Lionel Messi says his Argentina career is over after Copa América final defeat

Argentina captain misses penalty in shootout defeat to Chile
Sergio Agüero says he and other players are also considering future

Lionel Messi has said his international career is over at the age of 29 after he blazed a penalty over the bar in Argentina’s defeat in the Copa América final to Chile.

The Argentina captain missed his spot-kick in the decisive shootout at Met Life Stadium, which Chile went on to win 4-2 and secure a second Copa crown in two years, and was disconsolate on the pitch after the game.

“It’s tough, it’s not the time for analysis,” he said. “In the dressing room I thought that this is the end for me with the national team, it’s not for me. That’s the way I feel right now, it’s a huge sadness once again and I missed the penalty that was so important.

“I tried so hard to be [a] champion with Argentina. But it didn’t happen. I couldn’t do it. I think it’s best for everyone, for me and for many people who want it. The choice for me is over, it is a decision. I tried many times [to be a champion] but did not.”

Sergio Agüero and other Argentina players could now follow Messi’s lead, with the Manchester City forward telling Olé: “The likelihood is that Messi is not the only one that will leave the national team. There are several players like me that are evaluating whether or not to continue.

“One doesn’t want to think about it but at times, there are things that happen and the thought [of retiring] comes into your mind. Afterwards, it’s difficult to get it out. Unfortunately, the one that leaves most affected is Leo Messi after his penalty miss. This is the worst that I’ve seen him in the changing room. We are all affected and we will try to think about something else and move forward. Again, luck was not on our side.”

The defeat continued Argentina’s 23-year trophyless run and Messi’s own personal misery now extends to four lost finals with the national side – at the 2014 World Cup against Germany and at three Copa Américas, in 2007, 2015 and now 2016.

Argentina coach Gerardo Martino said: “The burden of the consecutive games [lost] has been accumulating these last two years. He feels like you would expect a player to feel after playing and losing a final.”

Messi had enjoyed another impressive outing in the latest final of his international career but failed to find a finishing touch over 120 minutes of play. Still, few would have expected him to miss from 12 yards after Chile’s Arturo Vidal had seen the first kick of the shootout saved by Sergio Romero. But the Barcelona forward conspired to balloon the ball over the bar and pass up the chance to give his side an early advantage.

Lucas Biglia also missed for Argentina with his penalty being saved by Messi’s Barcelona team-mate Claudio Bravo, before Chilean midfielder Francisco Silva scored the decisive spot-kick.

Messi, a five-time Ballon d’Or winner, was representing his country for the 112th time since making his debut in 2005 as an 18-year-old.

In that time he scored 55 times, including five this tournament. He surpassed Gabriel Batistuta’s all-time leading mark of 54 for Argentina with a superb free-kick in last week’s semi-final against the US.

“Messi’s numbers are unparalleled and I think they’ll remain that way forever, because it’s impossible for a football player to do what Messi has done,” said Juan Antonio Pizzi, the Chile coach who is from Argentina. “My generation can’t compare him to [Diego] Maradona that’s for my generation, because of what Maradona did for Argentine soccer. But I think the best player ever played today here in the United States.”

Immediately after Sunday’s shock announcement, goalkeeper Romero said he hoped Messi would change his mind. “I think Leo spoke in the heat of the moment because we missed that great chance,” said Romero.

Messi now stands to miss the 2018 World Cup, with the odds of Argentina breaking their long-standing major trophy drought in Russia just having lengthened significantly.

Brexit? What Now?

Here's what happens if voters in England decide it's time to leave the European Union

After months of debate, bitterly divided Brits head to the polls on Thursday to cast their votes in an historic referendum whether to leave the European Union. Polls are too close to call.

Those for a Brexit, or “British exit,” want to breakaway from the 28-member European Union and “take back” their country by returning control of British immigration, laws and taxes to Britain. The campaign for a Brexit is led by former London mayor and conservative politician Boris Johnson and the leader of the UK Independence Party Nigel Farage.

Those in the remain camp say leaving the European Union would have major financial consequences on Britain. Prime Minister David Cameron warned of the damage a British exit would have on Britain’s world standing.“If we left, our neighbors would go on meeting and making decisions that profoundly affect us, affect our country, affect our jobs, but we wouldn’t be there. They would be making decisions about us, but without us,” he said.

Cameron’s argument to “remain” is being echoed around the globe. Speaking after a Federal Reserve policy meeting last week, US Fed Chair Janet Yellen said, “It is a decision that could have consequences for economic and financial conditions in global financial markets. If it does so itcould have consequences in turn for the US economic outlook that would be a factor in deciding on the appropriate path of policy.”

Jamie Dimon, head of JP Morgan Chase, which employs thousands of people in Britain, is quoted as saying a Brexit would be “a terrible deal for the British economy and jobs.” That sentiment is joined by billionaire investor George Soros and the head of the European Central Bank Mario Draghi. Renowned economist Nouriel Roubini tweeted, “the Brexit could stall the UK economy and tip it into a recession.”

Global financial markets have been watching Brexit polls closely for weeks now. A vote in favor of a Brexit is expected to cause the British pound to tumble. If that were to happen, it’s believed the Bank of England might stepin and raise interest rates. That would cause borrowing and mortgage prices to rise, which could cause UK home prices to drop. Some economists say Britain’s GDP could decline by more than 2% and that jobs and trade deals would disappear. As for David Cameron: Some say his career as prime minister would be over.

But those pro-Brexit dismiss critics. Some point to Britain’s decision to stay out of the single European currency as an example of British success in going it alone.

Come Friday morning the votes are expected to be tallied and one thing is for sure, change wouldn’t happen overnight. If the vote to exit Britain passes, Britain would then need to negotiate an EU exit plan, which is expected to be a two-year process.

What the Brexit vote means for the US economy

Yes, the Brexit vote matters to Americans. It's not terrible, but it's not good.

For weeks, there have been a lot of headlines crossing about this so-called Brexit vote
Brexit is the abbreviation for "British exit from the European Union." Unhappy with having EU policies forced on them, anti-EU Brits organized and called for a vote. And in a surprise development on Thursday, Britain voted to leave. Specifically, 52% of voters voted to leave as 48% voted to remain.

For our purposes, we're gonna skip what the Brexit vote means for everyone else and focus on what it means for the US.

What the Brexit vote means for the US: Tighter financial conditions

While the US economy and the companies in the US stock market have limited exposure to the UK, they're all nevertheless affected by what's unfolding.

The first thing most economists are flagging right now is tighter financial conditions. Simply put, tighter financial conditions means that it is harder and more expensive for businesses and consumers to get money. That in turn leads to less borrowing, less investing, and ultimately less economic activity.

And these tighter financial conditions are appearing in the US.

"The sharp fall in stock prices in most economies and the widening of credit spreads represent a tightening of financial conditions," Wells Fargo's Jay Bryson said. "If financial conditions remain tight in coming weeks, economic activity in many economies could decelerate from already lackluster rates of growth."

On Friday, the S&P 500 (^GSPC) plunged 75 points or 3.6%. The Dow (^DJI) fell 610 points or 3.4%.

Expect the Fed to keep monetary policy loose for longer

This comes at a time when the Federal Reserve has been planning to actively tighten financial conditionsthrough tighter monetary policy. Why would they want to do this? Because the economy has made great strides in the past seven years since the end of the financial crisis, which means the economy is actually at risk of overheating.

But with these new developments out of the UK  combined with other recent signs of slowdown economists agree that tighter monetary policy which the Fed has been rolling out with interest rate hikes  is likely to be put off for now.

“The Fed will likely delay the hiking cycle,” Bank of America Merrill Lynch’s Ethan Harris said. “We expect the next hike to be in December versus our prior forecast of September. Given the high degree of uncertainty, we will be nimble to adjust forecasts as needed depending on financial conditions.”

Harris isn't the only economist who believes that rate hikes will be put off until the end of the year. His peers at Nomura, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, and UBS all see the Fed waiting until December until the next rate hike comes. ING's Rob Carnell thinks the next rate hike won't come until 2017.

The good news

Historically, these types of shocks rarely have long-lasting affects. Event-driven sell-offs in the financial markets are usually followed by huge rallies.

It's a similar story for economic growth, especially for regional shocks. Renaissance Macro's Neil Dutta considered other major regional shocks from recent history.

"Examples include the European Exchange Rate Mechanism crisis in the early 1990s, the Tequila crisis of the mid-1990s, and the Asian financial crisis in the late 1990s," Dutta observed. "We saw regional recessions that did not bleed to the rest of the world."

Dutta believes that the US economy could experience "a possible GDP hit of anywhere from 0.2 to 0.6ppt to US GDP over the next year" following this Brexit vote. But he also sees growth to improve thanks to, among other things, loose monetary policy.

Stock markets tumble after Leave vote

Wall Street and the FTSE 100 both fell sharply in a wild day of trading after the UK voted for Brexit.

The London blue-chip index fell 7% in early trading to just over 5,800 points but ended the day 3.15% lower at 6,138.

New York and European markets all suffered even bigger falls, with the Dow Jones posting its biggest one-day slide in almost five years.

Sterling also plunged, falling more than 8% against the dollar and 6% against the euro.

Credit rating agency Moody's cut the UK's outlook from stable to negative on Friday night, saying the Brexit vote could result in weaker economic growth.

Wall Street fell sharply in late trading, with the Dow plunging more than 600 points, or 3.4%, to close at 17,400 points.

The S&P 500 fell 3.6% - the biggest daily slide in 10 months - while the Nasdaq slumped 4.1% to give the technology-focused index its worst day since 2011.

Jack Ablin, chief investment officer of BMO Private Bank, said: "This was really an event that caught most global investors flat-footed. We're going to see more days like today as the collective wisdom may prove wrong in others cases, too."

In London the FTSE 250, which mostly comprises companies that trade in the UK, shed 7.2% to close at 16,088 points.

Financial services group Aldermore was the biggest faller on the 250, down 32%, with house builder Crest Nicholson closing 26% lower.

House builders were also the three biggest fallers on the FTSE 100, with Taylor Wimpey suffering a 29% slide.

Liberum analyst Charlie Campbell said: "The outcome is bad for housebuilders' shares as the combination of slowing GDP, rising longer-term rates and political uncertainty is like Kryptonite for that group of shares."

However, the FTSE 100 index still ended the week higher than it started at 6,021 points.

Gold miner Randgold jumped 14%, while consumer-facing companies including GlaxoSmithKline, Unilever and Diageo all rose more than 3%.

The London market regained some poise after the Bank of England pledged to intervene to help shore up the markets.

Governor Mark Carney said the Bank was prepared to provide £250bn to support the markets, but added that "some market and economic volatility can be expected as this process unfolds".
'Bargain hunting'

The European Central Bank also said it was closely monitoring financial markets and was in close contact with other central banks.

Laith Khalaf, senior analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown, said investors on the hunt for bargains helped the blue-chip index later in the day.

"A significant number of FTSE 100 stocks ended the day in positive territory, predominantly those companies with lots of overseas earnings, which stand to benefit from a weaker pound," he said. "Looking forward, we expect further choppiness in the days and weeks to come."

Brexit reaction: Business live

Brexit: Five areas to watch on the economy

Jack: The great business referendum snub

City shock at referendum result

UK interest rate 'likely to hit zero'

How will Brexit affect your finances?

Property market lull may follow EU vote

Drivers 'face rising petrol prices'

Business calls for stability and direction

Sterling fell more than 10% early on Friday to levels not seen since 1985, sinking as low as $1.3236 against the dollar, before regaining some ground to $1.3578.

John Higgins of Capital Economics said: "While this is still a lot lower than the $1.50 reached late on Thursday (UK time), it is not much different from the level that it reached a week earlier when the opinion polls first began to suggest that a Brexit was likely. It therefore seems disingenuous to suggest that sterling has collapsed in the wake of this outcome."
Media caption


UK government bond yields hit a new record low, with 10-year yields down more than 30 basis points to 1.018%, according to Reuters data.

Two-year yields fell more than 20 basis points to their lowest levels since mid-2013, at 0.233%.
European hit

Oil prices have also fallen sharply in the wake of the referendum outcome, with Brent crude down 4.9% to $48.41 a barrel - the biggest fall since February. US crude also fell 4.7% to $47.77 a barrel.

Gold jumped 5% to its highest level in more than three years at $1,322 an ounce.

The impact of the vote was also felt across the continent. The Dax in Frankfurt fell 6.8% - its worst day since 2008 - while Paris ended 8% lower, with falls of about 12% in both Milan and Madrid.

Capital Markets analyst Oliver Roth said the slide in the Dax "wasn't quite as bad as we had feared. At the opening it was down almost 10% but the markets stabilised somewhat ... However, there is great concern after this political disaster."

IAG, which owns British Airways and Iberia, said the result of the vote would hit its profits, sending shares down 22.5% in London.

"Following the outcome of the referendum, and given current market volatility, while IAG continues to expect a significant increase in operating profit this year, it no longer expects to generate an absolute operating profit increase similar to 2015," it said.

UK banks were also hit hard, with Lloyds closing 21% lower, Royal Bank of Scotland fell 18.8% and Barclays shed 17.7%.

Along with housebuilders, the banking sector is regarded to be most at risk from a weaker UK economy.

In France, Societe Generale plunged 20% and BNP Paribas fell 17.4%, while in Germany Deutsche Bank slumped 14.1% and Commerzbank slid 13%.

Meanwhile, shares in Santander - the eurozone's largest bank - fell almost 20% in Madrid.

David Tinsley at UBS said there would be "a significant rise in economic uncertainty" and that the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) was expected to take action, including interest rate cuts and an extension of its quantitative easing programme.

"We expect the MPC will cut policy rates to zero and make further asset purchases, in the first instance of £50-75bn, not later than February 2017," he said.

Did Demi Lovato Just Diss Mariah Carey? Singer Defends Jennifer Lopez in On-Going Drama

Demi Lovato reportedly slammed Mariah Carey in a series of comments (that have since been deleted) on a celebrity gossip account, The Art of Shade, late Thursday, coming to the defense of Jennifer Lopez.

The post compared Ariana Grande to Mariah, claiming the former Nickelodeon star is a lesser version of the 46-year-old singer. Demi commented, saying, "You got it the wrong way around honey," before bringing up Mariah and J.Lo's decades-long feud that has recently resurfaced in the media.

"Mariah is a legend and so talented but constantly disses people. It's nasty the way she treats Jennifer," Demi continued. "Ari did nothing wrong."

When Mariah's "lambs" began lashing out at Demi, she explained further, "This is why I posted what I did. Jen keeps it classy but I'm not afraid to say s--t. The woman is mean for no reason."

She added,"Extremely talented? Yes. Superhuman? Possibly. Unnecessarily rude? Absolutely."

Demi's alleged comments surround the on-going feud between Mariah and J.Lo that started back in the 2000s when Mimi told a few members of the paparazzi that she "didn't know"who the Latina singer was.

It was reignited again in March when Mariah was asked about Lopez by photographers, and she laughed, "I still don't know her!"

However, she clarified her comments during an interview with Andy Cohen on Watch What Happens Live last month. "That was so long ago," she said. "I can't believe people still make such a big deal out of it."

She added, "Apparently, I am forgetful. It wasn't like I don't know who she is—of course I do. That's not the question."

When Cohen asked her if she thinks J.Lo is cool, Mimi responded, point-blank, "I don't know her. What am I supposed to say? I'm not going to put on a thing like we're all Hollywood and let's pretend we're best friends."

Adored Mexican comic actor Ruben Aguirre dies

Mexican comic actor Ruben Aguirre, loved by millions of children and adults across Latin America, has died, aged 82.

Aguirre was best known for his role in the long-running children's TV series El Chavo del Ocho, where he played the teacher, Professor Jirafales.

Episodes of the programme were repeated for years across Latin America, dubbed into Portuguese in Brazil.

He had been very ill for some time and died in his home in Puerto Vallarta.

In his role as Professor Jirafales, a play on the word "giraffe" because Ruben Aguirre was very tall and skinny, he enchanted his audience with his gentle slapstick humour, his catchphrases and his character's courtship of a local woman who had a cheeky son in his class.

He had started early in show business, first in radio, then television, and played various comedy roles.

In the nineties when his television contracts had finished he bought a circus and travelled with it across the Americas.

At one time he had earned a living as a bull-fighting commentator and he presented the first bullfight broadcast live via satellite from Madrid to Mexico.

How Alexander Hamilton solved America's gun problem — 228 years ago

So many Americans are slaughtered by gun violence that even the most sensitive of us has grown numb to some degree. An Islamic extremist turns a gay nightclub into a grisly abattoir and we all know what comes next: nothing.

Regardless of your position on guns, two facts are beyond dispute: The National Rifle Association as a lobby is sufficiently powerful to stop confiscation laws dead in their tracks; and the astounding number of guns in America means even that if every gun manufacturer folded tomorrow, generations of Americans would still live in a nation awash in instruments of death, whether said death is directed at animals, intruders, or innocents.

These two facts were best confirmed by President Obama, who said during a townhall meeting earlier this month that "the notion that I, or Hillary, or Democrats, or whoever you want to choose, are hell-bent on taking away folks' guns is just not true, and I don't care how many times the NRA says it. I'm about to leave office. There have been more guns sold since I've been president than just about any time in U.S. history. There are enough guns for every man, woman, and child in this country and at no point have I ever proposed confiscating guns from responsible gun owners."

This is true.

So what can be done?

The answer is right there in the the Second Amendment, unchanged since it first flowed from the quill of James Madison: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Ask yourself: For what purpose did the Framers endow militias with such a special place in the Bill of Rights?

The Federalist Papers assert that local militias (as opposed to a "regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country") exist as a formidable check on federal power. In Federalist 46, Madison writes of the local militia versus a national military:

It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. [Federalist 46]

Bearing arms is "the right of the people" who would make up a state militia, which protects us from national tyranny (even if Madison was overly generous in describing the efficacy of militiamen during the Revolutionary War). In Federalist 29, published 228 years ago, in 1788, Alexander Hamilton concurs as to why militias are necessary:

If circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist. [Federalist 29]

People need firearms proficiency to defend against young soldiers of a standing army who might be, in Madison's words, "rendered subservient to the views of arbitrary power." Hamilton also elaborates on ideas that would later lead to the Second Amendment, and particularly the notion of a well-regulated militia. He is unambiguous in Federalist 29 on the point that people have a right to their weapons, and that they need not attend formal military training to be part of a militia, which would be "as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it."

By definition, then, a "well-regulated militia" would no longer seem to include the National Guard, which does require formal and sustained military training by the regular Army. At any rate, in its present incarnation, the Guard — as we saw in Iraq and Afghanistan — is a "state" force in name only. In practice, it is a part-time Army Reserve: a national army that happens also to be used for natural disasters in home states.

Hamilton writes further of the requirements of militia members:

Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year. [Federalist 29]

So: If the whole point of the keeping and bearing of arms is to stock "well-regulated militias," why not mandate militia membership in order to own a gun?

Before this suggestion is dismissed out of hand, I assert that the extremist so-called "militias" in Oregon, Ohio, and elsewhere — these people who live on compounds and confront federal agents — are not militiamen but rather insurrectionists. Insurrectionists should be excluded from this discussion. They surrender any claim to the designation "militia" and any place in civil society.

Proper militias would be comprised of sane men and women who own guns and wish to comply with state law. (And that is key: Militias belongentirely to the states, who regulate them accordingly.) Militias might be formed voluntarily based on like-mindedness and geography. Never forgetting their purpose — the common defense — hunters in north Louisiana, for example, might form their own militia — which in practice would exist as a kind of society or association. State regulation of militias would seek to prevent the radicalization of any such group and thus suppress insurrectionists. Likewise, state laws and local governance from within a militia might find better luck in implementing piecemeal the gun reforms that confound federal legislatures.

Recall Hamilton's statement of fact that in order to be "well regulated," a militia should meet once or twice a year. This is key to a militia-based reform (as opposed to an arms-based one) and could easily be accomplished. Precedent exists for large groups of people to assemble for one or two days a year to fulfill a civic obligation, and local governments are quite good at making such assemblies happen, as anyone who has ever been called to jury duty can attest.

Because, as Hamilton writes, formal military training would entail "a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss," how might these militias spend their two days of annual assembly? How about using those days as opportunities for gun safety training. Why not bring the NRA to said meetings to conduct such training? Their political activities aside, the NRA is peerless with respect to teaching such classes. This also allows militia members to "feel each other out" and police one another, as all communities and associations are wont to do.

As militias would be geography based, members directly and through degrees of separation would run invariably across one another's Facebook profiles and the like. A monster like Dylann Roof, for example, might attract added attention with his pro-apartheid regalia, gun poses, burning American flags, and Confederate flag fixation. His friends might not care — and might well have similar beliefs — but a group of sane gun owners familiar with the consequences of inaction might be more willing to keep an eye on the guy and flag him to local law enforcement. Likewise Omar Mateen — not because of his name, religion, or skin color, but because hebeat his wife and was reared by an unhinged video podcaster preaching pro-Taliban propaganda. Anyone who grew up in a small community knows: Fair or not, word of such things gets around. And a militia, as it were, would be just such a community.

This might not have directly prevented the massacres committed by Mateen or Roof or Adam Lanza. The simple disruption (or rather: restoration) of what it means to own a firearm, however, might well prevent future horrors. Gun owners would be given a vested interest in keeping firearms out of the wrong hands: pride in their militia. Can there be a greater dishonor than an atrocity like the massacre in Orlando? It is a national stain, make no mistake. But if the perpetrator was the member of a local militia, the shame becomes local, and with that, a certain urgency to make sure it doesn't happen.

The result of compulsory militia membership for gun owners is actual reform whose design originates directly from the framers of the Constitution. This reform adds oversight, training, and state regulation while keeping the federal government out (militias existing specifically as a check on federal power); preserving the right to keep firearms; contributing perhaps to the security of the United States in some presently unimaginable future conflict at home that involves enemy divisions and open warfare; and has a better chance of seeing law than does confiscation or a repeal of the right to bear arms.

Court precedents work against this argument. But courts change, and new eyes will inevitably be set upon the Second Amendment. Still, I concede that the likelihood of this proposal ever surviving the gauntlet of our legislative process to be slim at best. I would consider a small chance of taking a first step in the right direction, however, to be preferable to thenothing that followed the unimaginable wholesale slaughter of first-graders at Sandy Hook. If the prevailing arguments against gun ownership could survive that unrivaled atrocity, which was conceived by a lunatic and doled out from the barrel of a rifle, then those arguments will simply never gain traction. I mean only to submit other strategies to the public debate. I hope others do as well.

'I want you to stay little forever!' Kim Kardashian and daughter North share sweet moment together in adorable video on toddler's 3rd birthday

Kim Kardashian shared a sweet video to mark her daughter North's 3rd birthday on Wednesday.

The 35-year-old is seen telling her daughter to 'stay little forever' while cradling her in her arms and planting a kiss on her cheek.

She shared the video on Instagram, along with a caption that read: 'She promised me she wouldn't get any bigger. I can't believe my baby girl is 3 years old today!!!! Northie I love you so much I can't even explain it! Happy Birthday to my favorite mermaid!!!

The video begins with Kim instructing her daughter, 'Okay, so you are not - ', before little North interrupts her by making a playful sound.

'So you're not going to get any bigger,' Kim says after giving her daughter a kiss on the cheek.

'You're not going to get any bigger,' she repeats as her little girl gazes at the camera. 'You're not going to get any taller.
'I want you to stay little forever,' Kim adds. 'Okay?'

Her smiling tot agrees.

'Kay!' North says as she reaches towards the camera.

'And you're not going to eat your veggies,' Kim adds in a separate and slightly longer video of the same interaction shared on her Twitter account. 'Cause I want you to be really small.'

North wears a playful bathing suit while her mother has her hair in braids and looks nearly makeup free.

Kim and Kanye West welcomed North in 2013 before tying the knot nearly a year later in Italy.

The couple are also parents to newborn son Saint.

Kim recently told fans that she and the The Life Of Pablo hit-maker are 'a perfect match' astrologically.

In a post on her subscription based website kimkardashianwest.com, she wrote: 'Libra/Gemini sex gets a 5-star rating because we're so in tune with each other.'

Kim also shared that both signs 'love travel, surprises and communication' and added that she and Kanye have 'had an amazing connection right from the start'

SpaceX's landing streak is over: Falcon 9 breaks apart after crashing down on a drone ship

The Falcon 9 rocket blasted off from Cape Canaveral at 10:29 local time
It delivered its payload of two communications satellites into orbit
But it failed to land on the floating drone platform in the Atlantic Ocean
SpaceX confirmed it lost the rocket after a hard touch down, with Elon Musk pointing to weak thrust on the engine's rockets as a likely cause

Elon Musk and SpaceX had hoped to make it four in a row today by landing a Falcon 9 rocket on a floating drone barge off the US coast, but confirmed the rocket did not survive the landing.

The Falcon 9 took off from Cape Canaveral in Florida at 10:29 local time (15:29 BST), carrying two communications satellites into orbit.

It returned to land on floating barge in the Atlantic Ocean minutes later, but failed to touch down successfully in what the firm says may be the hardest landing impact to date.

There was added drama after the live video feed on the floating platform froze, leaving it unclear as to whether or not the first stage of the rocket had landed successfully.

In a live stream of the launch, SpaceX confirmed: ‘Unfortunately we lost the vehicle in [the] landing’.

Elon Musk took to Twitter after the failed landing, pointing to low thrust on the rocket's engines as the reason for failure. Any lack of thrust would have meant the rocket approached the platform faster than anticipated.

He wrote: 'Looks like thrust was low on 1 of 3 landing engines. High g landings v sensitive to all engines operating at max.'

The billionaire entrepreneur quipped: 'Ascent phase [and] satellites good, but booster rocket had a RUD on droneship' - with RUD meaning 'rapid unscheduled disassembly'.

Musk confirmed the droneship - called 'Of Course I Still Love You' - survived the impact, adding that SpaceX hopes to post video footage of the landing when crew gain access to the barge later today.

The sixth mission of the year for the private firm delivered French-operated Eutelsat and ABS, controlled by Bermuda-base Asia Broadcast Satellite Limited, into geosynchronous orbit.

SpaceX confirmed that both satellites had been successfully deployed.

Eutelsat will relay video and data services to South and Central America, the Caribbean and the southern US, while ABS will provide communications to Russia, India, Africa and South Asia.

While the firm has successfully landed four of its Falcon 9 rockets after launch - one on land and three on the drone barge - it is yet to reuse one of them to take payloads into space.

Earlier this month, chief executive of SpaceX Musk revealed on Twitter that the firm plans to relaunch one of its rockets later this year, with a probable launch date in September.

If it goes ahead, this would make it the first relaunch of the private space company's rockets.

SpaceX has come a long way in its efforts to land Falcon 9 rockets, finally nailing its first successful barge touch down in April this year.

One thing to be sure of is that the firm will have collected data from all stages of today's launch and will analyse what went wrong this time and how to prevent it from happening again.

Video emerged at the start of the year showing three of the failures which eventually led to three successful barge landings.

It shows the rockets crunching wobbling, tipping and exploding on the floating barge, all in the hope that reusable rockets will be commonplace in future.

Why do 95% of Traders Lose Money?

I've written articles on this subject before but there are so many new traders and so many people who NEED to read this lesson I'll be posting this again.

Why do 95% of Traders Lose Money? The bottom line is emotions! Plain and simple. The underlying reason why almost all traders fail can be found in our emotions and our conditioning. Trading is psychologically difficult. Our emotions will cause us to do things we normally wouldn't do. Things we know better. Emotions can marry us to a trade, making it impossible to let go of a loss. They can make us revenge trade, over-trade, hesitate, chase the market, etc.. The list goes on and on. You could be handed the most profitable trading strategy known to man. With set rules, predefined entries and exits. You might even occasionally get into the correct mind-set to follow these rules with enough discipline to make the system work. The discipline and patience required are enormous. Then there is the screen time involved. Sitting in front of the monitor watching the markets on multiple screens to catch the right set-up for a trade. It is almost impossible to to adhere to this regimen. Well, there is a better way my friends. Automation! With today's technology there is no system or strategy that cannot be fully automated, programmed to trade for you around the clock. It is very possible to set up an automated trading system and make money while your sleeping!

If your interested in learning more about automated trading please message me or visit our website to get a free demo of our latest automated trading system.

EU referendum live: Jeremy Corbyn urges Labour supporters to vote remain

Fifty-two thousand EU nationals work in our NHS, as doctors, nurses and physiotherapists. They contribute to our country and save our lives.

EU nationals are 4.7 percent of our population. Yet they are five percent of NHS nurses and ten percent of NHS doctors.

If you care about our NHS, don’t just listen me, listen to NHS staff – every NHS workers’ union and royal college is backing Remain.

And now he’s wrapping up.

The risk to the NHS if we vote Leave is the damage to public finances caused by a hit to our economy, and the risk to our NHS by a victory for those who would scrap a universal NHS - free at the point of use.

The NHS is a force for civilisation. If, like us, you care about our health service, then listen to the dedicated staff here today, dedicated to the NHS and dedicated to remaining in Europe.

Please use your vote on 23 June to Remain and protect our NHS.

Corbyn cites the Tory MP Sarah Wollaston to back his case.

It’s not just me or Labour that is saying this, Dr Sarah Wollaston, a Conservative MP and a former GP was until last week supporting the Leave campaign.

This is what she had to say: “I could not have set foot on a battle bus that has at the heart of its campaign a figure that I know to be untrue”. Dr Sarah Woollaston is now voting for Remain, she said she feared what would happen to the NHS if we left what she called the “Brexit penalty”.

Corbyn repeats his call for the NHS to be excluded from TTIP, the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (the proposed EU/US trade deal). As it stands, Labour would veto TTIP, he says.

And he attacks Vote Leave for its claims about leaving the EU freeing up more money for the NHS.

The Vote Leave bus said “we send the EU £350m a week, let’s fund the NHS instead”.

There’s a couple of problems with that, firstly the UK Statistics Authority says that slogan is “misleading” and told them to stop using it.

The UK Statistics Authority is diplomatic when they say “misleading”, they mean dishonest. It’s an outright lie, and they know it.

And they’ve since been forced to re-paint the bus.

Does anyone really believe that those from the hard right of the Tories and Ukip would spend any extra funds on the NHS?

Corbyn says leading Leave figures 'don’t even want there to be an NHS'
Corbyn attacks the government’s record on the NHS.

And he says the NHS would be even worse if the leaders of the Leave side had their way. Many of them do not want an NHS, he says.

That crisis would be even worse if many on the Leave side had their way. People who have argued against the NHS and free healthcare on demand in principle. These same people now have the audacity to portray themselves as the saviours of the NHS. Most of the Leave side – the Tory right and Ukip – don’t even want there to be an NHS.

The millionaire funder of the Leave side, Arron Banks said: “If it were up to me, I’d privatise the NHS.”

Nigel Farage called for an insurance-based system to replace the NHS

Michael Gove is co-author of a book that says the NHS is “no longer relevant in the 21st century”. A book which calls for the NHS to be replaced by a new system of health provision in which people would pay money into individual health acount.

And Boris Johnson, who said: “If people have to pay for NHS services, they will value them more”.

(The Gove claim is based on this Observer about a book primarily written by Daniel Hannan, the Tory MEP, which includes a quote from Gove saying he does not agree with Hannan’s proposal to replace the NHS with an insurance system.)

Corbyn's NHS speech

Jeremy Corbyn is now speaking.

He says before he became an MP he represented NHS staff as a NUPE representative.

And the NHS is under threat if we leave, he says.

We have a big decision on 23 June, I value our NHS and admire the dedication of all its staff. I would not be voting for Remain if I thought there was any risk to our NHS whatsoever, the risk to the NHS is if we leave.
Corbyn says Labour making 'the strongest case we can' for staying in EU

The Labour event was billed by the party in advance as a “Labour In for Britain shadow cabinet event”. The party said there would a photo opportunity and “short remarks” by Jeremy Corbyn (ie, not a speech).

This is what Corbyn said in full.

This is a coming together of the Labour shadow cabinet, the general secretaries and members of the general council of the TUC and many members of our party’s national executive. This is the Labour movement saying we are voting to remain in the European Union next week.

We’re saying that because we want to defend the very many gains made by trade unions across Europe that have brought us better working conditions, longer holidays, less discrimination and maternity and paternity leave.

We believe that a leave vote will put many of those things seriously, immediately at risk. Many in work will be significantly worse off when the bonfire of regulations promised by others take place.

But we also want to extend those rights. We best extend those rights by working with trade unions, Labour parties, socialist parties, all across Europe in the interests of the working people of the whole continent and of course this country.

We’re making the strongest case we can. From Land’s End to John O’Groats, from Norwich to North Wales, we are making the case everywhere that staying in the European Union gives us the opportunity to defend and extend the rights of people in work. It gives us the jobs that we need and the exports that we must fulfil as a country to the rest of Europe. Therefore we are making the strongest case we can, for the good of the ordinary people of this country, to vote to remain, to give us that voice to try and improve rights and justice, in this country and all across Europe.

It’s the Labour position, it’s the trade union position, to vote to remain. That’s why we’ve come together here today to share our values, to share our determination, to share our strength, and we urge all of our supporters to think very carefully about this and to vote to remain next Thursday on 23rd.

In his final sentence there was a curious echo of what the Queen said ahead of the Scottish referendum. Doubtless it was unintentional.

Corbyn says this represents a coming together of the Labour party.

They are making the case for the EU all over the country, he says. They are making the strongest case they can.

They want to remain so they can improve rights and help workers.

He says he urges all Labour supporters to think carefully about this and to vote to remain.

Labour's In for Britain event

Jeremy Corbyn is now speaking at the Labour In for Britain event.

He has just been posing for a photograph with members of the shadow cabinet and union leaders.


Vote Leave has now released the full text of its open letter promising to maintain funding to people and institutions who currently received EU money (ie, farmers, scientists etc). Priti Patel was on the Today programme earlier talking about this. (See 8.53am.)

The letter, signed by 13 ministers and senior Tories, also claimed that leaving the EU could theoretically save the UK up to £43bn because it would allow the government to pass legislation saying the UK would no longer be bound by European court of justice rulings forcing HM Revenue and Customs to pay tax refunds. It says:

There are also many other costs, direct and indirect, of EU membership on top of our official contributions to the EU’s budget.

For example, the UK is set to pay out between £7 billion and £43 billion by 2021 in tax refunds to big businesses which have successfully used the European Court and EU law to escape taxes lawfully imposed on them in Britain. If we stay, these bills will be paid for by British taxpayers on P.A.Y.E. instead of that money going to public services. If we Vote Leave, the Government will pass legislation to prevent these payments being made so that taxpayers are not given these huge bills.

These figures are taken from government and HMRCACCOUNTS setting out HMRC’s contingent liabilities, the amount it might have to pay if it loses legal cases in the future.

A separate Vote Leave briefing note gives more details. Here’s an extra ct.

Rulings of the European court have exposed the taxpayer to massive liabilities for tax refunds to big businesses. The OBR now forecasts that HMRC will pay out £7.3bn from 2016-2017 to 2020-2021, an average of £270.43 per household (OBR, March 2016; ONS, 5 November 2015). If HMRC also loses every case currently pending (a further £35.6bn), the UK will be forced to pay out £42.9bn, the equivalent of £1,589 per household (HMRC, 16 July 2015; ONS, 5 November 2015).

The UK has tried to block these payouts before but its tax legislation has been overruled by the European court (Test Claimants in the Franked Investment Income Group Litigation v Commissioners of Inland Revenue, Case C-362/12; Commission v United Kingdom, Case C-640/13). If we vote remain, the European court will continue to take control over our tax system and require multibillion payouts to the multinational businesses.

Here is Iain Duncan Smith, the former work and pensions secretary, commenting on today’s European court of justice ruling backing Britain’s right to refuse to pay family welfare benefits to unemployed EU migrants who have been in Britain for less than five years. In a statement put out by Vote Leave he said:

It’s absurd that we have to to run every nut and bolt of domestic policy past Luxembourg, and then engage in lengthy and expensive court battles if they decide they don’t like what our democratically elected government is doing.

As well as the cost to taxpayers of fighting these lengthy drawn out cases, it’s clearly an illegitimate challenge to our sovereignty. Although David Cameron didn’t want to admit it, this case and others like it are proof positive that the unelected European court of justice is now supreme above our elected parliament. They decide the rules and the only way to prevent this kind of intervention in future is to Vote Leave on 23 June.

With Labour’s shadow cabinet EU event due to start in about half an hour, here is an extract from Rachel Sylvester’s column in the Times (paywall) today on the party and the EU referendum.

It is Labour voters who will determine the outcome next week. According to a senior source at the Stronger In campaign, Tory voters are likely toACCOUNT for a Remain vote of about 19 per cent, Lib Dems and Greens another 10 per cent and the SNP about 2 per cent, making a total of 31 per cent. That means that the prime minister is dependent on Labour voters to get over the required 50 per cent. Strategists have calculated that they need at least two-thirds of Labour supporters to vote Remain to be sure of victory. But — despite the vast majority of Labour MPs wanting to stay in — almost half of its voters do not know the party’s position ...

Another MP says that Labour voters in his area are breaking 55-45 for Out. “It’s terrible. The proverbial metropolitan elite has not been recognising the impact that rapid population change has had on the public services. And Labour is ducking this issue.”

The truth is that the referendum is exposing Labour’s breach with its traditional voters in a way that has profound implications for the country as well as the party. In Birmingham, campaigners were told to take all mentions of immigration out of their literature. Although the local MPs begged to be allowed to tackle local concerns head on, they were banned from doing so by party staff following instructions from the leader’s office. As one former minister says: “It gives the impression that we are completely out of touch with the way people live their lives.”

Orlando shooting: 50 killed, shooter pledged ISIS allegiance

An American-born man who'd pledged allegiance to ISIS gunned down 50 people early Sunday at a gay nightclub in Orlando, the deadliest mass shooting in the United States and the nation's worst terror attack since 9/11, authorities said.
* The gunman, Omar Mateen, 29, of Fort Pierce, Florida, was interviewed by the FBI in 2013 and 2014 but was not found to be a threat, the FBI said.
* Mateen called 911 during the attack to pledge allegiance to ISIS and mentioned the Boston Marathon bombers, according to a U.S. official.
* Orlando police shot and killed Mateen.
* Mateen's ex-wife said she thinks he was mentally ill.
Mateen carried an assault rifle and a pistol into the packed Pulse club about 2 a.m. Sunday and started shooting, killing 50 people and wounding at least 53, police said.
After a standoff of about three hours, while people trapped inside the club desperately called and messaged friends and relatives, police crashed into the building with an armored vehicle and stun grenades and killed Mateen.
"It appears he was organized and well-prepared," Orlando Police Chief John Mina said early Sunday. Authorities said they haven't found any accomplices.

'An act of hate'
There has been no claim of responsibility for the attack on jihadi forums, but ISIS sympathizers have reacted by praising the attack on pro-Islamic State forums.
"We know enough to say this was an act of terror and act of hate," President Obama said in an address to the nation from the White House.
While the violence could have hit any American community, "This is an especially heartbreaking day for our friends who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender," he said.
Omar Mir Seddique Mateen was born in 1986 in New York. Most recently he lived in Fort Pierce, about 120 miles southeast of Orlando. Fearing explosives, police evacuated about 200 people from the apartment complex where he lived while they looked through his residence for evidence.
Mateen's parents, who are from Afghanistan, said he'd expressed outrage after seeing two men kiss in Miami, but they didn't consider him particularly religious and didn't know of any connection he had to ISIS.
He was married in 2009 to a woman originally from Uzbekistan, according to the marriage license, but he filed documents to end the marriage in 2011.
Sitora Yusufiy, interviewed by CNN in Boulder, Colorado, said she and Mateen were together about four months, though it took a long time to complete the divorce because they lived in different parts of the country after separating.
Mateen was a normal husband at the beginning of their marriage but started abusing her after a few months, she said. She said Mateen was bipolar, although he was not formally diagnosed. She also said Mateen had a history with steroids. He was religious but she said she doesn't think his religion played in to the attack.
Mateen had worked since 2007 as a security officer at G4S Secure Solutions, one of the world's largest private security companies.
A message posted in Arabic on a dark web site associated with the ISIS news agency Amaq said "the armed attack that targeted a gay night club in the city of Orlando in the American state of Florida and that bore more than a 100 killed and wounded was carried out by an Islamic state fighter."
But CNN's Salma Abdelaziz, who translated the message and closely monitors ISIS messaging, cautioned about taking the message at face value.
She said the language is inconsistent with previous ISIS announcements and that the Arabic word for gay was used rather than an epithet normally used by ISIS. Also, there was no claim that the attack was directed, just an after-the-fact claim the gunman was an ISIS fighter, she said.
At a Sunday afternoon news briefing, FBI Assistant Special Agent Ronald Hopper said the agency was aware of Mateen. The FBI interviewed him in 2013 and 2014 after he expressed sympathy for a suicide bomber, Hopper said.
"Those interviews turned out to be inconclusive, so there was nothing to keep the investigation going," Hopper said.
Mateen was not under investigation at the time of Sunday's shooting and was not under surveillance, Hopper said.
In the past two weeks Mateen legally purchased a Glock pistol and a long gun, ATF Assistant Special Agent in Charge Trevor Velinor told reporters.
It's not known if those weapons were used in the attack.
"He is not a prohibited person. They can legally walk into a gun dealership and acquire and purchase firearms. He did so. And he did so within the last week or so," Velinor said.

Scene inside the club
Pulse describes itself as "the hottest gay bar" in the heart of Orlando. Hours before the shooting, the club urged partygoers to attend its "Latin flavor" event Saturday night. The club is a vast, open space that was hosting more than 300 patrons late Saturday and into Sunday morning.
People inside the cavernous nightclub described a scene of panic made more confusing by the loud music and darkness.
"At first it sounded like it was part of the show because there was an event going on and we were all having a good time," clubgoer Andy Moss said. "But once people started screaming and shots just keep ringing out, you know that it's not a show anymore."
Christopher Hansen said he was getting a drink at the bar about 2 a.m. when he "just saw bodies going down." He heard gunshots, "just one after another after another."
The gunshots went on for so long that the shooting "could have lasted a whole song," he said.
When the shots erupted, Hansen hit the ground, crawling on his elbows and knees, before he spotted a man who had been shot.
"I took my bandana off and shoved it in the hole in his back," Hansen said, adding that he saw another woman who appeared to be shot in the arm.
Survivors provided CNN with dramatic accounts of how they avoided death. One person hiding in the bathroom covered herself with bodies to protect herself. Some entertainers hid in a dressing room when the shooting started and escaped the building by crawling out when police removed the air conditioning unit.
One of the bartenders said she hid under the glass bar. Police came in and said, "If you are alive, raise your hand." Then police got her and others out.
After the initial shooting, police surrounded the club while Mateen was inside with clubgoers hiding in bathrooms and other parts of the building. People inside the club were communicating on their phones with law enforcement from that time until around 5 a.m., when authorities used an armored vehicle to break down the door of the building.

Hospital swamped with victims
Thirty-nine people and Mateen were pronounced dead at the scene, with two bodies found in the parking lot, Mayor Buddy Dyer said. Eleven people were taken to hospitals and pronounced dead there, he said.
The City of Orlando is posting names of the deceased on a website after next of kin are notified. The youngest person among the first seven named, Luis Omar Ocasio-Capo, was 20 years old.
Forty-three of the wounded people were patients on Sunday afternoon at Orlando Regional Medical Center, a hospital spokesperson said, with 26 operations being performed.
Blood donors rush to help in Orlando
Before Sunday, the deadliest shootings in U.S. history were at Virginia Tech in 2007 and Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, with 32 and 27 killed. Fourteen people were killed December 2 in an attack in San Berardino, California.
National media attention was already focused on Orlando over the weekend because of Friday night's fatal shooting of Christina Grimmie while she signed autographs after a show. She was an up-and-coming singer who had appeared on NBC's "The Voice." Her shooter then killed himself. The Pulse shooting happened only a few miles from the Plaza Live theater, where Grimmie was killed.
Dyer, the mayor, called for the city to come together. "We need to support each other. We need to love each other. And we will not be defined by a hateful shooter," he said.
President Obama called for flags to be lowered to half staff and Florida Gov. Rick Scott called for a moment of silence across the nation at 6 p.m. Sunday. States of emergency were declared for the city of Orlando and for Orange County.

Santa Monica arrest
Also on Sunday, authorities in West Hollywood, California, arrested 20-year-old James Wesley Howell. They said they found an arsenal in his car that included, three assault rifles, high-capacity magazines, ammunition and a five-gallon bucket with chemicals that could be used to create an explosive device, officials said. At 5 a.m. PT, police got a call about a prowler and found Howell, who told authorities he was looking for a friend to attend the LA Pride festival.
There was no indication the arrest was related to the Orlando attack.

'Hamilton' wins 11 Tony Awards on a night that balances sympathy with perseverance

Broadway's biggest night ended in dramatic fashion when stage legend Barbra Streisand announced that "Hamilton" would indeed win the Tony Award for best musical. That made 11 wins for Lin-Manuel Miranda's groundbreaking production, just shy of the record of 12 Tonys won by "The Producers."

And on a night when so many were thinking of the victims of the biggest mass shooting in U.S. history, it’s fitting that Miranda’s “Hamilton” company sang the number “Yorktown (The World Turned Upside Down)” to introduce the musical.

First-time Tonys host James Corden began the night with a message for the Orlando victims: “Your tragedy is our tragedy. Theater is a place where every race, creed, sexuality, and gender is equal, embraced, and loved. Hate will never win.” A few notable and moving speeches paying tribute to the Orlando victims were given by Miranda, Jessica Lange, Frank Langella and others. Overall, though, the show largely stuck to its original script of laughs and plenty of music. Plus Andrew Lloyd Webber on tambourine.

Live from Apple’s Keynote at WWDC 2016

Once a year, Apple gathers thousands of developers and journalists to show off all of the secret things the company has been working on for the past many months.

Today is that day.

So, what will they announce? iOS 10? The long rumored rebranding of OS X to macOS? How about the supposed overhaul of Siri? You’ll have to tune in to find out.

Greg Kumparak and Matthew Panzarino will be bringing back the up-to-the-second news from the keynote, which is scheduled to start at 10 AM Pacific (that’s 1 PM Eastern, 7 AM Hawaii, 6 PM London, and 1 AM on the 14th over in Beijing). We traditionally start bringing back photos and commentary from the scene a bit before the keynote officially kicks off — so tune in early!

Qualifying - Hamilton edges Rosberg, Vettel for Canada pole

Little over a tenth of a second separated the top three cars in Saturday’s qualifying session for the Formula 1 Grand Prix du Canada 2016, with pole going to Mercedes’ Lewis Hamilton from team mate Nico Rosberg and Ferrari’s Sebastian Vettel.

Daniel Ricciardo beat Red Bull team mate Max Verstappen to fourth place, with Kimi Raikkonen sixth in the second Ferrari. Williams’ Valtteri Bottas and Felipe Massa, Force India’s Nico Hulkenberg, and McLaren’s Fernando Alonso completed the top ten.

Q2 was punctuated by a red-flag period five minutes in after Carlos Sainz clouted the right side of his Toro Rosso against the infamous Wall of Champions, eliminating the Spaniard on the spot.

The second phase alsoACCOUNTED for Force India’s Sergio Perez, pipped at the death by his team mate, McLaren’s Jenson Button, Toro Rosso’s Daniil Kvyat, and Haas’s Esteban Gutierrez and Romain Grosjean.

Q1 saw light rain in the closing minutes, and effectively ended with a late crash for Manor’s Rio Haryanto, who hit the wall with his right-rear wheel in Turn 4, picking up a puncture and spinning across the track before also brushing the left of the car against the barriers.

Joining the Indonesian rookie on the Q1 elimination list were Renault’s Jolyon Palmer, Manor’s Pascal Wehrlein, and Sauber’s Marcus Ericsson and Felipe Nasr.

Kevin Magnussen did not participate after Renault were unable to get his car repaired in time following his FP3 crash. With his R.S.16 requiring a new gearbox, the Dane is set to start from the back of the grid or - more likely - the pit lane.

Mercedes and Ferrari began slugging it out the moment Q1 began, and it was Rosberg who narrowly beat Vettel to the fastest time, with Ricciardo jumping up late to third for Red Bull ahead of Hamilton, Bottas and Raikkonen.

At the other end of the grid Haas duo Esteban Gutierrez and Romain Grosjean just made it through, surviving a late onslaught from Renault's Jolyon Palmer who - despite a brush with the wall of champions - improved at the death, but fell 0.015s shy of demoting Grosjean.

Once the red flags came in following Sainz's crash, the two Mercedes quickly jumped to the top of the times, with Hamilton's 1m 13.076s shading Rosberg's 1m 13.094s by just 0.018s. Bottas split the third- and fifth-placed Red Bulls, as Ferrari were a disappointing sixth and seventh with Raikkonen and Vettel eight-tenths off.

The Force Indias and McLarens, meanwhile, were locked in a fight to progress into Q3. Jenson Button looked set to secure his place, but dropped away in the final sector - unlike team mate Alonso, who jumped up to ninth with his final effort.

That left Perez in 10th, but in danger given Hulkenberg - on the brink of elimination in 11th - was on track and going quickly. The German made his last effort count to secure ninth, which meant Perez got bumped to 11th on 1m 14.317s ahead of Button on 1m 14.437s, Kvyat on 1m 14.457s, and the Haas pair of Gutierrez on 1m 14.571s and Grosjean on 1m 14.803s. Sainz's 1m 21.956s left him 16th.

Q3 began badly for Hamilton when he ran over the same Turn 14 yellow kerb on which he had damaged his car in FP3. This time it appeared to have had no ill effect, however, as his first run yielded a mighty 1m 12.812s. Rosberg was matching the Briton blow for blow, however, and crossed the line just 0.062s down.

Behind them, Verstappen provisionally took third with 1m 13.430s from Vettel on 1m 13.479s and Ricciardo on 1m 13.521s.

Vettel had a scare when he brushed the wall of champions, but he avoided damage and found massive gains on his second run to move into third. Hamilton had also improved on the first sector, but lost time over the remainder of the lap - a fact that went unpunished when Rosberg locked up at Turn 1 and abandoned his own effort.

Pole therefore was Hamilton's - his fourth of the season, fifth in Canada, and by the closest margin so far in 2016.

Thus the provisional grid will line up: Hamilton, Rosberg; Vettel, Ricciardo; Verstappen, Raikkonen; Bottas, Massa; Hulkenberg, Alonso; Perez, Button; Gutierrez, Grosjean; Sainz, Kvyat; Palmer, Wehrlein; Nasr, Haryanto; Ericsson, Magnussen.

Kvyat and Ericsson have three-place grid penalties for causing collisions at the previous round in Monaco, while Magnussen takes a five-place drop after being forced to change gearbox as a result of his crash in FP3.