New technology from the UC San Diego Nano-Engineering lab will make it easier for people with health problems to monitor their critical numbers.
- Associated Press
A Supreme Court justice on Monday annulled all convictions against former Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, a ruling that potentially would allow him to run again for the presidency next year. Others saw the ruling, based on procedural grounds, as an attempt to preserve a vast but embattled corruption investigation that has led to numerous convictions of powerful businessmen and politicians but that has been accused of impropriety. The decision by Justice Luiz Edson Fachin drew no conclusions about the mammoth “Car Wash” investigation centered on state-run giant Petrobras, from which the da Silva probes emerged.
New Zealand is unlikely to stop having Queen Elizabeth as its head of state anytime soon, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said, in comments following Oprah Winfrey's interview with Prince Harry and Meghan. Ardern was asked by a reporter if the interview, and the picture painted of the royal family, had given her pause around New Zealand's constitutional ties with the royals. A former British colony, New Zealand retains Queen Elizabeth as its constitutional monarch and head of state.
- The Independent
Harry says wife’s success ‘brought back memories’ of his mother for royal family
- The Daily Beast
Joe Pugliese/CBSThe contemplation of suicide, blatant racism, and a family of “trapped,” emotionally stunted snobs: nobody expected Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s interview with Oprah Winfrey to be as dramatic as it was, or as grim. It was less a night for popcorn and low-stakes royal dish, and more one for stricken looks of surprise. One bombshell and within-palace-walls horror story followed another, one numbing thud after another. The opening revelation that Kate Middleton had made Meghan cry, not the other way round—as had been previously reported—was a relatively innocent aperitif. This grand guignol was just getting started.Meghan Markle: ‘I Just Didn’t Want to Be Alive Anymore’Harry and Meghan told a similar raw story of gilded nightmares just as Princess Diana told BBC’s Panorama in 1995. We have heard it before, and assumed the institution might have changed in response to the criticism that followed. Not a chance.It was every terrible part of being a princess/duchess in a fairytale-gone-wrong as Diana had told—with a happy ending of a kind, although the question lingering at the end, despite the principals’ smiles was: at what cost? Harry said he felt his mother’s spirit during this time, as well as living off her money having been cut off by the royal family. “She saw it coming,” he said.The British tabloid press, and Harry and Meghan’s harshest critics, will likely find ways to dismiss their words, to criticize them anew. Perhaps, as has happened before, Meghan and Harry will be decried as rich cry-babies, entitled whiners. But these familiar attacks will be harder to make, given how the couple told their stories to Oprah. Britain will finally see this documentary tonight, Monday.Oprah did not, as her detractors expected, simply act as a friend with a shoulder to cry on; she didn’t supply warm bathos or easy platitudes. Sure, she visited the couple’s hens. She joyfully welcomed Meghan’s pregnancy bump. But she interviewed with care and rigor. Every time Meghan or Harry waffled or said something imprecise, she asked them to be precise—especially when it came to identifying the racist or racists within the palace who demeaned Meghan, and who queried how dark Archie’s skin would be when he was born.That person (or persons’) identity remains unknown, but the stricken expressions on Meghan and Harry’s faces, their determination not to tell Oprah, suggest someone who was very close to them, or significant within the palace. The possible darkness of Archie’s skin, the fact he would be the child of a biracial couple, apparently necessitated he would not be thought of as a prince, and that he deserved no security.Oprah asked questions about what had gone wrong in the royal family, and was told bluntly about a catastrophe that—if true—shows just how unfit for modern purpose the royal family is. This was such a compelling interview, brilliantly done, that two hours did not seem enough. Indeed, Oprah said more would be revealed on CBS This Morning in a few hours time, co-anchored by her best friend Gayle King. Sure, Meghan was not asked about the investigation into bullying allegations that broke after the interview was recorded and had so focused minds before its transmission, and which seem—for now at least—the least of the royal family’s concerns.That family is very selective when it comes to opening investigations. For instance, at the time of writing there is one underway about alleged bullying by Meghan Markle of palace staff, and not one about Prince Andrew’s friendship with dead pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.Here is a suggestion for a few more, after Meghan and Prince Harry’s interview.Is it true a palace figure raised “concerns” about the “darkness” of unborn Archie’s skin? If so, whose racism was this? Why did they feel they could voice it to the baby’s father and mother? Why is this being said in the 21st century? What does it say about the royal family as an institution? Was it a royal family member, an aide, who? Will they be as thoroughly investigated, and if necessary reprimanded, as Meghan? What does the royal family have to say about this proud racism it exhibits directly to a woman of color, carrying a royal family member in her belly?Another investigation idea. Meghan said she felt suicidal when she was five months pregnant and that she approached the palace authorities seeking help, and was effectively told to get lost—when they surely have access to all the best doctors and specialists in the land. This reminds the casual royal observer of the complete dereliction of care when it came to Princess Diana, who was also left by this family to go mad within the confines of the palace.This investigation would focus both on both alleged cruelty and ignorance. Cruelty, because a woman is clearly struggling to maintain her psychological equilibrium. She is not only suffering, she is suffering right in front of you, and you are essentially rolling your eyes at her as if she is an inconvenience. Is this true? Who are you, the people that reportedly did this? And what are you, the institution that facilitates this behavior?After Diana died, so much was written about the changing royal family; that it would be the wake-up call to embrace at least the vestiges of 20th and now 21st century thinking. “Progressive” was the word. Harry and Meghan’s interview showed just how bogus that PR window dressing was. This is an institution, if Harry and Meghan are telling the truth, that is incapable of change, and more than that—actively resistant to it, and vicious to those who represent change, or who herald it. The royal family is not geared to welcoming such figures or forces. According to Harry and Meghan, the institutional instinct rather is to destroy. Prince Harry made brutally clear how deficient his father Prince Charles had been, and said—just as he felt “trapped,” so did his father and brother. The only winner in his recitation of awfulness was the queen, who Harry praised to the hilt.If we believe the couple, their departure from the royal family was quite literally a life or death situation. Harry left the royal family to save his wife’s life, and his son’s future. And to save himself. In her one misconceived idea, Oprah edged into the finale-of-Pretty-Woman territory, when she set up the dynamic of the couple saving each other, and it would have been easy for Meghan and Harry to go along with that, summoning up the image of Richard Gere and Julia Roberts on that apartment ladder joyfully clinging on to each other, allegedly equal saviors (but really, c’mon!).But Meghan could not go there. She said one of her regrets was “believing them when they said I would be protected,” meaning the royal family. They had done the opposite; they had left her not only exposed, she made clear, but life-endangeringly desperate. She told them this, and they did nothing. (Buckingham Palace, of course, may respond to this litany of charges, and claim things unfolded very differently—we shall see.) Harry and Meghan cautiously accepted the Pretty Woman dynamic Oprah offered, but their grim smiles suggested this was less a triumphant romantic ending, and more a case of lives saved by the grittiest of margins.Let’s say Pretty Woman had ended with Richard Gere weeping with fear on the ladder because of his fear of heights, and Julia Roberts coming to help him with the aid of the emergency services—that was more the tone of the end of the Oprah interview. When Meghan said it was “greater than any fairytale you ever read,” it sounded like she meant that this story could have ended very differently; that happiness had only just been snatched from the jaws of unhappiness and desperation.There seem to be a number of vying forces, which will govern the future of royal relationships after this shattering interview. The royal family were right to be nervous. This morning they will likely be pondering how on earth to respond to it.Judging by the sheer scale of anti-Harry and Meghan briefing hours before the broadcast, a war—and one without end—seemed very much on. We learned, variously, in the British Sunday papers that Meghan had exploded over a blanket shaded the wrong kind of red; that Harry was nicknamed “The Hostage” before his wedding, and that he had shouted “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets” in a row over a tiara.The other forces, probably mindful of how this rift might look publicly, were telling certain reporters that reconciliation between the warring Harry and William might be on the cards. The Sunday Telegraph said William and Kate were hopeful for a reconciliation whatever was said in the Oprah interview, and the Telegraph said that Harry was “determined to stand shoulder to shoulder” with William at the unveiling of a statue of their mother Princess Diana, scheduled for July 1 at Kensington Palace on what would have been her 60th birthday.Harry “desperately hopes” to attend the event and considers it “a priority,” the Telegraph said. That sense of old-school royal duty and loyalty mirrors the undertones of Queen Elizabeth’s message to the Commonwealth, broadcast earlier on Sunday by the BBC. The queen spoke of “friendship and a spirit of unity” in her address, praising examples of “courage, commitment, and selfless dedication to duty” in Commonwealth nations and territories, notably by those working on the front line, whether in health care or other public services. “The testing times experienced by so many have led to a deeper appreciation of the mutual support and spiritual sustenance we enjoy by being connected to others,” the queen said in the gentle program—also starring Prince Charles, Kate, William, Camilla, and Sophie, Countess of Wessex—which was in marked dramatic contrast to the Harry and Meghan interview. Post-pandemic, the queen said she looked forward to “a common future that is sustainable and more secure.”Harry and Meghan said they wanted to “move on” after the broadcast of the interview, considering it their opportunity to have their say, and now “consider the matter closed,” sources told the Telegraph. “It was something they felt they wanted and needed to do but now they have done it, they feel a line has been drawn under that chapter of their lives and they want to move on,” a friend told the paper.After the Oprah interview, however, all of this seems entirely unlikely—unless the royal family finally opens its minds and hearts to the multi-layered dysfunctionality it so willingly fosters and tolerates. The number and nature of revelations requiring detailed and considered response by the palace are simply too many. The fact that Meghan came so close to taking her own life; the fact the color of Archie’s skin was a matter of “concern” are matters that are un-spinnable (unless the palace challenges their veracity)—as is Harry’s damning summation of his relationship with Prince Charles. The Oprah interview is a depth charge. It can only be a roadmap to restored relations if the royal family rouses itself from its air of lost-in-time prejudices and snobbery, and answers the questions Meghan and Harry have laid at its door. As for Harry and Meghan, they didn’t seem too bothered about making friends, or making nice. Telling their truth seemed far more important, and this they did—devastatingly.Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.
- The Independent
Ms McCain said ‘we can no longer have our leaders work with fear and anger and hate’
- The Independent
Princes received full amount of money from mother’s estate when they turned 30
- Reuters Videos
After months of remote learning, millions of English children and teenagers returned to school on Monday.The reopening of schools is the first step in a four-stage government plan to ease the lockdown while trying to prevent a new surge in infections.New safety measures for pupils include regular hand washing, staggered arrival times, and social bubbles.For secondary schools, the requirements are more onerous with teenagers being mass-tested for COVID and required to wear masks in the classroom.The near-consensus has been that getting children back into the classroom is essential for their mental health, education and life chances.Most pupils had missed out on more than three months of school in the spring and early summer of 2020, when Britain was under its first strict national lockdown.James Fisher is the Head of Harris Academy in Sutton, England:"I'm seeing a lot of thrilled children, really grateful to be back in school, really thrilled to be getting back on with their learning but we're prepared for any of the inconsistencies that might be thrown up in terms of their behaviour, but we're prepared for that as well."Things have also opened up for England's care home residents, who are now allowed one regular visitor.Nicky Clough was one of the first family members allowed back to the Alexander House home in Wimbledon, south London.She had not been able to visit her mother, 87-year-old Pam Harrison, at the home since March 2020.Aside from a couple of meetings when Harrison had been admitted to hospital, all of Clough's interactions with her mother have been through the ground floor window.Now, the only barrier to connection is the comprehensive protective gear Clough has to wear.For adults in England, the lockdown remains in force, with social contact severely restricted.People are under stay at home orders, most shops are closed, and cafes and restaurants are only able to offer takeaway or delivery.The remaining three steps of the government's plan to ease the lockdown are due to kick in, in April, May, and June, subject to a continued reduction of coronavirus infections.Since the start of the pandemic, Britain has recorded 124,500 deaths from COVID-19 - the fifth highest official death toll in the world and the worst in Europe.
- The Independent
Follow the latest in US politics
- The Independent
Harry and Meghan say concerns were raised by unnamed family member over how dark Archie’s skin would be
Duchess wouldn’t reveal who raised the topic, saying it ‘would be very damaging to them’
- The Independent
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’
- USA TODAY
'Let the people vote': Biden signs executive order promoting voter access, marking anniversary of Selma march
President Biden signed an order directing the government to expand access to voter registration and election information, among other directives.
- The Independent
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’
- CBS News
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.
- Business Insider
Oprah's interview with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle didn't just expose the royal family - it also revealed just how the broken US healthcare system is
British people were shocked by how many pharmaceutical ads ran during Oprah's interview with Meghan Markle, exposing how dire things are in the US.
- The Daily Beast
David McGough/GettyMost are likely unfamiliar with the accusation that helped kick off the investigation into Woody Allen’s alleged child sexual abuse of his 7-year-old adopted daughter, Dylan Farrow. It came from Allison Stickland, the nanny to Farrow family friend Casey Pascal, who was at Woody Allen and Mia Farrow’s Connecticut country home on Aug. 4, 1992.During the eventual child custody trial, Stickland, who was watching Pascal’s young children—who were friends with the Farrow kids—that day, testified that she saw Allen being inappropriate with Dylan.“Dylan was sitting upright on the couch and Woody was kneeling directly in front of her with his face in Dylan’s lap,” she stated. “His face was very close to her private area.”Since Dylan was not wearing underpants that day (according to the testimony of Dylan’s French tutor Sophie Berge, Mia Farrow, and their neighbor), Allen was, by Stickland’s account, burying his face in her naked lap while Dylan sat on a couch “staring vacantly in the direction of a television set.” Stickland’s testimony is of particular importance as she was the only adult in the house when the abuse allegedly happened who was not employed by Allen or Farrow (the other two were Farrow nanny Kristi Groteke and Berge).As Amy Herdy—an investigative journalist who headed the research on HBO’s four-part docuseries Allen v. Farrow—explains, this incident ultimately led to Dylan’s confession to her mother that Allen had allegedly molested her in their attic that day. (Allen has denied the allegation and accused Mia Farrow of “coaching” Dylan.)‘Allen v. Farrow’ Lead Investigator Amy Herdy Hits Back at Woody Allen Defenders“People just need to look at the timeline. You have a nanny [Allison Stickland] who walked in on Woody Allen with his face in Dylan’s naked lap. She disclosed that to her employer, who was Casey Pascal, that night,” Herdy told me. “Then Casey told Mia, and Mia immediately brought it up with Dylan the next morning. So that’s a lot of short-term intensive coaching, if you want to go the coaching route and explore that as a plausible allegation. That’s a short amount of time to do an enormous amount of coaching in a young child.”On Monday afternoon, Stickland appeared on the Allen v. Farrow podcast with the docuseries’ team, Kirby Dick, Amy Ziering, and Amy Herdy, to tell her side. Herdy spent two years trying to track down Allison Stickland in the U.K., eventually writing snail-mail letters to people by the name of “Allison Stickland” in the U.K. They only heard from Stickland after the Allen v. Farrow episodes had locked, so she unfortunately didn’t make it into the docuseries.“You don’t think something all those years ago is going to come back, so it was a shock,” said Stickland. “I didn’t respond very quickly because I had to let it sink in… I felt, you know, it’s something I kind of really need to do, because if I leave it and don’t, it will probably eat away at me.” Then Stickland discussed how she would oversee the Pascal children at Farrow and Allen’s country home in Connecticut during the summer months and what she thought of the sprawling Farrow clan.“I thought it was a lovely household. Lovely children, they all got along well together. There never seemed to be any sibling rivalry. The older children I would say had fun with the younger ones. It was just very happy. I wouldn’t say it was troubled at all,” described Stickland. “I thought [Mia] was lovely. She was a very soft-spoken, gentle lady. Very attentive. You could tell it was so obvious that she adored all her children.”The filmmakers proceeded to ask Stickland to recall what happened on Aug. 4, 1992. “From what I remember, Mrs. Pascal and Mia went away to do shopping for a few hours, and myself, Mia’s babysitter, and this French tutor, we were all at the house watching the children, and Woody came on a visit,” she said. “And at some point during the day, I didn’t see one of Mrs. Pascal’s children, so I went in the house to have a look, and I opened the door to this small TV room, and when I opened it, I saw Woody on his knees, kneeling down in front of Dylan with his head in her lap.” “I just walked, turned, and went,” Stickland continued. “I was shocked. I thought it was very odd. I thought… I didn’t know what to think of it, really. It’s not something you expect to see… a situation you expect to see a father and daughter in.” ‘Allen v. Farrow’ Filmmakers Fire Back at Alec BaldwinStickland said she was sure Allen was aware of the intrusion because she had just walked into the room normally, as she was looking for one of the missing Pascal kids. She told the filmmakers that she confided in Mrs. Pascal about what she saw later that evening during dinner. “I was just eating and I just felt, no, I need to get this off my chest and share it with Mrs. Pascal,” said Stickland, adding, “It didn’t strike me as normal behavior. You don’t expect a father to have his head in his young daughter’s lap, so that’s why it bothered me so much. [Allen] obviously looks at it differently, but it’s not the kind of appropriate behavior you expect from a father, really.”As for her court testimony during the child custody trial, she remarked: “All I could do was go and tell the truth.”Read more at The Daily Beast.Got a tip? Send it to The Daily Beast hereGet our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.
- The Telegraph
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.
The 22-year-old modeled in a Givenchy fashion show over the weekend.
- Business Insider
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.
- USA TODAY
The Internal Revenue Service could begin delivering payments in about two weeks under President Biden's COVID-19 relief package, analysts say.
- Business Insider
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.