gshc2020.com

It marks the first time the PQ has been in power since 2014, with Paul St-Pierre Plamondon set to become the province's new leader.

In his victory speech, St-Pierre Plamondon again raised his independence plans but vowed to be "the premier of everyone in Quebec".

The result could prove a fresh test for Prime Minister Mark Carney, also setting up confrontations with Québec over issues like immigration and the monarchy.

In its effort to achieve independence, the PQ has pledged to hold a referendum on separating from the rest of Canada.

The majority French-speaking province has held other votes on this, in 1980 and 1995. On both occasions, the independence movement was defeated. Polls indicate only about 30% of Quebecers back such a move this time.

St-Pierre Plamondon has previously said the vote would occur after President Donald Trump is out of office south of the border in the United States, explaining that would require "conditions that allow for an informed and serene debate". The US and Canada are in a trade war as a result of Trump's programme of tariffs.

In his victory speech after Monday's election results, St-Pierre Plamondon said of the potential referendum: "Our national destiny will be achieved one day."

The PQ leader will need to secure the support of rival parties to get the vote he wants, potentially from Québec Solidaire, a left-leaning sovereignist party that won nine seats.

Quebec Liberal Leader Charles Milliard said his party, which won 40 seats, is prepared to support the PQ on a number of issues, but "there is no way we will collaborate on a potential referendum".

Despite winning the most amount of seats of any party, the PQ's share of the popular vote is only 28%.

With most votes counted on Tuesday morning, the party was set to win fewer than the 64 seats needed to command a majority in the province's assembly, according to projections from Canadian media.

The Liberals - the provincial party with links to Carney's federal Liberals - are projected to have increased their number of seats in the assembly, as have the Conservatives.

All parties benefited from the collapse of the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ), which was previously the province's governing party but is not projected to have won a single seat this time.

Carney congratulated Plamondon, saying he looked forward to working with the new provincial leader, adding: "Building a stronger Quebec is at the heart of our mission to build a stronger Canada."

Carney may find himself managing dual unity crises in different parts of the country, depending on the outcome of a vote in Alberta on whether to have a referendum of its own.

Trump is due to leave office in just over two years, meaning that if Plamondon is able to enact his pledge, a third vote on independence would likely be scheduled for 2029 or 2030.

Monday's result is in part due to public fatigue with the previous CAQ government.

The party made the issue of safeguarding Quebec's identity and language central to its eight years in office, but its long-time leader, François Legault, eventually lost significant support among voters.

Efforts to revive the party by replacing Legault with a new leader, outgoing Premier Christine Fréchette, were unsuccessful.

Fréchette conceded her own re-election race in Trois-Rivières shortly before 22:00 local time. She said in a speech that she would work with St-Pierre Plamondon on the transition.

"Governing Quebec is the greatest honour I have ever had," she said. "I have Quebec tattooed on my heart."

The Quebec Liberal Party secured the second-most seats, while the Quebec Conservative Party gained seats.

Prime Minister Carney remains popular in Quebec, though support for him had recently dipped, external as US President Donald Trump imposed new tariffs on Canada in August, following a breakdown in trade talks.

Quebec is among the hardest hit by the latest US tariffs, with experts at global forecasting firm Oxford Economics projecting a C$2bn blow for the province. %!s()

Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell announced on social media on Monday that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth had made the recommendation and President Donald Trump approved it.

It will be the first military execution by firing squad since the end of World War Two.

Parnell said the secretary of the US Army would set the time and place of the execution.

"Judgement day for Hasan has finally come," he wrote on X.

Hasan, a US Army psychiatrist from Virginia, killed 13 soldiers at the base in Texas in 2009 and later admitted in court he was the gunman and apologised for "any mistakes".

He said during his court-martial in 2013 that he believed he was protecting Muslims and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

The killings on 5 November 2009 were the deadliest ever non-combat attack on an American military base.

The attack took place in a crowded medical building where deploying soldiers were awaiting check-ups and vaccines.

Hasan is currently one of four inmates on the US military's death row.

A military execution requires approval from the US president, according to military law.

It also requires appellate review and a final judgment on its legality to move forward.

The US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces deemed the military death penalty unconstitutional in 1983 but it was reinstated the following year by an executive order under then-President Ronald Reagan.

Military executions differ from those carried out at the state level.

The majority of executions in the US are carried out on the state level, with 27 states, the military and the federal government still having capital punishment as a legally available option.

Death by firing squad is rather uncommon. There was an execution by firing squad carried out last year in South Carolina, a first for the state and the first time the method was used in the US in 15 years.

Four other states allow the use of a firing squad, including Idaho, Mississippi, Oklahoma and Utah. %!s()

The film, billed as a biographical dramedy, tells the story of a chaotic boardroom crisis at OpenAI in November 2023, when co-founder Altman was fired and then re-hired at the AI giant.

Andrew Garfield stars as Altman, with Anora‘s Yura Borisov playing Ilya Sutskever, the chief scientific officer and co-founder of OpenAI who fires Altman. Monica Barbaro plays Mira Murati, the chief technology officer of OpenAI, and Cooper Hoffman plays Greg Brockman, the board chairman of OpenAI. Ike Barinholtz stars as Elon Musk, the other co-founder of OpenAI.

The cast also includes Jason Schwartzman, Chris O’Dowd, Mark Rylance, Zosia Mamet, Billie Lourd, Angus Imrie, Nicholas Hamilton and Thaddea Graham.

Artificial was written by humorist and Saturday Night Live alum Simon Rich. The film was developed at Amazon MGM Studios before Guadagnino was hired to direct it. Amazon MGM notoriously ended up dropping the film several days after parent company Amazon signed a deal a $50 billion deal with OpenAI.

Neon picked up Artificial in a unique deal in which they paid nothing up front but committed to a $15 million marketing spend.

Guadagnino’s film comes at a time when Hollywood is applying much greater scruitiny to Silicon Valley’s tech titans. In recent weeks, Alex Gibney has released Musk, a searing documentary about the polarizing trillionaire, and this past Sunday, Aaron Sorkin premiered The Social Reckoing, a followup to The Social Network, with another unflattering look at Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg. Also coming up in Nathan Fielder’s acclaimed docudrama You Can See Everything, about disgraced Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes.

Artificial hits theaters on Dec. 25. Read on below for early social media reaction to the film.

In one ad, Trump says, "We will cast out the communists, Marxists, and fascists. We will throw off the sick political class that hates our country. We will rout the fake news media, and we will liberate America from these villains once and for all".

The ads come just ahead of the pivotal November midterm elections, when Democrats hope to take control of one or both chambers of the US Congress as polls continue to show Trump's approval rating falling. Midterm elections often serve as a verdict on how a president is doing - and typically the party of a sitting president tends to lose seats in Congress.

The White House has pushed back against criticism, calling the ads "educational" and saying they are not propaganda, but rather public service announcements.

They've pointed to previous administrations ads, like those under former Presidents Barack Obama on his healthcare plan and one under former President Joe Biden urging people to get Covid-19 vaccines.

But legal experts say past US government adverts have typically been about public health or national emergencies.

"It's difficult to see what legitimate government purpose is served by spending taxpayer dollars on ads whose only apparent purpose is to promote the president," legal ethics expert Margaret Dylus-Yukins has told the BBC.

Democratic Senator Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire introduced a measure, which was blocked by a Republican, denouncing the administration for using government funds for for the ads.

"It is the sense of the Senate that the advertisements promoting President Donald Trump that aired in September 2026, which included the direct language 'paid for by the U.S. Government,' should not be paid for by the United States government," the measure reads.

The ads have received criticism on both sides of the aisle.

Republican Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters on Monday that while "I like the message ... it shouldn't be paid for with taxpayer dollars".

Senator John Kennedy, a Republican, said on CBS News on Sunday that politicians should not spend taxpayer funds on promotional ads.

"I don't think any public official, including President Trump or Kristi Noem or John Kennedy, should spend public money on private ads for themselves," the Louisiana lawmaker said. %!s()

In a post on his social media site on Monday, Trump defended the advertisements, which cost at least $1.5m in federal funds and were aired ahead of the US November midterm elections.

Recommended Stories

• list 1 of 4Trump’s approval hits new low among Hispanic voters ahead of midterms
• list 2 of 4Attorney General announces record number of cases to strip US citizenship
• list 3 of 4Mexico seeks evidence of border shooting that prompted US troop deployment
• list 4 of 4Trump blames Democrats and Ukraine for soaring US fuel prices, not Iran war

Trump said he considered the advertisements to be “a positive promotion for our Great U.S.A.”, but that they would no longer be funded by taxpayers but by either him or his MAGA PAC,

MAGA Inc. is Trump’s political war chest and had amassed more than $400m by the end of July.

The announcement came as ethics experts and lawmakers from both ⁠parties have criticised the three nationally broadcast advertisements and called for independent investigations.

The advertisements have run during football games as recently as Sunday and during other programming.

One features Trump declaring that “America will never be a communist country”, ⁠while a chorus repeats the words “love me”. Another combines ⁠images of Mount Rushmore with footage of Trump praising a “golden age of America”.

The advertisements end with a disclaimer saying they were paid for by the US government.

Democratic lawmakers said last month that the White House transferred $20m in Homeland Security Department funds to air ⁠the advertisements, including one that closely resembles a 2024 Trump ⁠campaign ad, and sought independent probes.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Monday called ‌for an independent investigation, calling it a “staggering misuse of public funding and breach of public trust” after the calls for a probe.

Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr, a ‌Republican ‌named to his position by Trump, last week said the advertisements were appropriate and rejected a request to investigate them. %!s()