Hasta La Gadget!

As far as the current-gen consoles are concerned, it seems that Sony’s PS4 is leading the pack as during E3 2017, Sony announced that they have managed to sell 60.4 million units of the PS4 to customers worldwide to date. This is double the amount from when Sony announced their sales back in November 2015 where they had sold 30 million units.

We’re not sure where Microsoft is standing at this point because the company has never really published its sales figures, although in recent times we have been seeing how the Xbox One has managed to outsell the PS4 in certain markets, so that is pretty optimistic. There are some who believe that Microsoft’s recently announced Xbox One X could help boost Xbox sales ahead of the PS4.

However the Xbox One X is priced rather dear at $499 which could make it harder to adopt than the PS4 Pro which is slightly cheaper, but perhaps the raw power in the Xbox One X could make it more justifiable. As for Nintendo, the Switch has managed to sell over 2 million units to date which still puts it pretty far behind the competition, so it remains to be seen if it will be able to play catchup.

In the meantime analysts have predicted that Sony could sell as many as 69 million PS4 units by 2019, and at 60.4 million units in 2017, it sure looks like Sony is on track to hitting that mark.

PS4 Sales Have Hit 60.4 Million Worldwide , original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.

Divorce attorneys have a front-row seat to the kinds of problems that can chip away at relationships. Every day in their offices, they get an earful from clients about what led to divorce. 

What are some of the most common complaints they hear? Below, divorce lawyers from around the country share nine of the most prevalent marital issues. 

1. My spouse rarely helps out with the kids.

“When I first meet with people during the consultation, I often hear that the husband or wife doesn’t feel like they have an equal partner in their marriage, especially when it comes to the responsibility of caring for their children. It takes time and energy to manage a family’s extracurricular activities, doctor’s appointments and social activities. Whenever someone feels their spouse is not pulling their weight, resentment will build. When it involves children, though, it becomes much more complicated. When they are in my office, I know they have tried everything and asked their spouse to step up and help, but they have not been successful. Filing for divorce is the only way they believe they will get some reprieve from it.” — Puja A. Sachdev, an attorney in San Diego, California 

2. We never talk about our problems. 

“It’s nothing that either spouse says ― it’s what they don’t say. Problems crop up and no one wants to rock the boat. So no one deals with the problem. No one talks about it. But then it doesn’t go away. It goes underground, then another problem crops up. This time, dealing with it is even harder because both parties still hold resentment from the first problem they never dealt with. So they push the second problem under the rug. Then the third. And so on. At some point, they explode over something that seems stupid and silly. Ultimately, they’re arguing about the  ongoing, unspoken problems they have.” ― Karen Covy, an attorney and divorce coach based in Chicago, Illinois 

3. Our sex life fizzled out, and so did any intimacy.

“Honestly, I can go on and on, but those are two big complaints I hear. What it boils down to is life has gotten in the way and there is no longer a connection between spouses. Even more than sex, it has to do with a lack of communication and lack of intimacy. What couples fail to realize is that the work of the relationship does not end at ‘I do’ ― there is work to be done every day. I know it sounds trite but it is important to connect with and check in with your spouse on a daily basis whether you are sharing a meal or walking the dog.” ― Lisa Helfend Meyer, an attorney in Los Angeles, California

4. My spouse reconnected with an old flame on Facebook. 

“I have recently had clients inform me that their spouses were becoming ‘addicted’ to social media; more importantly, the social media ‘addiction’ was merely a symptom of an age-old problem ― cheating. Their spouse clicked the ‘like’ button on someone’s Facebook post and it escalated into sexual chats, texting and ultimately, face-to-face meetings where the flame was rekindled. It’s likely that the person would have sought out some way to cheat even without social media. So the social media ‘addiction’ was merely a symptom of the ultimate issue: infidelity. Some couples can work through the issue of infidelity, but most cannot ― and that’s what leads them to my office.” ― Douglas Kepanis, an attorney in New York City  

5. We feel more like roommates than spouses. 

“People often say that their spouse feels like a stranger, not the person they married. Clients often describe themselves as ‘roommates’ and say they spend little time interacting with their spouse. More commonly, they say that their spouse has ‘checked out.’” ―  Carla Schiff Donnelly, an attorney in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

6. My spouse is selfish. 

“Selfishness manifests itself in different ways: stingy with money, unwilling to listen and be emotionally present, not sharing responsibility for chores and the kids, having an affair instead of trying to work it out or splitting with respect, not being aware of the other’s needs and wants. The exact form of selfishness varies from case to case, but the theme is always there in divorce cases.” ― Alison Patton, a San Diego-based divorce attorney and mediator 

7. We speak different love languages. 

“Two people may love each other, but not ‘feel loved’ if they have a different love language. That means, if one spouse’s ‘language of love’ is to do helpful things or buy gifts, and the other’s love language is verbal affirmations, loving touch, or quality time together, the receiver doesn’t really feel love, and the giver doesn’t feel appreciated for the love they’re giving. When that happens, there isn’t enough credit in the love bank for them to get through the challenges that come with any relationship. They’re fighting over money or sex, when underneath that is the need for simple physical connection or quality time. Find out your love language: It might just keep you out of a divorce lawyer’s office.” ― Dennis A. Cohen, an attorney and mediator in Marina del Rey, California 

8. I feel taken for granted. 

“This complaint makes sense. When courting each other, there’s often a lot of flattery and extra attention spent listening to and pleasing your mate. But once the deal is done, once the relationship is sealed with vows, many feel safe and worry less that their partner is happy. Many people who hire me tell me they’ve been unhappy for years, that they’ve waited and waited for things to improve before they finally hit their limit. Rarely do I encounter a couple getting divorced because of a sudden or one-time event such as a one-night stand or one ugly argument. With so much invested in a marriage, it often takes quite a lot for someone to get to the point of no return. But when they get there, it is often because they finally realize they would be happier unmarried to that person ― or as someone once told me, less miserable.”— Randall M. Kessler, an attorney in Atlanta, Georgia

type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related Stories + articlesList=58ab1fd1e4b07602ad56ceef,571f9b9fe4b0b49df6a92312,559ebd80e4b05b1d028fecad,56cf434ae4b03260bf75d3ed

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

WASHINGTON ― Federal prosecutors in the nation’s capital want a man who fired a weapon inside a local pizza shop in December ― after reading fake online news stories that it housed a child sex-trafficking ring with ties to Hillary Clinton ― to serve 4½ years in prison plus three years of probation.

In a sentencing memo filed Tuesday, prosecutors wrote they wanted to send a message to “deter other would-be vigilantes” from committing similar acts after “the next internet-inspired conspiracy theory.”

Edgar Maddison Welch, 28, pleaded guilty to charges stemming from his Dec. 4 attack on Comet Ping Pong in northwest Washington. In a sentencing memo, federal prosecutors said Welch was “expressly willing to sacrifice those lives ― the lives of innocent people ― so that he could pursue vigilante acts of violence against non-existent criminals.” That nobody was shot “was entirely the product of good luck,” they wrote.

“The defendant committed serious crimes that terrorized a community and traumatized Comet employees and customers alike,” they wrote. “There are victims who require crisis counseling, employees who feel unsafe in their jobs, and children whose memories are imprinted with the danger of that day. The government submits that the facts of this case require a significant sentence, not only to punish the defendant for his actions, but also to keep the community safe from the defendant and to deter other would-be vigilantes from attempting similar crimes against innocent subjects of the next internet-inspired conspiracy theory.”

In a separate sentencing memo from Welch’s defense team, they wrote that their client “made an incredibly ill-advised decision to try and save children who he sincerely believed were being held against their will at a popular pizzeria located in Washington, D.C.”

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

WASHINGTON, June 13 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump has given Defense Secretary Jim Mattis the authority to set troop levels in Afghanistan, a U.S. official told Reuters on Tuesday, opening the door for future troop increases requested by the U.S. commander.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said no immediate decision had been made about the troop levels, which are now set at about 8,400.

The Pentagon declined to comment.

The decision is similar to one announced in April that applied to U.S. troop levels in Iraq and Syria, and came as Mattis warned Congress the U.S.-backed Afghan forces were not beating the Taliban despite more than 15 years of war.

“We are not winning in Afghanistan right now,” Mattis said in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee earlier on Tuesday. “And we will correct this as soon as possible.”

Mattis said the Taliban were “surging” at the moment, something he said he intended to address.

It has been four months since Army General John Nicholson, who leads U.S. and international forces in Afghanistan, said he needed “a few thousand” additional forces, some potentially drawn from U.S. allies.

Current and former U.S. officials say discussions revolve around adding 3,000 to 5,000 troops. Those forces are expected to be largely comprised of trainers to support Afghan forces, as well as air crews.

Deliberations include giving more authority to forces on the ground and taking more aggressive action against Taliban fighters.

Some U.S. officials have questioned the benefit of sending more troops to Afghanistan because any politically palatable number would not be enough to turn the tide, much less create stability and security. To date, more than 2,300 Americans have been killed and more than 17,000 wounded since the war began in 2001.

Any increase of several thousand troops would leave American forces in Afghanistan well below their 2011 peak of more than 100,000 troops.

The Afghan government was assessed by the U.S. military to control or influence just 59.7 percent of Afghanistan’s 407 districts as of Feb. 20, a nearly 11 percentage-point decrease from the same time in 2016, according to data released by the U.S. Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction.

A truck bomb explosion in Kabul last month killed more than 150 people, making it the deadliest attack in the Afghan capital since the Taliban were ousted in 2001 by a NATO-led coalition after ruling the country for five years.

On Saturday, three U.S. soldiers were killed when an Afghan soldier opened fire on them in eastern Afghanistan.

The broader regional U.S. strategy for Afghanistan remains unclear. Mattis promised on Tuesday to brief lawmakers on a new war strategy by mid-July that is widely expected to call for thousands more U.S. troops.

Senator John McCain, the chairman of the Armed Forces Committee, pressed Mattis on the deteriorating situation during the Tuesday hearing, saying the United States had an urgent need for “a change in strategy, and an increase in resources if we are to turn the situation around.”

“We recognize the need for urgency,” Mattis said. 

(Reporting by Phil Stewart and Idrees Ali; Editing by Lisa Shumaker and Andrew Hay)

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is publicly testifying today before the Senate Intelligence Committee, adding further drama to the investigation into the connection between Trump’s associates and Russia’s meddling into the 2016 elections.

Unfortunately, Sessions is arriving at the Capitol with a dark cloud hanging over his head. In his testimony last week, former FBI Director James Comey raised serious concerns about the propriety of the attorney general’s conduct related to the Russia investigation. The testimony raised serious questions as to whether the nation’s top law enforcement official is undermining the rule of law.

To start, Sessions said he recused himself from the investigation into Russian interference with our elections on March 2, and yet Trump cited Sessions’ recommendation when firing Comey, who was at the helm of the investigation. At the Department of Justice, Sessions reportedly discussed firing Comey for months while the inquiry was ongoing. This led Comey to ask aloud before Congress the question on everyone’s mind: “If — if, as the president said, I was fired because of the Russia investigation, why was the attorney general involved in that chain?” Why indeed?

And while Sessions jumped in when he should have stayed out, he also got out when he should have stayed in. One of the more chilling parts of Comey’s testimony was his description of a White House meeting where the president cleared the room to speak with Comey alone—the famous conversation in which the president said he “hoped” the FBI would drop the investigation against former Trump aide, Michael Flynn. Comey felt that Sessions sensed the inappropriateness of the request, lingering on his way out the Oval Office. But Comey was eventually left alone with Trump, and the president allegedly told him, “I hope you can let this go,” in reference to investigating the Russia connections of Michael Flynn, who had recently resigned as Trump’s national-security adviser. Afterward, Comey asked his boss to make sure that wouldn’t happen again, but Sessions showed no reaction to his plea.

Those were not the only reasons Sessions inspired mistrust. Sessions was, of course, a key figure in the Trump campaign that is the subject of investigation for its Russian ties.  Sessions himself has come under fire for failure to disclose meetings with top Russian officials during the campaign. Senior leaders at the FBI decided not to tell Sessions about the meeting between Comey and the president. According to Comey, they were aware of facts that “would make his continued engagement in a Russia-related investigation problematic” —facts that he would disclose only in a confidential setting. 

This behavior by the attorney general would be troubling enough on its own. It’s all the more troubling when the president’s actions — and tweets — remind us daily of the need for independent law enforcement leaders whose loyalty is to the rule of law.

In five short months the president has attacked the judiciary, both impugning judges personally and casting doubt on the legitimacy of the decisions emanating from a coequal branch of government. He even threatened to ignore court rulings altogether. He has come under criticism for watering down ethics rules to the extent that former White House ethics officials have called them “virtually meaningless.” As we learned last week, he effectively asked a sitting FBI director to drop an investigation that has the potential to touch the president, and then fired him after he stepped up the investigation. This week, he has reportedly been mulling firing the special counsel that was appointed to take over that investigation. Taken together, this conduct is creating a national crisis of rule of law.

Our democracy depends on the rule of law, and we need an attorney general who can help shore it up now. Unfortunately, so far Sessions has shown no indication that he’s willing to stand up to the president, as past attorney generals have done. He urgently needs to show now that his loyalty is to the law, not to the man.

All our public servants have an urgent responsibility to repair our nation’s commitment to the rule of law. Congress needs to ask the hard questions to get to the bottom of whether the attorney general’s conduct (not to mention the president’s) crossed the line. Special Counsel Mueller must be provided the uncontested authority to follow the facts wherever they may lead, without threats of being fired. And the Department of Justice’s inspector general must launch a full investigation to determine if the Department’s independence was breached.

In 1780, soon-to-be President John Adams sought “a government of laws and not of men.” Nowhere is it more urgent to uphold this principle than in the Department of Justice. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.