Clear and frigid through the night

How's the weather looking for your weekend? Get your latest Maine's Total Weather video forecast from Meteorologist Roger Griswold.

Recommended Stories

  • Joe Manchin's opposition to party-line infrastructure bill may derail early Democratic efforts to capitalize on Biden stimulus

    Sen. Joe Manchin criticized reconciliation as a path to more stimulus spending on climate and infrastructure, and he opposes ending the filibuster.

  • Meghan Markle says 'rude and racist are not the same' while addressing how she's been treated by the press compared to Kate Middleton

    Meghan Markle told Oprah that a royal press team would defend Kate Middleton but didn't do the same for her.

  • Biden Endorses Female Generals Whose Promotions Were Delayed Over Fears of Trump's Reaction

    WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden has nominated two female generals to elite, four-star commands, the Defense Department announced, months after their Pentagon bosses had agreed on their promotions but held them back out of fears that former President Donald Trump would reject the officers because they were women. The nominations of Gen. Jacqueline D. Van Ovost of the Air Force to head the Transportation Command, which oversees the military’s sprawling global transportation network, and of Lt. Gen. Laura J. Richardson of the Army to head the Southern Command, which oversees military activities in Latin America, now advance to the Senate, where they are expected to be approved. The unusual strategy to delay the officers’ promotions — intended to protect their accomplished careers — was devised last fall by Mark Esper, the defense secretary at the time, and Gen. Mark Milley, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times They both thought the two generals were exceptional officers deserving of the commands. But under Trump, they worried that any candidates other than white men for jobs mostly held by white men might run into resistance once their nominations reached the White House. Esper and Milley feared that if they even broached the women’s names, Trump and some of his top aides would replace them with their own candidates before leaving office. So the Pentagon officials delayed their recommendations until after the election in November, betting that if Biden won, then he and his aides would be more supportive of the picks than Trump, who had feuded with Esper and Milley and had a history of disparaging women. They stuck to the plan even after Trump fired Esper six days after the election. “They were chosen because they were the best officers for the jobs, and I didn’t want their promotions derailed because someone in the Trump White House saw that I recommended them or thought DOD was playing politics,” Esper, referring to the Department of Defense, said in an interview with The New York Times, which first reported the strategy last month. “This was not the case,” Esper added. “They were the best qualified. We were doing the right thing.” The strategy paid off Saturday, when the Pentagon announced in separate afternoon statements and in Twitter messages from its press secretary, John Kirby, that Biden had endorsed the generals’ promotions and that the White House was formally submitting them to the Senate for approval. The disclosure last month that the Pentagon senior leadership had held back the nominations to protect the careers of the two officers from Trump prompted a lively debate in military journals and on social media. Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who left the military last summer after his own entanglement with the White House, argued in the national security blog Lawfare that Esper and Milley should have fought it out with Trump. “Upholding good order and discipline within the military does not mean dodging difficult debates with the commander in chief,” Vindman wrote. But defenders of Esper and Milley’s strategy say that Vindman’s argument ignores the civil-military crisis between Trump and the senior Pentagon leaders in the fall. Trump, furious that they had stood up to him when he wanted to use active-duty troops to battle Black Lives Matter protesters, was openly disparaging of Esper to his aides and to the public. Trump was also countermanding the Pentagon at seemingly every turn, especially on social issues. When Milley and senior Army officials sought to set up a commission to look into renaming bases that were named after Confederate generals, Trump took to Twitter, vowing that “my Administration will not even consider the renaming of these Magnificent and Fabled Military Installations.” Lloyd J. Austin III, the new defense secretary, declined last month to comment on the lengths to which Esper and Milley went to ensure that Van Ovost and Richardson received their command assignments. “I would just say that I’ve seen the records of both of these women,” he said. “They are outstanding.” Promotions for the military’s top generals and admirals are decided months before they take over their new positions. So the delay in formally submitting the two officers’ promotions should not affect when they start their new jobs, most likely this summer, Pentagon and congressional officials said. Van Ovost is a four-star officer, leading the Air Force’s Mobility Command at Scott Air Force Base in Illinois. Of the 43 four-star generals and admirals in the U.S. military, she is the only woman. Richardson is the three-star commander of the Army component of the Pentagon’s Northern Command, based in San Antonio, which is playing an important role in providing military assistance to the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s coronavirus vaccination program. This article originally appeared in The New York Times. © 2021 The New York Times Company

  • Biden news - Cuomo faces fresh allegations as Obama praises president on Covid-19 relief bill

    Follow the latest in US politics

  • Lauren Boebert: Congresswoman linked to QAnon attacks Democrats for being ‘obsessed with conspiracies’

    Freshman Republican complains: ‘Judge Jeanine, this is complete bonkers that we are keeping people out the United States Capitol’

  • Biden signs executive order to expand voting rights: ‘If you have the best ideas, you have nothing to hide’

    ‘Every eligible voter should be able to vote and have it counted’

  • Meghan: Archie's title was not royal family's "right to take away"

    A century ago, King George V decreed the children and grandchildren of the monarch automatically get prince or princess titles. Queen Elizabeth made a special ruling to extend that to William's children.

  • Biden's German shepherds have been sent home to Delaware after a 'biting incident' with White House security officers

    The two German shepherds were sent back to the Biden family home after 3-year-old Major displayed aggressive behaviour to White House security staff.

  • Prince Harry has lit a slow burn stick of dynamite that will cause the greatest devastation of all

    To outward appearances, the Markle Sparkle was fully in evidence as the Duchess smilingly worked the room, her hand touchingly entwined with Harry’s. With her midnight blue ball gown shimmering in the glare of the flash bulbs, the five-month pregnant royal appeared in sparkling form as she joined her husband for the premiere of Cirque du Soleil in Jan 2019. Yet following an extraordinary TV interview with Oprah Winfrey that has left the Royal family reeling, we now know that the “suicidal” former actress only went ahead with the engagement at the Royal Albert Hall because she did not think she should be left alone. The claim, along with the suggestion that an as-yet unnamed Windsor questioned how dark Archie’s skin might be when he was born, form the main charge of the bomb dropped on the monarchy during the couple’s two-hour tell all.

  • Ohio college student dies after alleged hazing incident

    Stone Foltz, 20, a sophomore at Bowling Green State University and a new member of the Pi Kappa Alpha Fraternity, was allegedly hazed during an initiation event when he was made to drink alcohol.

  • A new lab study shows troubling signs that Pfizer's and Moderna's COVID-19 shots could be far less effective against the variant first found in South Africa

    A mutation called E484K appeared to help the variant, first found in South Africa, to evade antibodies produced by the vaccines, the authors said.

  • 5 hidden details you might have missed in Meghan Markle's Oprah Winfrey interview outfit

    Through her jewelry and Armani lotus dress, Meghan Markle sent a message of hope, paid tribute to Diana, and may have made a nod to the Commonwealth.

  • A mask-less Trader Joe's customer in Texas had a meltdown after being denied entry - and it reveals how states' new rules endanger workers

    In Texas, frontline workers are forced to impose corporate rules on masks without the support of the state, exposing them to customer backlash.

  • $1,400 checks could start arriving within weeks under latest COVID-19 relief package

    The Internal Revenue Service could begin delivering payments in about two weeks under President Biden's COVID-19 relief package, analysts say.

  • Nearly 11,000 women could be living with undiagnosed breast cancer following 'protect the NHS' drive

    Nearly 11,000 women could be living with undiagnosed breast cancer following last year’s drive to “protect the NHS”, new analysis reveals. A reluctance to burden the health service during the pandemic’s first wave, coupled with a drop in GP referrals and suspensions of screening programmes is wreaking a “tragic cost”, experts said. Research by the charity Breast Cancer Now found there were 10,700 fewer people diagnosed with breast cancer across the UK between March and December last year. The team analysed a range of data to reach the figure, including the number of people starting their first treatment for breast cancer, the number of women screened each month and the length of time for which services were paused. During the first wave of the pandemic, breast screening services were paused for different amounts of time across the UK, including around four months in Scotland and five months in Wales. While services were not officially paused in England, Breast Cancer Now said this still happened because hospitals turned their attention to fighting Covid. Overall, it said nearly 1.2 million fewer women in the UK underwent breast screening between March and December. Meanwhile, there was a 90,000 drop in referrals to a specialist for patients with possible symptoms of breast cancer in England between March and December. Even though services have resumed, the charity said they are operating at around 60 per cent capacity due to the need for social distancing and infection control. The charity on Tuesday warned of a forthcoming "perfect storm", with health workers in imaging and diagnostic services under unprecedented pressure due to the pandemic, having already been "chronically under-resourced" beforehand. Baroness Delyth Morgan, chief executive of Breast Cancer Now, said: "The tragic cost of almost 11,000 missing breast cancer diagnoses is that in the worst cases, women could die from the disease. "And looking ahead, while we cannot know the full impacts of the pandemic, what we do know now is that over the coming years the number of women coming forward could overwhelm our already over-stretched workforce. "Women with breast cancer have already paid an unacceptable price due to the pandemic – we simply cannot afford for any more time to pass before UK Governments invest in and tackle the crisis facing the cancer workforce.” Overall, it put the number of patients undiagnosed with breast cancer due to the pandemic at around 8,900 cases in England, 890 in Scotland, 687 in Wales and 248 in Northern Ireland.

  • Republican National Committee rejects cease-and-desist demand from Trump attorneys

    The Republican National Committee dismissed a cease-and-desist demand from former President Trump's attorneys Monday after Trump's lawyers told the organization to stop using Trump's name and likeness, Politico reports.What they're saying: The RNC "has every right to refer to public figures as it engages in core, First Amendment-protected political speech, and it will continue to do so in pursuit of these common goals," chief counsel Justin Riemer wrote in a letter sent Monday afternoon.Stay on top of the latest market trends and economic insights with Axios Markets. Subscribe for freeThe RNC letter highlights Trump's "close" relationship with RNC chair Ronna McDaniel and states that Trump personally approved the use of his name for fundraising."The RNC is grateful for the past and continued support President Trump has given to the committee and it looks forward to working with him to elect Republicans across the country," Riemer wrote.The RNC did not immediately respond to Axios' request for comment.Trump attorneys sent a letter on March 5 requesting that the RNC "immediately cease and desist the unauthorized use of President Donald J. Trump’s name, image, and/or likeness in all fundraising, persuasion, and/or issue speech."It was one of many cease-and-desist demands, which the Trump team sent to GOP committees including the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee.The big picture: Trump worked closely with the RNC during the 2020 campaign, raising over $366 million together, according to Politico.Trump is expected to speak at the RNC's upcoming donor retreat in Palm Beach, a portion of which has been moved to Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club, per the Washington Post.Like this article? Get more from Axios and subscribe to Axios Markets for free.

  • The Sussexes have removed much of the magic – but the monarchy, and the Queen, will prevail

    Beneath a soft blanket of Californian therapy-speak, the Sussexes were in vicious attack mode. Everyone – except the Queen – was a target. Prince Charles, Prince William, the Duchess of Cambridge, unnamed members of the Royal Family, advisers, the press... All of them are guilty, guilty, guilty – of not having the warmth, goodness and openness of the Sussexes. There was bombshell after bombshell. A regular theme was that, every time something was said by the press to be Meghan’s fault, it was apparently someone else’s fault. So it wasn’t the Duchess of Cambridge who was reduced to tears by Meghan before the Sussexes’ wedding. No – it was the Duchess of Cambridge who made Meghan cry but did the right thing: “She owned it, and she apologised.” There were allegations of racism and the very sad revelation that the Duchess had had suicidal thoughts – “I just didn't want to be alive any more”. But, again and again, the suggestion was that the only people in real pain were the Sussexes. There was barely a mention that the world is going through a pandemic that has killed more than 2.6 million people. When Prince Philip, seriously ill in hospital, was brought up, it was to advertise Meghan’s kindness in immediately getting on the phone to the Queen to ask how he was. Every blow was coated in a Ready-Brek glow of virtue signalling and self-congratulation. In the Sussexes’ own eyes, they can do no wrong. To some, this will be seen as a deeply damaging programme for the Royal family. Millions of viewers – particularly younger ‘woke’ ones – will side with Harry and Meghan. But while the Twitterati may be up in arms, the broad sway of British opinion will cleave to the heart of the Royal family – the Queen. How modest and short her Commonwealth Day message was on Sunday, particularly in comparison with the Sussexes. She praised the “selfless dedication to duty… demonstrated in every Commonwealth nation”. She has demonstrated that selfless duty ever since she came to the throne 69 years ago; she showed signs of that selflessness almost since her birth over 94 years ago. The British public knows this and respects her for it. The Queen has never given an interview in those 94 years. Harry and Meghan have given two interviews within a month to two of the biggest names in American television: Oprah Winfrey and James Corden. Even Princess Diana had been married to Prince Charles for 14 years before her explosive Panorama interview in 1995. The Queen’s greatest PR message is the power of silence. The tactic works like a charm, but only the Queen, it seems, realises this. Princess Diana, Prince Charles and, most recently, Prince Andrew have all made disastrous errors in TV tell-alls. In 1988, Prince Charles asked the late Sir Peregrine Worsthorne, then editor of The Sunday Telegraph, how he should conduct his public life. Perry said Charles should confine himself to public duties and never air his private thoughts. The Prince buried his head in his hands, moaning: “But then I’m just a cypher.” Perry was right. Royal interviews by disaffected family members are big box office – but they are only ever harmful to all concerned. Over the next few weeks, it will be the Royal family that takes a battering over the latest revelations. But history tells us that the Sussexes’ attacks will have less and less traction as time goes by. Like all other members of the Royal family not in the direct line of succession, they will drift further and further from the action. Prince Harry was born third in line to the throne; he is now sixth. When Princess Margaret was a child, she was second in line. If she were alive today, she’d be 21st in line, after Lena Tindall, Zara Phillips’s younger daughter. In California, the Sussexes are now utterly detached from royal life. There’ll be no sign of them on state occasions; no more sightings of Harry in his dashing uniforms, now he’s lost his military role. It is clear the Sussexes have made the full migration from Royals to Californian celebrities. Harry has begun to speak California psychobabble: “I’m not comfortable with sharing that.” California speak is also a tremendous device for masking hypocrisy and this will slowly be unmasked. Thus Meghan saying in the interview that all she wants to do is to “live authentically”, while feeding her chickens – oh yes, and broadcasting to billions, too, and picking up multi-million dollar pay cheques.

  • When will your $1,400 stimulus check arrive? House looks to pass COVID plan quickly

    Here’s when you could get your stimulus check under the new bill.

  • Paul Walker's daughter walks fashion show, gets shoutout from dad's co-stars

    The 22-year-old modeled in a Givenchy fashion show over the weekend.

  • Papa John's founder says he's been working to get the N-word out of his vocabulary for the 'last 20 months'

    The former CEO of Papa John's is assuring the public he's been working on not using racist language, an effort that has apparently been ongoing for nearly two years. John Schnatter, the Papa John's founder who in 2018 stepped down as chairman after admitting he used the N-word during a conference call, told One America News Network the pizza chain's board has painted him "as a racist" when "they know he's not a racist," per Mediaite. From there, Schnatter described his "goals," evidently including no longer saying racial slurs. "We've had three goals for the last 20 months," Schnatter said. "To get rid of this N-word in my vocabulary and dictionary and everything else, because it's just not true, figure out how they did this, and get on with my life." The former pizza boss also told OANN he "used to lay in bed" after his ouster wondering "how did they do this," and he called on Papa John's to come out and declare that it "didn't follow proper due diligence" and that he actually "has no history of racism." Schnatter stepped down as Papa John's chair after Forbes reported that he "used the N-word on a conference call" that had been "designed as a role-playing exercise for Schnatter in an effort to prevent future public-relations snafus." He apologized at the time, saying "racism has no place in our society." Shortly after, though, Schnatter said he resigned because the board asked him to "without apparently doing any investigation" and that he now regrets doing so. Later, Schnatter would vow that a "day of reckoning" would come in a bizarre 2019 interview, in which he also famously declared he's eaten "over 40 pizzas in the last 30 days." Update: In a statement on Monday, Schnatter said he has been seeking to eliminate "false perceptions in the media" and that "on OANN, I tried to say, 'Get rid of this n-word in (the) vocabulary and dictionary (of the news media), and everything else because it's just not true,' – reflecting my commitment to correct the false and malicious reporting by the news media about the conference call." Papa John’s ex-CEO says he’s been working for the last 20 months “to get rid of this N-word in my vocabulary” (h/t @mount_bees) pic.twitter.com/8heITnJJxA — philip lewis (@Phil_Lewis_) March 8, 2021 More stories from theweek.comThe Harry and Meghan interview might have taken down more than the royal family7 spondiferously funny cartoons about the Dr. Seuss controversyA record number of migrant kids are in Border Patrol custody