"If you can look into it." Details of Trump's call to the Ukraine have been released, & more in news in 5.

– With AAP.

1. “If you can look into it.” Details of Trump’s call to the Ukraine have been released.

US President Donald Trump repeatedly pushed for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden, and his son, Hunter, according to a transcript of the phone conversation released by the White House.

On Wednesday, the White House released a five-page summary of the phone conversation which took place on July 25 between Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky.

During the conversation, Trump also asked Zelensky to work with his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and US Attorney General William Barr on the issue.

“There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… it sounds horrible to me,” Trump says, according to the summary.

During the phone call, Trump also criticised Mueller’s testimony from the day before and raised the possibility of looking into the US cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike.

“I would like you to do us a favour though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say CrowdStrike… I guess you have one of your wealthy people… the server, they say Ukraine has it,” he said according to the transcript.

“There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the attorney general call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it,” he added. “Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.”

The release of the transcript comes a day after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared the President had betrayed his oath of office and announced she is opening a formal impeachment inquiry.

“The fact is that the President of the United States, in breach of his constitutional responsibilities, has asked a foreign government to help him in his political campaign at the expense of our national security, as well as undermining the integrity of our elections,” she said after the transcript was released Wednesday. “That cannot stand. He will be held accountable. No one is above the law.”

2.  Greta Thunberg was not surprised by Donald Trump’s tweet.

Swedish teen climate activist Greta Thunberg says she was not surprised to have been the subject of a tweet from US President Donald Trump and says she “of course” took his tweet to have been meant sarcastically.

Trump tweeted about Thunberg for the first time after reportedly watching video of Thunberg giving an emotional speech at a UN summit on climate change in New York.

“She seems like a very happy young girl looking forward to a bright and wonderful future. So nice to see!” Trump tweeted on Monday.

Thunberg was visibly angry in her speech earlier in the day as she sounded the alarm about climate change and accused world leaders of inaction, stealing her childhood and future.

Asked about the president’s tweet on a Scandinavian talk show, Thunberg said: “You can interpret it in many different ways, but I knew that at some time he is probably going to say something about me.”

“It doesn’t make any difference in a way,” Thunberg added in an excerpt released on Wednesday of the Norwegian-Swedish television production Skavlan, which will air in full on Friday.

Asked if she “read any sarcasm” into Trump’s tweet, Thunberg replied: “Of course I do, but of course he was going to write that.”

Trump and Thunberg did not meet in person, though they were both in New York for the UN General Assembly this week. Trump walked past the 16-year-old activist on Monday, appearing not to notice her behind him as he addressed reporters.

Thunberg has also changed her Twitter biography, using a portion of Trump’s quote about her.

3. Cannabis use is given green light in Canberra.

Possessing and growing cannabis for personal use will be legal in the nation’s capital next year.

The ACT will become the first state or territory in Australia to allow cannabis use, with residents over 18 permitted to possess up to 50 grams and grow two plants.

The ACT’s Legislative Assembly passed a private member’s bill from Labor backbencher Michael Pettersson on Wednesday, but residents will have to wait until the law comes into effect on January 31, 2020 before they can light up.

The bill would require cannabis not to be used near children and kept out of their reach.

Driving under the influence would stay illegal, as would growing it in community gardens or hydroponically and while each Canberran can grow two plants, there would be a limit of four per household.

On Wednesday, Chief Minister Andrew Barr suggested Commonwealth prosecutors had been pressured by the federal government to revise their legal advice to the ACT government.

The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions initially provided advice to the ACT on what defences would be available to those charged under Commonwealth law, but in a letter a week later said it “would not be appropriate” to give advice.

Mr Barr said this raised questions of what changed between those two letters.

Individual police would still be able to charge people under Commonwealth law, but Mr Barr said the ACT’s Attorney-General would intervene to defend anyone charged under federal law.

Attorney-General Gordon Ramsay said it was time to treat drug addiction as a health issue rather than an issue of “right and wrong”.

The government would roll out an education campaign on the new law before January.

The bill’s passing comes as laws passed on Tuesday allowing the establishment of a specialised drug and alcohol court in Canberra.

Mr Ramsay acknowledged that possession and growth of cannabis would remain a federal offence and the risk of prosecution was not entirely removed, but said “in practice” the laws would not apply.

Mr Pettersson said a defence exists for cannabis use under Commonwealth law if the use is excused or justified by state or territory law.

“Commonwealth law has been written with the express understanding that there are differences,” Mr Pettersson said.

“I don’t think it’s particularly likely the Commonwealth government will try to fight this.”

A review of the laws will be conducted within three years.

The Liberal opposition did not support the bill, describing it as badly drafted and raising concerns it would lead to a number of “perverse outcomes”.

ACT shadow attorney-general Jeremy Hanson told the assembly it would encourage more people to use cannabis, which medical professionals say would lead to increased rates of psychosis.

Mr Hanson said the fact it conflicted with Commonwealth law would also be confusing for police.

“This puts not only individuals at a greater level of risk but our police will be out there on the beat working in this unclear legal framework,” Mr Hanson said.

Federal Attorney-General Christian Porter said the bill was a matter for the ACT, but where Commonwealth laws applied they remained enforceable.

Federal Health Minister Greg Hunt said any problems with Commonwealth law were a matter for the attorney-general, but the Morrison government did not support legalising cannabis for recreational use.

Mr Barr said the government had consulted with ACT Policing.

4. An online fathers’ group named ‘Domestic Violence Against Men’ urges for mass child abduction.

A post in an online group of fathers has urged more than 19,000 members to abduct their children in a coordinated strike that would reduce the ability of law enforcement to respond.

The group, Domestic Violence Against Men, posted the call to action asking Australian fathers to ”grab their kids” on December 1 and take them interstate.

The September 12 post, made by an administrator of the Facebook group reads: “On the 1st of December every father must grab their kids & run to another state, then report the mother for sexual abuse.”

Fathers were urged in a subsequent post to run as far as they could and to make false claims about the mother.

The following day an administrator posted that the mass abduction would attract media coverage.

“We are going to make headlines no matter what it takes, no one gives a shite about how we are affected or why we #suicide,” he said.

A later post says: “Truth is, no father has it in them to take a child away from a mother yet a mother will do it & doesn’t give a … who it effects.”

The page says it is a voice for silenced male victims of domestic violence. It encourages members to vent on the site rather than suicide.

Following the announcement of the parliamentary inquiry into family law, several members wrote warnings to Prime Minister Scott Morrison of an epidemic of suicide and violence if the inquiry failed to do what was right by them.

The Domestic Violence Against Men page owner alleges he is a victim of domestic violence and claims he has been falsely accused of committing domestic violence.

When alerted to the post urging mass child abduction, an Australian Federal Police spokesperson said they were aware of a number of groups that advocated for all sides of family law matters.

“The AFP encourages all parties to resolve Family Law issues in accordance with the best interests of the children involved and the law,” she said.

Queensland police said they would not tolerate the breaking of any laws and anyone who chooses to do so would be held accountable.

1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732)

Lifeline 13 11 14

5. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson flies back home to face parliament.

A defiant Prime Minister Boris Johnson is flying home from New York after the Supreme Court ruled he had unlawfully suspended parliament, with no end in sight to Britain’s deep political crisis over Brexit.

Johnson is determined to lead Britain out of the European Union on October 31, with or without an exit agreement, but most members of parliament are equally determined to prevent a so-called “no-deal Brexit” scenario.

The House of Commons, where Johnson has no majority, will reconvene at 11.30am local time on Wednesday after the Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that his decision to suspend it for five weeks was unlawful and therefore null and void.

It is unclear exactly what will happen next. Johnson has rejected calls from some political opponents to resign. The main opposition Labour Party is itself deeply split over Brexit, and appears to be vacillating about whether to launch a motion of no-confidence to try and bring Johnson down.

Johnson has repeatedly said his preferred Brexit outcome would be to agree an exit deal with the EU’s 27 other members before the October 31 deadline, and that he was hopeful he would achieve that.

However, EU negotiators say he has made no new proposals capable of breaking the deadlock over the issue of how to manage the border between Ireland, an EU member, and Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, after Brexit.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the leader of the House of Commons and an ardent advocate of Brexit, was reported by British newspapers to have said during a conference call with Johnson and other cabinet members on Tuesday that the Supreme Court had carried out a “constitutional coup”.

Johnson himself was combative after the ruling, telling reporters in New York on Tuesday that he strongly disagreed with the Supreme Court justices, and complaining that there were many people trying to thwart Brexit against the will of the people.

On the other side of the divide, one of Johnson’s own former cabinet members, Amber Rudd, said it would be irresponsible for the government to cast the ruling as an anti-Brexit move when Johnson’s defence all along was that his decision to suspend parliament in the first place had nothing to do with Brexit.

Former minister Dominic Grieve, an influential member of parliament and an anti-Johnson rebel within the ruling Conservative Party, accused the prime minister of behaving “like a bull in a china shop”.

“My judgment is that there’s only one way out and that is to have a second referendum, because otherwise we’re going to carry on going round in circles. But he’s entitled to put other ideas forward if he thinks he’s got them,” Grieve said.

“He says he wants to get a deal but there’s no evidence he’s even started negotiating a deal with the EU and it’s quite clear that the House of Commons and parliament will not accept leaving without an agreement because it’s so damaging for the future of our country.”

Before the suspension, parliament had passed a law requiring Johnson to ask the EU to push back the October 31 deadline if no exit deal was agreed by October 19.

Asked by reporters on Tuesday how he planned to overcome that obstacle, Johnson simply ignored the question and insisted Brexit would take place on October 31, come what may.