Oakland – against California later All -time scorerPresent Fremont-Oakland Boys basketball coach Scott Alexander tried every tactic within the book to decelerate the St. Joseph-Santa Maria Wing Tounde Yessoufou in a matchup in mid-December.

He let his tiger zone and man play to man, covers and aggressive traps fall. But as he did against almost every other team that Yessoufou has on the technique to a record of three,467 profession points, the Baylor Commit was not affected.

“I have trained high school basketball since 1993 and he is one of the patient children I saw,” said Alexander on Saturday morning of the Bay Area News Group: “You get many children who are good, but they” re built athletics. But he had patience and sportiness, and I loved that on him. “

Yessoufou engraved his name on the record book on Saturday evening by scoring 30 points in a 93: 62 victory over Weston Ranch-Stockton with his brand-shaped acrobatics and high-ranking jumpers.

He converted the legend of the Bay Area and the former Duke captain Demarcus Nelson with 3,462 points only a few weeks later to place # 2 The native Vallejo let his jersey retired From the local high school.

Nelson had an eye on Yessoufou all year round. During his jersey retirement ceremony in Vallejo two weeks ago, Nelson was asked what it did for as long as he did.

He said to this news organization: “Records should always be broken, and there is always something for the youth to strive for. It is a child in the south that is 300 points away and he should break it before the end of this year. I think that's just great. “

Nelson posted a video They congratulate Yessoufou on social media on Saturday evening.

“You should be proud, you should be happy and I hope this is a very special day for you and your family,” said Nelson. “I would like to congratulate you, the new top scorer ever in California.”

Fremont will not be the one school within the Bay area that Tound has lit on his 4 -year -old march towards history.

Salesian recently gave St. Joseph all the pieces that could possibly be avoided At the contra Costa College. The switching defense of coach Bill Mellis stopped Yessoufou Only 23 points, his second lowest edition of the season in a 76-67 St. Joseph-Sieg.

“We didn't want to stop him,” said Mellis after the sport. “It was more about stopping the other boys, and we didn't do that.”

Two years ago, Dougherty Valley had the not envied task of facing the Benin native.

Despite the leading role, two future division-i guards and playing the sport in San Ramon had no answers to the 6-foot 6 rating machine.

Yessoufou scored 29 points within the semi -finals of the Norcal Open Division as Saint Joseph survived an offended wild cat Rally to win 87-76.

California's top scorer also scored 33 points on Oakland Tech this season. In 2023, Yessoufou fell 44 points against St. Francis, the second highest variety of his profession.

At the start of this season he dominated Berkeley on the technique to a 38-point night. The Yellow Jackets tried to hold through Yessoufou to clog his lanes, and the all-American of McDonald's reacted with five 3 converters.

“He is probably the best player I have ever seen as a high school trainer,” said Berkeley coach Mike Hudson on Saturday afternoon about this news organization. “I think he will be an NBA all star within five years.”

The record breaker will not be tortured to torture the Bay Area teams. Because St. Joseph plays within the central section, it’s Could either be placed in Norcal or Socal clips For regional playoffs.

“I would play against someone at any time and every day,” said Yessoufou after the Salesian game. “For me it is about playing the best competition.”

NEW YORK – The masked gunman who stalked and killed the top of one in all the biggest U.S. medical health insurance corporations on a Manhattan sidewalk used ammunition with the words “deny,” “defend” and “depose,” a police official said Thursday.

The official was not authorized to publicly discuss details of the continued investigation and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, 50, died Wednesday in an ambush as he walked to the corporate's annual investor conference at a Hilton hotel in Midtown, just blocks from tourist attractions similar to Radio City Music Hall and the Museum of Modern Type removed.

The words on the ammunition could have been a reference to strategies utilized by insurance firms to avoid paying damages.

Investigators recovered several 9mm shell casings outside the hotel and a cellphone from the alley through which the shooter fled, NYPD Chief Detective Joseph Kenny said earlier.

The murder and the shooter's movements within the minutes before and after were captured by a few of the quite a few surveillance cameras in that a part of town.

Investigators consider, based on surveillance video and evidence collected on the scene, that the shooter had not less than some firearms training and experience with firearms and that the weapon was equipped with a silencer, the official said.

Investigators are also looking into whether the suspect had prepositioned a bicycle as a part of an escape plan, the official said. The suspect fled on a bicycle and was last seen riding into Central Park.

Authorities conducted DNA and fingerprint evaluation on items found nearby, including a water bottle they consider the suspect could have discarded, the official said.

Surveillance camera video showed the gunman approach Thompson from behind, point his pistol and fire several shots. He barely paused to clear a temporary weapons jam because the dying health manager fell to the bottom.

Other surveillance cameras recorded the early stages of the shooter's escape. He was seen fleeing the block across a pedestrian mall after which escaping on his bicycle. Police used drones, helicopters and dogs in an intensive search, however the killer's whereabouts remained unknown.

Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch said that while investigators haven’t yet determined a motive, the shooting was not a random act of violence.

“Many people walked past the suspect, but he appeared to be waiting for his intended target,” Tisch said at a news conference Wednesday.

“It appears from the video that he is knowledgeable about firearms as he was able to troubleshoot the malfunctions fairly quickly,” Kenny said.

Police released several surveillance images of the person, who was wearing a hooded jacket and a mask that covered most of his face and wouldn’t have drawn attention on a chilly winter day. Some of the photos were taken at a Starbucks coffee shop shortly before the shooting.

“Brian was a valued colleague and friend to all who worked with him,” the Minnetonka, Minn.-based insurer’s parent company, UnitedHealth Group Inc., said in an announcement. “We are working closely with the NYPD and ask for your patience and understanding during this difficult time.”

Thompson's wife, Paulette Thompson, told NBC News that he told her “there were some people who had threatened him.” She didn’t provide details but suggested the threats could have been related to insurance coverage issues.

Eric Werner, the police chief within the Minneapolis suburb where Thompson lived, said his department had not received any reports of threats against the manager.

Investigators also searched Thompson's hotel room, interviewed his colleagues at UnitedHealthcare and checked his social media, Kenny said.

Police initially said the shooter rode a motorcycle from town's bike-sharing program CitiBike into Central Park. However, a spokesman for this system operator Lyft said law enforcement officials informed the corporate Wednesday afternoon that the bike was not from the CitiBike fleet.

Healthcare giant UnitedHealth Group held its annual meeting with investors to update Wall Street on the corporate's direction and expectations for the approaching 12 months. The company ended the conference early after Thompson's death.

Thompson, a father of two sons, had been with the corporate since 2004 and served as CEO for greater than three years.

UnitedHealthcare is the biggest provider of Medicare Advantage plans within the United States, administering medical health insurance coverage for employers and state and federally funded Medicaid programs.

Governor of Minnesota. Tim Waltz posted on social platform X that the state “directs our prayers to Brian’s family and the UnitedHealthcare team.”

“This is terrible news and a terrible loss for Minnesota’s economy and health care,” the Democrat wrote.

___

Balsamo reported from Washington.

Originally published: December 5, 2024 at 7:10 am PST

Many voters are willing to simply accept misinformation from politicians – even in the event that they comprehend it is factually incorrect. Our researchVoters often recognize when their party's claims usually are not based on objective evidence, yet they respond positively once they consider these inaccurate statements reflect a deeper, more vital “truth.”

Our team conducted a series of online surveys with over 3,900 American voters from 2018 to 2023. These surveys were designed to acquire responses about how they evaluate policy statements made by various politicians, even in the event that they consider those statements to be factually inaccurate.

Consider former President Donald Trump’s claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Even amongst his supporters, who recognized that his claims of election fraud weren’t based on objective evidencewe found that they usually tend to view these allegations as relevant to “American priorities”: for instance, they consider that the political system is illegitimate and contrary to their interests.

The same logic applies to factually incorrect statements about COVID-19 vaccinations President Joe Biden made suggesting that vaccinated people couldn’t spread the diseaseIn our polls, voters who supported the president considered the statement vital to American priorities, regardless that they acknowledged that it contained factual inaccuracies.

These questions allowed us to search out out what criteria guide voter behavior depending on who’s making which statement. Voters of each parties placed more emphasis on “moral truth” when evaluating a politician they liked. When evaluating a politician they didn’t like, nonetheless, voters relied more on strict objectivity.

Our surveys documented how voters provide such justifications for his or her partisan standard-bearers, revealing a big degree of “moral flexibility” in voters’ political judgment. I conducted this research with Oliver Hahl from Carnegie Mellon University, Ethan Poskanzer the University of Colorado and Ezra Zuckerman Sivan of MIT.

Why it can be crucial

Discussions about combating misinformation often concentrate on the necessity for higher fact-checking and education. But our discovery illustrates the deeper but missed causes behind voters' tolerance and support for factually inaccurate statements. The results suggest that misinformation survives not only due to voters' “gullibility,” but additionally due to their moral considerations about whether partisan ends justify the means.

If voters consciously decide to support misinformation since it aligns with their partisan political beliefs, then providing factual corrections is not going to be enough to guard the democratic norm that public policy is predicated on objective facts.

What will not be yet known

Our research raises critical questions on the best way to combat such moral flexibility and its consequences.

Of course, we don’t think that such moral flexibility is fundamentally fallacious. For example, as a society we are likely to think it will not be an issue to inform children that Santa Claus exists since it protects certain values ​​- corresponding to children's innocence and imagination.

But in relation to public debate on a difficulty that ought to be based on objective evidence, moral flexibility limits the extent to which partisan groups can agree on facts, let alone what policies may be derived from them.

What happens next?

What makes people on opposite sides of the political spectrum work together once they can't agree on what’s factually right?

There are probably more areas where partisan voters agree than the “culture war” narrative suggests – and we hope to learn from them. In collaboration with Sociologist Sang Won Hanwe examine legislators who often co-sponsor bills with politicians from the opposing party.

Sociologists Daniel DellaPosta, Liam Vinegar and I also examine what contributes to the polarization of politicians when voters of various party affiliations even have a consensus. For example, a majority of Democratic and Republican voters Support for background checks for the acquisition of weapons, while draft laws on such measures commonly fail.

The Research Brief is a summary of interesting scientific papers.

Tensions rise after killing of Hamas leader

So much needed to go right for Djokovic to even get the possibility to play within the Wimbledon final against Alcaraz 39 days after undergoing meniscus surgery on his right knee. In the tip, it was perhaps too good as he was attempting to get back into shape.

Djokovic was lucky not only because he drew a qualifier and a wildcard in the primary two rounds, but in addition because Alcaraz and world primary Jannik Sinner ended up on the opposite side of the draw. He then played against Alexei Popyrin, who had little centre court experience, and an out-of-form Holger Rune.

His next opponent seemed to be a formidable challenge – Alex de Minaur, one other Australian, a grass-court lover and, most significantly, a top-10 player with the wheels and engine to last all day. De Minaur even showed his newfound power to maintain up with Djokovic when he shifts up the gears.

But De Minaur tore his hip cartilage and withdrew, giving Djokovic more rest before playing Alcaraz, who was five levels tougher. By the time he got his level back to the extent needed to compete with Alcaraz, Djokovic was already two sets behind.

So different. Too different. Everything had gone right – although he only needed a little bit adversity on the pitch to be ready for this ultimate test.

The end result of the upcoming US presidential election can have a major impact on relations between the US and its allies. While President Joe Biden is a firm believer Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is a supporter of the transatlantic alliance and has railed for years against US participation in NATO, the military alliance commonly known as NATO.

In February 2024, for instance, Trump said that if he were re-elected as president, he would call on Russia to “whatever they need” against NATO members who’re “delinquent” because they’ve not invested enough in their very own military capabilities. Foreign policy commentators saw this as an invite for Russia to attack these NATO countries.

In September 2022, six months after Russia’s large-scale invasion, Ukraine applied to affix NATO. Now Ukraine’s potential membership is some of the necessary issues that representatives of the The 32 member states of NATO in North America and Europe might be considered at their meeting in Washington in July 2024.

Debates about policy towards alliances corresponding to NATO are based on the idea that NATO requires its members to intervene and help defend itself if one other alliance member is attacked.

As Political scientist who study Given the role of international organizations corresponding to NATO, we consider it’s important to grasp that alliance arrangements are literally more flexible than people think.

In practice, it is feasible for the United States and other Western countries to remain out of a conflict involving a NATO country without having to interrupt their alliance obligations. The text of the NATO treaty accommodates loopholes that allow member countries to remain out of other members' wars in certain situations.

What does Article 5 really mean?

A central a part of the NATO treaty, which countries sign once they join the alliance, known as Article 5It states that an “armed attack” against a NATO member in Europe or North America “shall be regarded as an attack against all NATO members.”

In the event of such an attack, NATO states undertake to help the country in need, including through “the use of armed force to restore and maintain security in the North Atlantic area”.

However, the treaty doesn’t contain a transparent definition of what an “armed attack” actually is.

This was necessary in February 2020 when Türkiye calls for NATO meeting It also called on NATO to intervene with military force within the Syrian civil war in response to attacks by Russian and Syrian forces on its territory. 33 Turkish soldiers were killed within the attacks. The NATO allies have decided against it Turkey should be defended with military force, on the grounds that the size of the violence against Turkey just isn’t large enough to talk of an “armed attack”.

Further exceptions to the rule

Even if NATO members resolve that Article 5 should apply to a specific situation, each country can still resolve individually methods to act. That is, while NATO have administrative staff based in BrusselsThere isn’t any central NATO authority that tells each country what to do.

Instead, each country tells NATO what it’s willing to do – and what it just isn’t.

NATO members have only officially invoked Article 5 once – after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon outside Washington.

At that point, 13 NATO countries sent fighter jets to assist the USA They patrol the skies from mid-October 2001 to mid-May 2002.

But most NATO allies decided to not send troops to Afghanistan to support the US within the fight against the Taliban. This inaction by some NATO allies was not seen as a breach of contract and didn’t trigger any major debate – and the countries that selected not to affix the fight were neither sanctioned nor expelled from the alliance.

The NATO treaty also provides for some geographical exceptions. When Argentina went to war with Britain (a NATO member) over the Falkland Islands in 1982, the United States and other NATO members were in a position to benefit from the indisputable fact that The alliance only covers the North Atlantic area as a reason to remain out of the conflict.

Would public opinion force the president to act?

Some political scientists argue that voters will demand of their leaders to take the country to war to defend an ally. This implies that what really binds the members of an alliance together just isn’t the legal text of a global treaty itself, since no international court has the facility to implement the contractbut quite the general public's expectations about what it means to be an ally.

As a part of our research To learn the way the American public feels about international legal obligations, we decided to conduct an experiment to check whether presidents can use the language of alliance loopholes as a justification for keeping the United States out of a war involving an ally.

In 2022 and 2023, we conducted two survey-based experiments during which we asked nearly 5,000 American adults to assume a hypothetical scenario during which a U.S. ally is attacked by a strong neighbor.

Some respondents were told that the language of the alliance treaty would allow the U.S. government to forego sending troops to defend the attacked ally, while others weren’t given this information. Although no specific alliance was mentioned within the survey, we described the terms of the alliance in a way that was consistent with language utilized in treaties corresponding to NATO. We then asked respondents to inform us their views on sending U.S. troops to defend the attacked ally.

Our results showed a giant difference between individuals who were told about the pliability of the alliance treaty and people who weren’t. While respondents from each groups were generally inclined to return to assistance from an ally, their willingness to accomplish that was significantly lower once they were told that the alliance treaty doesn’t necessarily require the United States to send troops.

This suggests that, under certain circumstances, political leaders can reach convincing a big portion of the general public that it’s okay to desert an ally in times of need.

So when debates arise about U.S. policy toward its allies—and whether it should admit latest members like Ukraine—it’s important for each side to acknowledge that alliance commitments are neither legally nor politically binding as popular perceptions suggest.