Republican Mike Rogers expressed support Thursday for a “pause” on data center construction as he runs against a progressive Democrat for Michigan’s open Senate seat.

Michigan is one of the top Senate battlegrounds this cycle, with Democrats hoping to hold on to the seat being vacated by retiring Sen. Gary Peters.

Asked during a news conference about his “policy on data centers,” Rogers said, “I think we need to take a pause, probably, and make sure that we’re answering all the questions that people have.”

Rogers specified to the Detroit News that he supports a one-year moratorium on data centers in Michigan — a proposal state policymakers would approve — not a national ban.

“While I don’t support a federal ban, Michigan needs stronger guardrails to protect community control, prevent utility price hikes, protect our water and stop pay-to-play schemes,” Rogers told the News.

“That is why I am calling for a one-year moratorium on new data centers until we establish a fair, transparent approval process that puts local communities first.”

The position is a massive shift for the former congressman and separates him from most of the Republican Party and even many Democrats. Rogers’ campaign did not immediately respond to POLITICO’s requests for comment or clarification.

Rogers’ opponent, Democrat Abdul El-Sayed, has called for strict new standards to prevent data center impacts on the electric grid, water and local communities, but has not called for a large-scale moratorium, as other progressives have.

Data centers have become a pivotal issue in numerous midterm campaign as voters grow increasingly weary of the facilities and blame them for electricity costs and other impacts. The Data Center Coalition has said the facilities alone are not to blame for higher utility rates.

Data centers are also defining another major Senate campaign this year — the Ohio contest between Republican Sen. Jon Husted and former Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown, who has accused Husted of being too tight with data centers.

This week, the National Republican Senatorial Committee sent a memo to the technology sector warning that data centers are proving toxic in the midterms, especially in the fight between Husted and Brown.

On Capitol Hill, House lawmakers are moving forward with legislation called the Ratepayer Protection Act, H.R. 9340, to shield Americans from the impact of data centers. Husted is sponsoring the Senate companion, S. 5028.

In the past, Rogers has been generally supportive of the data center build-out. In a July interview with ABC affiliate WXYZ, he said there should be electric grid and environmental rules for data centers, but communities that want them should be able to allow their construction.

“If the people are willing to put up with one of these things in their community, they ought to have direct benefit,” he said. “I think that’s a better way to get the community involved in the decision.”

El-Sayed, who focused a large portion of his primary campaign against Rep. Haley Stevens, seemed skeptical of Rogers’ change. He responded to the news on X with an emoji with its eyebrow raised.

“People really effing hate data centers,” the Democrat said in one campaign event.

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) called for a state data center moratorium during her race for governor. She lost the primary.

Source link

The ground is up, the sky is down, and Andy Burnham’s vibe just isn’t “establishment”, you know? That last bit’s according to Guardian columnist Johnathan Freedland. Though, of course, that statement makes almost as much sense as either of the other two.

"Burnham's vibe is not establishment."

Guardian columnist Jonathan Freedland says it's difficult for the Green Party to run an "anti-establishment" campaign against PM Andy Burnham. #Newsnight pic.twitter.com/MynzDRDdez

— BBC Newsnight (@BBCNewsnight) August 19, 2026

Advertisement

Politics is about vibes – and Burnham is vibing

In his recent appearance on BBC’s Newsnight, Freedland opined that:

So much of politics in the 21st century is about vibes, and part of the vibe of Zack Polanski is …one of his messages that he’s the anti-establishment candidate on the left.

Freedland pronounces ‘vibe’ there like a recently acquired novelty from a foreign language, as opposed to – you know – common parlance for anyone aged 40 or below. Also, politics is a surface-level popularity contest now? What is the world coming to!

Freedland goes on:

That was easy when you’re running against Sir Kier Starmer, who looked like, even if it was more complicated, he looked like an establishment figure.

Andy Burnham’s vibe is not establishment in the same way – the Manchester, the outsider, the t-shirt under the jacket. Just, the vibe of him is different.

‘He can’t be the establishment – he’s from the North! AND he wears a t-shirt.’ Absolutely cracking political analysis right there, a credit to Newsnight for airing it. I bet Burnham doesn’t even pronounce ‘scone’ right, the bloody renegade.

#1 warm-up act for No.10

Then, we get to the crux of the matter:

It’s harder to run a left anti-establishment message against Andy Burnham than it was against Keir Starmer.

You know what, I’ve got to give Freedland that one. That’s hardly a complement though – it’s just that Starmer was a howling, soulless void in the shape of a man. Practically anyone would look like a mover-and-shaker following that act.

Not you, Wes Streeting. I said practically anyone.

Freedland then heaped praise on Burnham’s integrity, of all things:

And then in terms of substance, you’ve got a prime minister now who says that 40 years of neoliberalism was a terrible mistake – well that’s stealing a kind of Zack Polanski line, and trying to close off Gaza as an issue by saying ‘we got things wrong’.

Really demonstrating the point that politics is vibes-based there mate. Burnham may criticise neoliberalism, but his actions say another thing. As the Canary’s Cameron Baillie wrote:

Burnham says he would still obey Rachel Reeves’s fiscal rules. That means accepting the same Treasury constraints that have blocked serious public investment for decades. Can you really challenge neoliberalism while simultaneously reassuring bond markets, protecting fiscal rules, and refusing to confront financiers?

And don’t even get me started on how much ‘we got things wrong’ on Gaza doesn’t even begin to cover it. Call me when Burnham admits the UK is complicit in genocide, and then follows through and bloody does something about it.

‘Adolescent politics’

Freedland finished off his insightful ramble with two final bangers:

So he’s trying to eat into the Polanski base, and so far pollsters are saying that voters have shifted to Labour, they’ve actually come more from the Green side than the Reform side. So it’s Polanski, even in a way more than Farage, who has to worry about Burnham very specifically.

Again, Burnham is following Starmer’s premiership. It’s hardly the political shock of the century if some Labour voters who couldn’t bring themselves to vote for the centrist’s centrist have now returned to the fold.

Also, I just think Burnham’s kind of doing stuff shows up Polanski’s adolescent politics, the sort of protest gesture stuff, while Burnham is there in Downing Street – or in Number Ten North – actually able to affect change. Some voters on the left will look at that choice and think “we’d rather go with the guy who can actually do things, rather than just wear a slogan on a t-shirt.

It’s almost like one of them’s the prime minister and the other isn’t even an MP. But sure, Burnham’s the very spitting image of an anti-establishment figure.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to claim Polanski’s a 100% political outsider by any stretch. The man was a Lib Dem – though of course, we all deserve second chances.

But next to Andy ‘I was in Blair’s cabinet during the Iraq war‘ Burnham? Why, Polanski’s practically popping off AND rizzed up, as the kids are saying.

Featured image via the Canary

By Grace

Source link

Sebastian Stan in 2025

Robert Pattinson in 2022’s The Batman

Source link

The TV comeback a decade in the making is almost upon us.

Earlier this year, it was revealed that a third and final season of the domestic drama Doctor Foster was coming to our screens in 2027, with Suranne Jones returning as TV’s most chaotic GP.

More details about the new series have been revealed, including exactly what’s in store this time around.

The official synopsis had already teased: “Ten years ago, on discovering her husband Simon was having an affair, Gemma Foster enacted a masterful revenge. But the fallout was devastating when her 15-year-old son Tom disappeared.

Advertisement

“Now, in series three, Gemma is still a GP, still in the same house, but on the brink of a fresh start: she has met someone new and is getting married. But as the wedding day draws closer, and friends and family gather, shadows from the past begin to re-emerge threatening both her happiness and her reputation.”

“As Gemma fights to protect those she loves and expose whoever’s intent on hurting her, will she be able to put the past to bed, dispense justice, and claim the future she deserves, before it is too late?” the teaser concludes.

Gemma’s new man will be played by Slow Horses actor Dustin Demri-Burns, with Adam James, Thusitha Jayasundera and Anna Madeley also set to return after their appearances in the first two seasons, alongside series leads Tom Taylor and Bertie Carvel.

Meanwhile, Riot Women star Rosalie Craig will play a new character, joining the series alongside fellow new additions Gracie Oddie-James, Lois Baglin, Karima McAdams, Anjana Vasan, Michael Balogun, Christina Balmer, Justin Salinger and Ash Tandon.

Suranne previously claimed: “When I got the call to ask if I wanted to return as Gemma Foster, I knew the time was right. We needed space from the first two series, and we needed Tom – Gemma and Simon’s runaway son – to return as an adult with questions.

Advertisement

“For me, this time around it’s about accountability and questioning – ‘can we ever truly sever ties with our past and the damage or traumas that haunt us, so we can fully move forward?’. Gemma and Simon have so much to unpick!”

Doctor Foster became a huge hit when it debuted in 2015, with the cast also including Jodie Comer and Victoria Hamilton, whose character later appeared in her own spin-off, Life.

Suranne’s leading performance in the show earned her two NTAs, a Royal Television Society Award and a TV Bafta.

Source link

Our solicitors have today sent the letter below to Police Scotland.

(Click pics to enlarge.)

It’s worth remembering what this is about.

– Peter Murrell was recently sentenced to over five years in prison for misappropriating approximately £400,000 from the SNP, which is the crime of embezzlement.

Advertisement

– John Swinney recently admitted that the SNP misappropriated close to £700,000 from donors to “ring-fenced” fundraisers for a second indyref, spending the money on party interests instead, which is also the crime of embezzlement.

– Police Scotland and the Crown Office have declined to prosecute the second embezzlement offence, saying that they investigated it before and somehow failed to notice what the First Minister has now publicly admitted on camera.

?

– Despite the First Minister’s admission, which came after the police investigation into the missing money was closed, Police Scotland inexplicably refuse to consider this as “new evidence” and reopen the investigation.

Advertisement

– Police Scotland and the Crown Office blame each other for the decision not to prosecute, but neither will release any correspondence between them on the subject to clear up which of them is telling something at least in vague proximity to the truth.

?

– Police Scotland and the Crown Office also both flatly refuse to release the written statement given to them by Nicola Sturgeon regarding the investigation following her seven-hour “no comment” interview.

(Sturgeon also refuses to release it, despite previously saying she would, and the Crown Office blocked Police Scotland’s attempts to interview her again on account of her lack of co-operation.)

Advertisement

The former First Minister, the current First Minister, the police and the prosecution service are all on the same side, saying the same thing: there’s nothing to see here, but you can’t see it anyway.

(Their being on the same side is all the stranger when you consider that two of them are supposed to be investigating crimes committed by the party the other two were leader and deputy leader of at the time.)

In the name of justice, transparency and accountability, we will continue trying to expose what all of them are united in not wanting you to know. As ever, we’ll keep you updated on how it goes.

Source link

Source link

Diane Morgan in character as Mandy

Source link

UK pro-Palestine groups have called for a full ban on arms sales to Israel. The demand comes a year on from the UK’s recognition of Palestinian statehood.

Palestinian Forum in Britain, Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Stop the War Coalition, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Friends of Al-Aqsa and Muslim Association of Britain all co-signed the call.

Their 19 August statement said:

Nearly three years into Israel’s continuing genocide in Gaza, Palestinians still face killing, starvation and displacement, while British-funded humanitarian aid remains subject to Israeli restrictions.

The Government must secure an end to Israeli attacks and unrestricted humanitarian access to Gaza.

Advertisement

Adding that:

Across the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, settlement expansion, settler violence and restrictions on Al-Aqsa Mosque continue to intensify – restrictions the Government must act to end.

A year on from the UK’s recognition of the State of Palestine, that decision has yet to be matched by action.

And:

Britain’s commitment to international law cannot be hostage to Israel’s election timetable. Real action means confronting Britain’s own complicity.

The groups also urged an end to UK arms sales to the settler colonial state:

That means ending the arms trade with Israel, suspending military and intelligence support that facilitate violations of international law, and stopping British businesses, banks, universities and charities from supporting occupation or settlement activity – starting with a ban on trade connected to Israel’s illegal occupation and comprehensive sanctions on Israel.

Their call comes ahead of a major national demonstration in solidarity with Palestine on Saturday 10 October:

Join us for the national march in central London to mark three years of the ongoing genocide. We call on people across the country to stand together in demanding justice and an end to British complicity.

Pro-Palestine groups on UK arms sales to Israel

In February 2026, Oxfam reported:

Since 2015, the UK has licensed at least £500 million worth of military exports to Israel.

However, given the opaque nature of the global arms trade, Oxfam warned this was likely to be a severe underestimate:

There are also a number of additional open licences in place that the government does not publicly report on, so the figure is likely to be much higher.

Stop the War Coalition vice-president Chris Nineham told New Arab that UK recognition:

was welcome, but, as we feared, it was symbolic.

He said the people of Palestine “need action”:

and we are calling on our government to end British support for Israel immediately.

Adding:

We are working to organise another mass demonstration on 10 October to pressure it to take action.

It is essential that pressure is kept on the UK government. Whether through marches, protests, legal actions, investigative reporting and other routes, it all counts towards holding the UK establishment to account for its complicity in crimes against the Palestinian people.

Featured image via the Canary

By Joe Glenton

Source link

Source link

Source link