side Brest 3-0 in their Champions League clash on Tuesday. Flick said on Monday that his side’s recent form was a major worry after they failed to win for a second successive LaLiga game, but the German coach was delighted with how his players responded. “Very happy. We deserved it, winning by three goals but we could have scored more,” Flick told Movistar Plus. “But I’m happy either way because delivering a performance like this after (a 2-2 draw at Celta) Vigo (on Saturday) is just great.” Flick praised Barca striker Robert Lewandowski who scored twice to join Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi as the only players to reach 100 goals in the competition, but said that he preferred his team’s collective effort on Tuesday. “Lewandowski is great, I’m delighted with his goals. I think Lewandowski knows he has to score and he is in the position to do it, but the important thing is what the team generates,” Flick said. “Obviously, he knows he has to score and he plays for it, but what this team does is just wonderful.” Tuesday’s victory lifted Barca to second in the 36-team Champions League table on 12 points from five games, one point behind Inter Milan and level with third-placed Liverpool, who host Real Madrid on Wednesday. Flick’s team are on top in the LaLiga standings with 34 points, four ahead of rivals Real Madrid in second, who have a game in hand. (Reporting by Fernando Kallas; Editing by Toby Davis) Disclaimer: This report is auto generated from the Reuters news service. ThePrint holds no responsibilty for its content. var ytflag = 0;var myListener = function() {document.removeEventListener('mousemove', myListener, false);lazyloadmyframes();};document.addEventListener('mousemove', myListener, false);window.addEventListener('scroll', function() {if (ytflag == 0) {lazyloadmyframes();ytflag = 1;}});function lazyloadmyframes() {var ytv = document.getElementsByClassName("klazyiframe");for (var i = 0; i < ytv.length; i++) {ytv[i].src = ytv[i].getAttribute('data-src');}} Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Δ document.getElementById( "ak_js_1" ).setAttribute( "value", ( new Date() ).getTime() );WASHINGTON — Federal officials said Tuesday that drones spotted along the East Coast over the past month do not pose a threat to national security or public safety. Four federal agencies — the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Defense — issued a statement Tuesday after weeks of reports about drone activity. In some cases, airports have been closed as a result of the drones. The Pentagon statement said that the majority of the more than 1 million drones registered with the FAA are used legally for commercial, recreational or governmental purposes. The agencies noted that the recent sightings likely involve a combination of these legal activities and misidentifications of manned aircraft, helicopters, or even celestial objects such as stars. The statement said the agencies have "not identified anything anomalous." Despite this, the agencies acknowledged the public's concern and urged Congress to expand counter-drone authorities to address potential future threats better. U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., posted on X this week that he would move for the Senate to pass legislation "giving local officials the tools and authorities necessary to act quickly and in lockstep with government agencies." The FBI received more than 5,000 reports of drone sightings in recent weeks, with fewer than 100 warranting further investigation. Advanced detection technologies and personnel were deployed to assist local and state authorities with monitoring and assessing the sightings. At a news conference on Monday, President-elect Donald Trump said the U.S. government and military know what is happening and where the drones are coming from. "Something strange is going on," he said. "For some reason, they don't want to tell the people, and they should." The joint statement comes amid heightened public interest and speculation surrounding the origins and intentions of the mystery drones. Law enforcement officials in Virginia recently reported "suspicious" drone sightings appearing over counties located within an hour outside of the Washington, D.C. metro area containing sensitive military bases and national security facilities. The increase in unexplained drone activity in the skies over New Jersey and Pennsylvania caused alarm among state officials who were already critical of federal authorities' response to the drones and demanded action. The agencies said there had been a "limited number of sightings" of drones over military facilities in New Jersey and elsewhere, including restricted airspace. They continued that sightings over Department of Defense installations aren't new and reiterated that the department takes unauthorized access to its airspace seriously and is closely working with federal, state, and local law enforcement authorities. "Local commanders are actively engaged to ensure there are appropriate detection and mitigation measures in place," according to the Pentagon.