U.S. President Donald Trump says he may veto a $1.3 trillion spending bill because it does not offer protections for young undocumented immigrants who arrived as children and does not fully fund the border wall. In a Twitter post Friday morning, Trump said he is considering a veto of the omnibus spending bill based on "the fact that the 800,000 plus DACA recipients have been totally abandoned by the Democrats (not even mentioned in Bill) and the BORDER WALL, which is desperately needed for our National Defense, is not fully funded." Previously, White House officials said Trump would sign the spending package, a move that would head off a potential government shutdown due to a lack of funding. The measure funds the federal government through September 30. If Trump does not sign the legislation into law, the federal government will shut down at 12:01 a.m. Saturday. The Senate passed the bill by a 65-32 vote early Friday morning after the House of Representatives approved the measure Thursday. Lawmakers had just hours to read the nearly 2,200-page bill released Wednesday night. With midterm elections looming in November, the bill likely marks the final time Capitol Hill considers major legislation this year. The measure fulfills Trump's vow to boost military funding but provides funding for limited parts of his immigration agenda. The bill includes a 2.4 percent pay raise for military personnel. After extensive negotiations between Republicans and Democrats, the bill also provides $1.6 billion for physical barriers and 150 kilometers of a wall at the U.S.-Mexico border, short of the $25 billion Trump requested for the project he repeatedly touted on the campaign trail while pledging Mexico would pick up the cost. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi touted the agreement in a letter to her Democratic colleagues, saying negotiators "fought for and achieved drastic reductions to the Trump/GOP plan," including much less funding for the wall than Trump requested and a limit on the number of immigrants that can be... When did Trump tweet about a possible veto? - not enough information - after September 30 - on Friday - before the bill was released.
on Friday

The city was gray but the buildings contrasted with dirt red. The morning settled my nerves a bit more and before long the train pulled into the station. Boston had a slower feel, much slower than New York. The air was cool and peppered with moisture. I knew I was close to the ocean. Vision blurry, I wobbled out of the train depot and thought about the fact that I had never really done anything crazy in my life. The colors meant something here. Green was the color of plants but it was also the color of money. Plants were good but money was bad. I didn't know what green meant. Blue and red were clear though. Blue was the color of ocean and sky, both good things. Red was the color of Mars and it was manly but mars meant aliens and aliens were bad so red was bad. This is how I navigated. I followed the colors. I was lost in a daze of exhaustion and moved my feet slowly. They were dead and raw with pain and blisters, and I shuffled out into the city. My eyes darted from color to color, sign to sign, connection to connection. I floated like a ghost and thought about crying. There were few people out so I found a relative ease in that but my mind still jumped around reckless. I needed to find Kim. I saw a silent pay phone with a dangling phonebook and headed towards it until I remembered that phone books don't normally list cell phones. Kim wasn't the type of girl to list herself in the phonebook either. I had no leads but I knew I could go to a library and maybe find out her number if she had listed it on Facebook, so I kept walking. Stopping at benches, I would rest until I could muster more energy. How long did it probably take for the author to find the phonebook? - a week - a few minutes - not enough information - 2 days
a few minutes

Q: Americans may become accustomed to the political turmoil swirling around President Donald Trump, but it remains an open question whether that turmoil will ultimately help or hurt Trump and his Republican allies, especially in an election year. Last week, it was Trump's firing of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and an apparent Democratic victory in a special congressional election in Pennsylvania a sign of a possible wave in the November midterm elections. This week, it was a series of presidential tweets criticizing the Russia probe, followed by a controversial Trump statement of congratulations for newly re-elected Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump also added former U.S. attorney Joseph diGenova to his legal team. DiGenova has alleged that elements of the FBI and the Department of Justice have been out to frame Trump in connection with the Russia probe. Trump ignored shouted questions Tuesday from reporters at the White House who asked whether he wanted to fire special counsel Robert Mueller, who is leading the Russia probe. Earlier, House Speaker Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican, told reporters at the Capitol that he had received "assurances" that firing Mueller was "not even under consideration." The latest back and forth over the Mueller investigation came after several days of presidential tweets complaining about the probe, including one blasting it as a "total WITCH HUNT with massive conflicts of interest." The tweets sparked new fears that Trump might try to have Mueller fired. Some Republicans warned that an attempt to fire Mueller could put Trump's presidency in jeopardy. "I think anything directed at firing Mr. Mueller blows up the whole town, and that becomes the end of governing and the presidency as we know it," cautioned Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. The renewed focus on the Russia probe came in the wake of last week's firing of Tillerson. That, in turn, raised the prospect of more administration changes. Who wanted to fire special counsel? - the President - U.S. attorney - the speaker - not enough information
A: the President

Q: As a day trip from Brussels (only a half hour train), I've found that either many people haven't heard of Ghent, preferring to explore the chocolate box streets of Bruges, or they adore Ghent so much that when a blogger (me) visits, they spam them via instastories with recollections of days spent there and memories made. True story. Disclaimer: I was a press guest of VisitFlanders in Ghent, but all planning, mischief and thoughts are all mine. We fell into the former camp on our trip to Brussels and explored Bruges, but genuinely regretted only being able to fit one city in, vowing to return one day. Luckily an invite to explore Ghent appeared in my email inbox, so I gleefully accepted, hopping on the Eurostar one sleepy morning, and spending a long weeked gambolling through the streets (under blues skies and then grey clouds.) As guests of the tourism board, we were given city passes which allowed us to hop on the local transport (trams & busses), pop in and out of the museums and climb aboard a canal cruise, exploring the city by water. GALAVANT THROUGH THE GRAVESTEEN We didn't galavant so much as gallop up through the castle, so intent we were on completing a challenge to the top, but strolled back down through exhibitions. The exhibits share the history of The quintessential 12th-century stone castle, which comes complete with moat, turrets and arrow slits. And the view from atop the towers? Well, it's ok I guess. HOP ONTO A CANAL CRUISE Sit back, relax, and let the world glide by. The 40-minute tour included in the city card takes in the city by canal, led by a knowedgable driver/guide and is a lovely way to get to know the city a little bit better. There are also other operators, a couple of whom offer picnics as you float through the medieval city. How long did it probably take to climb to the top of the castle? - probably about an hour - probably about 2 hours - not enough information - probably about 15 minutes
A: probably about 15 minutes