#FiNe

Happy birthday ?

Hello, To solve your problem you need just to follow the steps of this video:click And I'm sure that your problem will be solved ! Good luck!

US President Donald Trump has hailed a Supreme Court ruling upholding his travel ban which covers people from several Muslim-majority countries. Lower courts had deemed the ban unconstitutional, but the US top court reversed the decision in a 5-4 conservative majority ruling. At a White House meeting to discuss Mr Trump's proposed border wall he lauded the decision as "a tremendous success". The court's reversal is viewed as a victory for the Trump administration. The ban prohibits most people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen from entering the US. Mr Trump said the Supreme Court decision was a "great victory" for the nation and constitution. "We have to be tough and we have to be safe and we have to be secure," the Republican president said in Tuesday's meeting with lawmakers. "The ruling shows that all the attacks from the media and the Democrat politicians were wrong, and they turned out to be very wrong," he added. He added: "If you look at the European Union, they're meeting right now to toughen up their immigration policies because they've been over-run, they've been over-run. "And frankly, a lot of those countries are not the same places anymore." The travel ban, which the Supreme Court allowed to take effect in December, has been widely criticised by refugee and human rights groups. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion, which said the travel ban was "squarely within the scope of Presidential authority". He also rejected arguments that the ban discriminated against Muslims. What Trump team has said about Islam America's 'invisible' Muslims "The Proclamation is expressly premised on legitimate purposes: preventing entry of nationals who cannot be adequately vetted and inducing other nations to improve their practices," Chief Justice Roberts wrote. "The text says nothing about religion." Shortly after the Supreme Court released its decision, President Donald Trump shared the news from his Twitter account. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined Justice Sonia Sotomayor in the dissenting opinion, which argues the court failed to uphold the religious liberty guaranteed by the first amendment of the US constitution. "It leaves undisturbed a policy first advertised openly and unequivocally as a 'total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States' because the policy now masquerades behind a facade of national-security concerns," Justice Sotomayor wrote. The dissent also states that "a reasonable observer would conclude that [the ban] was motivated by anti-Muslim animus". What does this ruling mean? The travel ban has been in place since December, when the Supreme Court ruled that it could go into full effect, pending legal challenges. Trump travel ban: All you need to know Coming to America: One translator's harrowing journey The ban prevents most immigrants, refugees and visa holders from five Muslim-majority countries - Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen - as well as North Korea and Venezuela from entering the US. But the restrictions on North Korea and Venezuela were not part of the legal challenge. The ban allows for waivers on a case-by-case basis, but applicants who cannot afford an attorney to go through the waiver process will likely be unable to immigrate to the US, immigration advocates say. Justice Stephen Breyer noted in his dissenting opinion that the State Department reported that only two waivers were approved out of 6,555 applicants during the first month of the travel ban. The high court has been issuing a number of decisions this week, including a ruling against a California law that required clinics to inform women of the availability of abortions paid for by the state. The Court ruled that the law violated the free speech rights of Christian facilities. Third time's a charm Analysis by Anthony Zurcher, BBC News - at the scene Despite the controversial nature of Donald Trump's travel ban, there were more abortion rights activists outside the Supreme Court on Tuesday morning than immigration protesters. Perhaps it's because abortion has been a contentious legal battle for decades, while the president's travel directive had been in effect, and out of the headlines, for months. Attention in recent weeks has been on migrants coming across the southern US border, not visitors and prospective residents from countries like Libya, Iran, Yemen and Syria. Nevertheless, this marks a significant victory for Mr Trump - and for presidential power to set immigration policy in general - albeit by the narrowest of margins. The five court justices said they took the president's order on its face, and separated it from his more bombastic anti-Muslim comments made on the presidential campaign trail and via Twitter. The travel ban was implemented haphazardly at the start of the Trump administration and faced repeated setbacks from the US legal system. In the end, however, the president got his way - or at least enough of his way to claim success. The third time turned out to be the charm. What's the reaction? The White House issued a statement saying the ruling was "a tremendous victory for the American People and the Constitution". "In this era of worldwide terrorism and extremist movements bent on harming innocent civilians, we must properly vet those coming into our country." Immigration lawyer Cyrus Mehta told the BBC that the majority opinion "gave in to President Trump's hate and bigotry and will be viewed as a blemish". He added that Congress could overrule the decision "so that a future president will not have a blank cheque to block the entire people of a nation - from babies to grandmothers - out of hate, fear or bigotry. That is our only hope for redemption as a nation". Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement that the decision was "critical to ensuring the continued authority of President Trump - and all future presidents - to protect the American people". US residents trapped in legal limbo at airport Islamophobia: New name, old fear Omar Jadwat, director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Immigrant Rights Project called the ruling one of the court's "great failures". "We must make it crystal clear to our elected representatives: If you are not taking action to rescind and dismantle Trump's Muslim ban, you are not upholding this country's most basic principles of freedom and equality." What's the context? Mr Trump's ban has seen several iterations. Iraq and Chad were banned in previous versions. Iraq was removed for having "a close co-operative relationship with the US" and Chad for having "sufficiently improved its practices". The administration said that the ban was the result of carefully considering national security interests, but critics argued it was fulfilling his campaign promise for "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States". The state of Hawaii had challenged the ban and a federal judge blocked its implementation. Critics have noted that major attacks such as the 9/11 New York attacks, the Boston marathon bombing and the Orlando nightclub attack were carried out by people from countries not on the list, such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Kyrgyzstan, or by US-born attackers.

Hello, The problem is from your web , you've a slowly connection and this happended to me too but I solved it. You need just to turn off you modem for 1 min , then ignite it again. If this It doesn't work , you have to supply the itensity of your internet! Good luck!!

Hello , You need just uninstall your cs1.6 and download the best version from this link : http://rampage.us.lt/cs-download-free-full-version.html It is better than all others versions , & I'm sure that you wont face problem next time! Regards,

Turkey's long-standing leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan remains ahead in presidential elections with 94% of votes counted, state media report. Mr Erdogan has 53%, while his closest rival, Muharrem Ince, is on 31%. If Mr Erdogan is confirmed with more than 50% of the final vote, he will be declared the winner and avoid the need for a second round of voting. Opposition parties have raised concerns about vote-rigging and electoral fraud. As well as the presidency, voters are also choosing members of parliament. Mr Erdogan's party is ahead in that poll. Turkey's elections in 100 and 500 words Erdogan: Turkey's pugnacious president Reality Check: The numbers behind Turkey's crackdown With 93% of the votes for parliament counted, the president's AK Party leads with 43% of the votes, the state news agency Anadolu reports. The main opposition CHP is on 23%. Crucially, the pro-Kurdish HDP looks set to reach the 10% threshold and enter parliament. This may make it harder for Mr Erdogan's party and its ally the MHP to reach a majority, although currently they are on course to do so. Voter turnout is high, at almost 87%, the state broadcaster says. Initial results were thought likely to favour the AK Party, so Mr Erdogan's lead is expected to decrease as more votes are counted. His opponent accused the state news agency of being mani[CENSORED]tive by releasing results from pro-Erdogan areas first. And, as the BBC's Mark Lowen points out, the opposition is disputing the agency's reports of how many ballot boxes have been opened: Turkey remains under a state of emergency imposed in the aftermath of a failed coup in July 2016. Who is standing for president? These elections were originally scheduled for November 2019 but were brought forward by Mr Erdogan. He is seeking a second term as president, and would govern under a new constitution which grants the president new powers. Mr Erdogan was prime minister for 11 years before becoming president in 2014. Should he win, Mr Ince has promised to push back what he characterised as a slide into authoritarian rule under Mr Erdogan. But his opponent accused the former physics teacher of not having the skills to lead. Around 60 million Turks were eligible to take part in Sunday's dual polls. In all, there were six candidates on the presidential ballot. If no one candidate crosses the 50% threshold in an outright win, the top two will face off in a second-round vote on 8 July. Is the vote likely to be fair? Security was tight at polling stations. Ahead of the vote, concerns were raised about potential voter intimidation and electoral fraud. Turkey's election commission has already said it will investigate alleged irregularities in Urfa province, on the southern border with Syria. Mr Ince said he would be spending the night at the electoral commission's headquarters in Ankara to ensure a fair count. In a tweet, he asked election observers not to leave the ballot boxes. Mr Ince said the commission's system reports 37% of boxes have been opened, whereas Anadolu says 85% of votes have been counted. Rights activists also say the press is not free to report on all sides. Under Mr Erdogan's rule, the country has become the world's biggest jailer of journalists, according to monitoring groups. What effect will the new constitution have? While the other candidates have rejected the changes, endorsed in endorsed in a tight referendum last year by 51% of voters, Mr Erdogan would start his second term in a turbo-charged version of the job. The job of prime minister would be scrapped and the president would gain new powers, including the ability to directly appoint senior officials. What have been the main election issues? The biggest is the economy. The Turkish lira has tanked and inflation stands at around 11%. Terrorism is another vexed issue, as Turkey faces attacks from Kurdish militants and the jihadists of the Islamic State group.

Hello , To fix your problem you need just to follow the steps of this video: I'm sure that your problem will be solved ? Good luck!

A French-Belgian industrialist who was the victim of one of France's most notorious kidnappings has died aged 80. In 1978 Baron Edouard-Jean Empain, then head of the Schneider Group, was seized at gunpoint from his chauffeur-driven car near his home in Paris. He was held for 63 days, chained in darkness, starved, and beaten. The case grabbed attention when the kidnappers cut off his fingertip and threatened further mutilation unless his family paid a huge ransom. Baron Empain was 40 at the time, and one of France's leading captains of industry. His Schneider group comprised some 300 companies and employed 150,000 people worldwide. He was the grandson of Edouard Empain, who had been ennobled by the King of the Belgians after building an industrial empire in the late 19th Century. Botched ambush In January 1978 armed men stopped his car on Avenue Foch, in Paris' wealthy 16th arrondissement. The chauffeur was bundled into a van - and quickly released- while kidnappers took the baron away in his car. There was initial speculation that he had been targeted by one of the left-wing militant groups that were seizing prominent industrialists across Europe at the time. But it quickly emerged that the abductors' motive was old-fashioned extortion. They contacted the family demanding 80m francs - the equivalent of about 50m euros (£45m) in today's money. The ransom note came with a packet containing the baron's left little finger. As kidnappings - both criminal and political - were becoming increasingly frequent, police decided to set an example, and vetoed plans by the family to pay up. Instead, they lured the kidnappers to a rendezvous point. But the ambush was botched and the ensuing shootout left two officers wounded. One the abductors was killed and another was captured, but the baron was still chained up in a hideaway in a Paris suburb. 'Broken man' The detained kidnapper, Alain Caillol, convinced his accomplices to release their captive. Two days later the baron was found wandering the streets south of Paris, disorientated and emaciated - with a 10-franc note his captors had given him to get home. Caillol later said they had experienced "Stockholm syndrome in reverse" - where the kidnappers end up sympathising with their victim. "He dominated us morally. Everyone saw in him the dream of what he wanted to be: handsome, rich, powerful, intelligent," Caillol told APF news agency in 2012. After serving his jail sentence, Caillol sought out Empain to ask for forgiveness. He was not the only one to feel sorry over the baron's ordeal. During the investigation, police had to delve into his private life to look for possible clues. As a result, his infidelities and gambling sprees became widely known. Public sympathy for him was limited and his wife divorced him shortly after his release. Empain was left bitter, feeling people had turned against him. He eventually withdrew from business life. "He was a completely broken man," one of the investigators recently told France Info radio. "It was terrible that he suffered so much for a few peccadilloes, while he himself showed impeccable virtue. He forgave his kidnappers... Even though he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, I felt he was hard-done by."

Hello, Maybe your trouble from your net , that's mean your connection is slow , you need to turn off your modem, for 10 minutes then ignite it again , and probably the problem from your ftp , maybe the password has been changed! Good luck

Hello , If you want to solve your problem you need just to follow my steps: 1- upload ur image in this site https://postimages.org/ 2- get the share link https://postimg.org/image/ctuypaj7p/efc57ffd/ 4- copy the share link ex:https://s18.postimg.org/mr5zikw15/hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.png I'm sure that your problem will be solved! Good luck!

Happy birthday! enjoy ?

Trump backs down on migrant family separations policy: US President Donald Trump has bowed to public pressure and signed an executive order promising to "keep families together" in migrant detentions. Mr Trump reversed his own policy amid international fury over the separation of undocumented parents and children. He said he had been swayed by images of children who have been taken from parents while they are jailed and prosecuted for illegal border-crossing. It was not immediately clear when Mr Trump's order would be implemented. "It's about keeping families together," Mr Trump said at the signing ceremony on Wednesday. "I did not like the sight of families being separated," he said, but added the administration would continue its "zero tolerance policy" of criminally prosecuting anyone who crosses the border illegally. The executive order states that immigrant families will be detained together, except in cases where there are concerns about the child's welfare, but it is unclear for how long. Mr Trump's order also calls for prioritising immigration cases involving detained families. Who has said what about US border crisis What is Trump's family-separation endgame? Who decided to take the children away? The president said his wife, Melania, and daughter, Ivanka, who reportedly have been applying pressure on him to drop the policy in recent days, "feel strongly" about ending the practice of separating migrant families. "I think anybody with a heart would feel very strongly about it," he said. "We don't like to see families separated." Vice-President Mike Pence and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, who has emerged as the face of the White House policy, were both present for Wednesday's order signing. Republican congressional leader Paul Ryan said the House of Representatives will vote on Thursday "on legislation to keep families together". He did not immediately provide details of the bill, but said it resolves the issue of so-called Dreamers, undocumented adult migrants who entered the US as children, "in a very elegant way". Trump backs down Analysis by Anthony Zurcher, BBC News, Washington For days administration officials have insisted they were simply following the law as written and their "zero tolerance" policy for illegal border crossings meant they "have to take the children away", in the president's words. Critics have countered that Mr Trump unilaterally created the situation that produced the heart-rending accounts of children separated from their parents, and he could unilaterally fix it. By taking executive action, the president is effectively acknowledging they were correct. Now the fight will probably move to the courts, with legal challenges to the administration's decision to hold detained families together while their immigration status is adjudicated. That is more politically hospitable ground for Republicans, who already face challenging mid-term congressional elections. Why the uproar? In April, the US attorney general announced a "zero-tolerance" policy to criminally charge and jail undocumented border crossers. As children cannot legally be jailed with their parents, they are kept in separate facilities. US immigration officials say more than 2,300 children have been taken from some 2,200 parents since 5 May. Pictures of dozens of children sleeping in fenced enclosures and audio of them crying emerged in recent days, provoking the widespread criticism. Under previous US administrations, immigrants caught crossing the border for the first time tended to be issued with court summonses and released. Where are the children taken? Holding cells: They are first detained at Customs and Border Protection (CBP) facilities, where chain-link fenced enclosures are used, though the children can only be legally held there for three days. Detention centres: They are then supposed to be moved to one of around 100 detention centres run through the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), part of the Department of Health and Human Services. US officials recently showed reporters around a converted Walmart Supercenter in Texas which was housing migrant boys aged 10-17. They apparently had access to beds, classes and games. "Tender age shelters": AP news agency reports that babies and toddlers are being taken to three "tender age shelters" in southern Texas. A CBP official said it is up to the discretion of border agents whether to detain "tender-aged" children, who are typically less than five years old. Tent camps: US officials have set up a tent camp for migrant children in Tornillo, Texas. Family members: Under US law, the children are meant to be released to stay with relatives or foster carers "without delay". In practice, the ORR says this process takes about two months. How are they reunited? Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has set up a hotline for parents to call after they are released from custody. However, a former ICE director has said some family separations are "permanent". What has global reaction been? The UK and Canadian prime ministers, Theresa May and Justin Trudeau, both called it "wrong". Pope Francis said he supported US Catholic bishops who described it as "immoral". French far-right leader Marine Le Pen, who in the past has praised Mr Trump's policy of curbing immigration, told French TV that she disagreed with splitting children from parents.

wlcm

welcome

Italy's right-wing populist Interior Minister, Matteo Salvini, has prompted a new outcry by saying he wants a census of the Roma community that would lead to non-Italians being deported. After a chorus of criticism he said his only aim was to protect Roma children. There are at least 130,000 Roma (Gypsies) in Italy, and many live in unlicensed camps on city outskirts. Last week Mr Salvini refused to allow a charity ship carrying 629 migrants into Italy. He has tried to limit the number of migrants entering Italy by blocking charity ships that rescue people off the Libyan coast. The Aquarius eventually arrived in the Spanish port of Valencia at the weekend. Since Mr Salvini's League party came to power this month with the anti-establishment Five Star movement, he has focused heavily on immigration. His remarks on Roma were eventually rebutted by his fellow deputy prime minister and leader of Five Star, Luigi di Maio, who made clear that a census was unconstitutional. How did Salvini cause offence? The interior minister told a local TV channel he had asked officials to "prepare a dossier on the Roma question in Italy at the ministry because nothing has been done since [ex-minister Roberto] Maroni and it's chaos". There would be a survey to see "who [they are], how [they live] and how many of them there are, re-doing what was called the census". "We'll have a register," he said. Those Roma who had no right to stay in Italy would be deported but "as for the Italian Roma, unfortunately you have to keep them at home". Italy's new populist government has as part of its programme a plan to deport 500,000 migrants. Italy populists take power: What comes next? 'Roma inequalities span Europe' An association that promotes Roma rights immediately pointed out that any census based on ethnic background was against Italian law and political opponents expressed horror at the idea. Jewish groups said the plan evoked memories of Mussolini's 1938 race laws. Paolo Gentiloni, the centre-left prime minister who led Italy for two years, tweeted: "Refugees yesterday, Roma today, tomorrow guns for all. How exhausting it is being bad." The League leader then clarified his position, insisting he was not proposing a register after all. No fingerprints would be taken, merely a survey of Roma camps to protect the thousands of children prevented from going to school. Mr Di Maio welcomed Mr Salvini's clarification, saying he was glad that the minister had denied plans for a register. "If something is unconstitutional, it cannot be done." On the fringes By James Reynolds, Rome In every way, the Roma in Italy live on the fringes of Italian life. Their camps are built on the outskirts of many of the country's biggest cities. Many of these settlements are unlicensed and have become de facto shanty towns. In Florence, I met a Western nun who hired Roma workers to tend to a graveyard. She insisted that they had been so marginalised by mainstream Italian society that they had no chance to find a way into regular work. But many Italians blame the Roma for choosing to live on the margins. There's a widespread perception that Roma children are taught how to steal. As a result, there will be support for Matteo Salvini's call to investigate whether or not Roma children have been properly enrolled in schools. Who are Italy's Roma? They number between 130,000 and 170,000 and around half have Italian citizenship. Many come from Romania and the former Yugoslavia. Italians have an overwhelmingly negative view of Roma, according to a survey published in 2016 by the Pew Research Center. Some 82% of those questioned were unfavourable to Roma, far higher than other European countries. Mr Salvini has long campaigned against the Roma community and has in the past called for their camps to be bulldozed. Two months ago he said if many of them worked harder and stole less, and educated their children in school rather than in theft, "that would really be a party". In answer to Mr Salvini's proposals, the 21 July Association that supports Roma rights said the numbers and details of Roma were already known. The Italian Roma community had been in the country for at least half a century, it said, while the few Roma who had no papers were in effect stateless so could not be deported anyway. Roma filmmaker Luciano Casamonica said the interior minister could say what he liked but he and his family had been in Italy for seven generations.

welcome

welcome

Almost 2,000 migrant children were separated from their families at the US border over six weeks, officials say. Following a Trump administration crackdown on illegal border crossings from Mexico, adults are being detained, meaning the children with them are removed from their care. The issue is causing a growing political storm in the US. On Thursday Attorney General Jeff Sessions cited the Bible to defend the "zero tolerance" approach. Why the US is separating migrant children from their parents Immigration 'an existential threat' to US Is US only country to separate migrant children? It means that those entering the US irregularly are criminally prosecuted, a change to a long-standing policy of charging most of those crossing for the first time with a misdemeanour offence. As the adults are being charged with a crime and detained, the children that travel with them are being separated and classed as unaccompanied minors. What do we know about the children? Figures from the US Department of Homeland Security show that 1,995 children were separated from 1,940 adults who are being held between 19 April and 31 May. No information was given on the age of the separated children. The children are passed into the care of the US Department of Health and Human Services. They are transferred to government detention facilities or foster care while officials try to resolve their case. The United Nations has called on the US to immediately halt the separations. Mr Sessions said having children would not shield border-crossing migrants from prosecution. The attorney general quoted a verse from St Paul's Letter to the Romans on obeying the laws of government. What has been the political response? The Trump administration policy is supported by some Republicans, but others have expressed misgivings. Speaking to reporters on Thursday, House Speaker Paul Ryan, Congress' highest-ranking Republican, said he was not comfortable with the tactics. This week, House Republicans pitched draft immigration legislation that would end the separation of children and parents at the border. Under the plan, families would be detained together. Also in the proposal are provisions to protect 1.8 million Daca 'Dreamers', eliminate the diversity lottery, and add $25bn (£18bn) for border security. The bill, a compromise between moderates and conservatives, is expected to be voted on next week. So will another, more hard line bill. President Donald Trump said on Friday he would not sign the compromise bill, despite Republican lawmakers having said he supported it. His remark sent legislators on Capitol Hill scrambling, but the White House later said the president had misspoken and he would back both measures. The administration says it has selected a site in Texas to house the migrant children in tents.

Thanks ? You too! ❤️

New York's attorney general is suing the Trump Foundation, as well as Donald Trump and his children, alleging "extensive and persistent" lawbreaking. Barbara Underwood said the charitable foundation had engaged in "unlawful political co-ordination" designed to influence the 2016 election. The lawsuit seeks to dissolve the foundation and $2.8m (£2.1m) in restitution. The foundation denied the charges, calling them politically motivated. The president hit back at the lawsuit on Twitter, saying that "sleazy New York Democrats" were "doing everything they can to sue me". He vowed he would not settle the case. The attorney general is also seeking to bar the president and three of his adult children, Donald Jr, Eric and Ivanka, from serving on the board of any New York-based charity, "in light of misconduct and total lack of oversight". She has referred the case to the Internal Revenue Service and the Federal Election Commission, she says. What is the state attorney general alleging? Ms Underwood filed a petition at the New York Supreme Court in Manhattan on Thursday, Mr Trump's 72nd birthday. It accuses the foundation and its directors - Mr Trump and his three eldest children - of unlawfully co-ordinating with the Trump presidential campaign, repeated self-dealing transactions, and violating laws under which non-profit organisations must operate. In a statement, Ms Underwood said Mr Trump had illegally instructed the foundation to provide support to his presidential campaign by using the foundation's name and funds it raised to promote the campaign. The petition also claims that Mr Trump used charitable assets to pay off legal obligations, to promote his own businesses and to purchase personal items, including a painting of himself. What have the Trump Foundation and the Trumps said? The Trump Foundation issued a statement denying the charges and accusing the attorney general of holding its $1.7 million in remaining funds "hostage for political gain". Ms Underwood is a Democrat. The president described the suit as "ridiculous". The younger Trumps have yet to comment publicly. How did this come about? The lawsuit announced on Thursday is the culmination of a two-year investigation, which began under the previous New York attorney general, Eric Schneiderman, Ms Underwood said. Mr Schneiderman resigned last month after several former girlfriends accused him of physical abuse. In October 2016 Mr Schneiderman ordered the Trump Foundation to stop fundraising in New York, after finding it had no proper registration. President-elect Trump vowed to shut the charitable foundation down in December 2016, to avoid "even the appearance" of any conflict of interest. The Trump Foundation lawsuit adds to Mr Trump's legal challenges, which include a wide-ranging special counsel investigation into alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. Special Counsel Robert Mueller has indicted several of Mr Trump's associates and raided the home and office of the president's long-time lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen. A new front opened up' Anthony Zurcher, North America reporter New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood has opened a new front in the ongoing criminal investigations into Donald Trump and his empire. Allegations of misdeeds connected to the Trump Foundation had swirled during the 2016 presidential elections, but the topic had been overshadowed during the early days of the Trump presidency. That may be about to change. Administration officials, from the president on down, will certainly attempt to brand this as yet another politically motivated investigation of an ideological adversary - new witches but the same hunt. Nevertheless, as New York Attorney General, Ms Underwood has significant investigatory and prosecutorial power, and if she starts looking into some of Mr Trump's more questionable charitable activities, there's no telling what she might turn up. At the very least, it appears the Trump world's celebrations of former Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's disgrace were a bit premature. Ms Underwood may not be as outspokenly anti-Trump as her predecessor, but she appears to be equally - or more - aggressive where it counts, in the courtroom. What details emerged in the court filing? Thursday's 41-page document filed with the NY Supreme Court spells out a range of alleged violations of laws concerning non-profit organisations, dating back more than a decade. The investigation apparently found that the foundation was "little more than an empty shell that functions with no oversight by its board of directors". The board had not met since 1999, despite being legally required to meet annually, and did not oversee the foundation's activities "in any way", the document says. Mr Trump, who has not contributed any personal funds to the foundation since 2008, was the sole signatory on the foundation's bank accounts and approved all of its grants. Several pages of the document focus on a charity fundraiser for veterans in Iowa in January 2016, which Mr Trump chose to hold instead of taking part in a TV debate with other Republican presidential hopefuls ahead of the influential state's caucuses. More than $2.8m was donated to the Trump Foundation at that event. The petition alleges that those funds raised from the public were used to promote Mr Trump's campaign for the presidency, in particular in the Iowa nominating caucuses. The lawsuit also claims that the foundation paid $100,000 (£75,000) to settle legal claims against Mr Trump's Mar-A-Lago resort, $158,000 to settle claims against one of his golf clubs, and $10,000 to purchase a painting of Mr Trump to hang at another of his golf clubs. The purchase of the painting was an example of one of "at least five self-dealing transactions" which violate tax regulations on non-profit charities, the statement said. "As our investigation reveals, the Trump Foundation was little more than a cheque book for payments from Mr Trump or his businesses to nonprofits, regardless of their purpose of legality," Ms Underwood said. "This is not how private foundations should function."