Given a document, generate a short title of the document. The title should convey the main idea/event/topic about which the document is being written. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].
--------
Question: However  the Northâs high-ranking delegation  including the younger sister of its leader Kim Jong Un  will meet South Korean President Moon Jae-in and have lunch with him on Saturday.
 Kim Jong Un   in a black hat and matching coat  saluted troops while  his  wife walked beside  him   television images showed. One of Kimâs close aides  Choe Ryong Hae  and Kim Yong Nam were also in attendance.
The Northâs state media also showed what appeared to be intercontinental ballistic missiles on launchers as thousands of North Koreans filled Kim Il Sung Square  named after  Kim Jong Un âs grandfather  in Pyongyang.
âWe have destroyed the enemyâs risk-taking provocations at every move â  Kim Jong Un  said in a speech.  He  did not mention the United States  which North Korea considers its main enemy and regularly threatens to destroy in a sea of flames.
âBy sending key figures like his sister  Kim Jong Un is aiming to send a signal to the South that it is giving more weight to inter-Korean ties while driving a wedge between South Korea and the United States â said Kim Sung-han  a former South Korean vice foreign minister.

Answer: North Korea says no U.S. talks planned at Olympics Pence vows continued pressure


Question: Premier Silvio Berlusconi skipped a hearing Friday in a trial accusing him of bribing a British lawyer to lie on the stand.
 Berlusconi had not been expected at the technical hearing  his lawyer Niccolo Ghedini said  adding that the premier would attend when there were issues of substance at hand  beginning next month.
 Prosecutors accuse Berlusconi of ordering the 1997 payment of $600 000 to lawyer David Mills in exchange for his false testimony in two trials. Both Berlusconi and Mills have denied wrongdoing. Mills is in the second and final round of appeals against his conviction in the case.
 of ordering the 1997 payment of $600 000 to lawyer David Mills in exchange for his false testimony in two trials. Both Berlusconi and MillsBerlusconi and Mills have denied wrongdoing. Mills is in the second and final round of appeals against his conviction in the case.
 On Friday  the three-judge panel rejected a defense motion arguing that Berlusconi's portion of the trial should restart from scratch  without allowing any evidence heard by the previous court to carry over on the grounds it would be prejudicial.
 The case is one of two in Milan courts restarted against the premier after Italy's Constitutional Court overturned a law sparing Berlusconi from prosecution while in office.
 In the other case  Berlusconi and others are accused of overpaying for rights to show U.S. movies on Berlusconi's Mediaset television empire and pocketing the difference.
 Although defendants in Italian trials are not required to be present  Berlusconi has said he wants to defend himself in person against the charges.

Answer: Berlusconi skips hearing in Milan corruption case


Question: The media-savvy special prosecutors have colluded with the Fourth Estate to try — and convict — Paxton in the court of public opinion long before the case even comes to trial.  Wice  in particular is an aspiring media celebrity  serving as a TV “legal analyst” on Houston’s Channel 2 (KPRC) since 2003. Think of a male version of Nancy Grace or Greta Van Susteren — a Dan Abrams wannabe. One profile described the bombastic  Wice  as a “media magnet” who “never shies away from the spotlight.” The KPRC website brags that
Beginning the very day  Schaffer  and Wice were appointed by Becker  the prosecutors were in contact with the media  shamelessly promoting themselves by mass distributing press statements and publicity photos.  Schaffer  and  Wice  obviously intended to milk the case for all the news coverage they could get  for two self-serving reasons: to poison the well of public opinion against Paxton  and to generate free advertising to attract future clients. Neither motive is ethical for a special prosecutor. Yet   Wice  has conceded that pretrial media coverage “impacts the way potential jurors view our client’s case long before they are ushered into the courtroom for voir dire. Being able to effectively represent your client on the courthouse steps can be every bit as important as representing them inside the courtroom.”
Moreover   Wice  once cynically acknowledged the economic benefits of making media appearances  informing fellow lawyers that “appearing on TV is client development — free advertising — that might well yield future business. And you never can tell what that one local  or  with a bit of good fortune  national TV appearance  can do for you or your practice.” Exploiting the media  in other words  is the latest form of ambulance chasing. “Celebrity” attorneys  like the Kardashians  are famous for being famous.
In that vein  Schaffer and Wice continued a steady stream of self-aggrandizing communications with the press corps during the “investigation” and grand jury phases  despite the strict secrecy associated with the grand jury process. The special prosecutors had numerous communications (by email and telephone) with the New York Times’ reporter early in the case  following which the NYT reported Paxton’s indictment on August 1  2015  before the indictment was even unsealed. Was this national media scoop a coincidence? The special prosecutors were the obvious source of the highly-unprofessional leak  but the press corps gratefully reciprocated by uncritically reporting  Wice ’s spin as “news.”
In addition to regularly sending eager reporters status updates and copies of pleadings and orders  on at least two occasions  Wice  circulated to the media Paxton’s annual Personal Financial Statement  presumably to encourage reporters to scrutinize the donors to Paxton’s legal defense fund — a wholly improper purpose. In an even more egregious breach of propriety   Wice  emailed a copy of Paxton’s booking “mugshot” to his KPRC colleague  reporter Phil Archer  shortly after Paxton was released on bail. The only word to describe this type of conduct is “sleazy.”
Intemperately denouncing Paxton’s legal arguments as “frivolous” and “clearly baseless ” the special prosecutors’ tone toward Paxton dripped with contempt as they delivered sound bites to groveling reporters on deadline. When asked by a reporter about a new attorney joining the Paxton defense team to deal with the federal civil case (which was ultimately dismissed with prejudice)   Schaffer  sarcastically responded “Never heard of him. Looks like we set off the Lawyer Relief Act…” When a prominent Paxton supporter wrote an op-ed in the Midland Reporter-Telegram  criticizing the indictment  the thin-skinned prosecutors immediately issued a florid press statement — presumably on the taxpayers’ nickel — condemning the piece as a “rant” containing “lies bathed in the cologne of half-truths  fabrications and disinformation.”
Mimicking the prosecutors’ flippant and unprofessional tone  some reporters began running stories with shockingly-unbalanced headlines  such as “Another Day  Another Idiotic Ken Paxton Motion ” which  Schaffer  and Wice gleefully circulated to their media contacts  with the message “I love it.” If media outlets did not parrot the prosecutors’ swaggering narrative  they were cut off from “insider access.”
This incestuous arrangement likely explains why the Dallas Morning News  which was closely following the Paxton case  never reported the bombshell mentioned in Part 2 — that  Schaffer  was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in a federal RICO case against the leader of the Bandidos motorcycle gang — a revelation that would have greatly tarnished the special prosecutors’ undeserved Boy Scout image — which McGaughy had gone to extraordinary lengths to burnish.
This apparently referred to Paxton’s retention of a defense team that included Dan Cogdell and Philip Hilder  with respect to whom  Schaffer  and Wice issued polite public statements.
The hundreds of email exchanges between the prosecutors and reporters (McGaughy in particular) are clearly collusive. With the avid cooperation of the press corps  for two and a half years  Schaffer  and Wice have been busy smearing Paxton through leaks and planted stories  all while risibly claiming to be “seeking justice on behalf of the people of Texas.”
To re-cap this series: The baseless  politicized prosecution of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has been a travesty on many levels. Following the recusal of Collin County District Attorney Greg Willis  the matter should not have been referred to mercenary “special prosecutors” for investigation;  Schaffer  (the unindicted co-conspirator in a RICO case) and Wice (an incorrigible diva) were not suitable for the assignment in any event; the open-ended compensation arrangement agreed to by Judge Scott Becker was both unlawful and foolhardy; the grand jury indictment improperly obtained by the unscrupulous prosecutors amounts to fabricated felonies — made-up crimes never previously prosecuted in a Texas court; the overtly-biased George Gallagher presided over the case as a farcical kangaroo court; changing the venue of the case to Harris County was an absurd and outrageous denial of due process to Paxton; et cetera  ad infinitum.

Answer:
Prosecutorial Collusion in the Fourth Estate: Anatomy of a Witch Hunt Part 4