One of the most common complaints from conservative voters is that Republicans don’t “fight.” They believe, and correctly so, that their representatives aren’t engaging in enough meaningful battles, both culturally and politically. Many Trump voters supported him in 2016 because he represented that willingness to “fight.” And he certainly did that. He pushed back strongly on multiple battlefronts. Everybody was sick of traditional republican politicians that were too polite, rehearsed, and afraid of controversy, and who in turn didn’t win. Trump represented a wrecking ball to the establishment, to the “swamp”, to the activist left that had seized the commanding heights of power in so many of our cultural, educational, corporate, and news media entities. Sometimes the wrecking ball hit its target and it was glorious, sometimes it hit a baby.
But there’s another element to “fighting.” We often forget to define what it means to “fight.” We forget that fighting is supposed to mean winning. —They aren’t the same thing… And in a democratic republic, where elections are won by votes, fighting needs to translate into persuading people to vote for you or your policy proposals. So if persuasion is key, it should be the key to fighting. But instead, as it seems to me, we have many futile or even counter-productive perceptions of what it means to actually fight, and the incentives of those who seem to be screaming “FIGHT” the loudest seem disingenuous. We keep rewarding politicians, pundits, and influencers who engage in what amounts to essentially performance art without any real substance. These people launch fiery rhetoric about “Fighting” to an echo chamber of people who already agree with them. When you’re doing that, you’re not actually persuading anyone. We act like fighting is “owning the libs” with a snarky tweet, or pulling out the most enthusiastic southern gospel-speak at a raucous political rally, like Ted Cruz’s cringy CPAC speech, to an audience who’s already bought in and which hosts essentially zero independents or convertible democrats.
Sure, that has its place, and obviously you want to boost enthusiasm from your base just before an election. It’s important to get out and speak to your base and give them the narratives and information they need to make up their minds. But otherwise, how reliably do “revved-up” mobs make good choices or persuade anyone? How effectively did Jan. 6th or the Black Live Matter incorporated riots translate into a political “win?” It didn’t! It was totally stupidly wrong, counter-productive, and painful for everyone, especially those who may have initially held a shred of sympathy for some of the concerns of some of those people. Jan. 6th is going to continue to be used as a club to beat regular people into silence, disarm them, alienate them, and shut down any organizational efforts of anyone to the right of Hillary Clinton. And here’s the thing: Jan. 6th was never going to overturn an election anyways. But this perfectly encapsulates what can go wrong when we put too much emphasis on rallying the base via political one-upsman performances instead of focusing on the real issues, like local politics and electoral reforms at the state level.
Echo Chambers Vs. Game Changers
We have a tendency of focusing our efforts far away from where we can more effectively make a difference. Effective fighting means packaging our ideas and selling them to broad swathes of people who don’t agree with us and are likely predisposed to dislike us, in a way that they might be receptive to it and we might actually persuade someone instead of talking in circles to ourselves, and then cranking up the temperature out of some misguided attempt to garnish some attention and score cheap and meaningless political points. This may even derive from a weak-mindedness that is afraid of encountering an argument that could shatter your world view.
We make a mistake by calling these things “fighting” The real fight is when we actually talk to persuadable voters who aren’t already in our camp. We need to focus on an expanding audience, which means putting out messaging and optics that will appeal to people who don’t agree with us. Messages that are moderate and inviting enough to entice people into a further interest in our ideas, and we must present our movement in a way that maintains a certain level of tolerance for disagreement and boasts some core morality. Remember, it doesn’t matter how correct you are, it doesn’t matter the merits of your tax plan or your immigration policy if you come across as a total jerk. People want to vote for people who they feel comfortable about. The best fighters are the ones who are exceptional at explaining complex and fully-formed ideas to people in an easy-to-understand way and in a way that makes people comfortable enough with you as a person. As human beings, we all have stereotypes and prejudices, big or small, that shape the way in which we filter in new information. By speaking in a genuine and honest way and having a trustworthy demeanor we can help mitigatethose negative stereotypes about us. Those mental filters that block new information can be mitigated and make our policy pitch far more pallettable to a broader audience.
Empty Vs. Effective Rhetoric
This is why politics usually comes down to rhetoric. And rhetoric is just the art of making your argument as persuasive as you possibly can. If you can’t make your arguments palatable to people then what do they matter? Your ethos is important. And having an ethos, a credible character, is what will make people on the other side listen up. Screaming invective and cursing the other side as infantile and stupid will have them not only disqualifying you, but disqualifying all the people who follow you. This is what we saw happen with Trump. All dialogue was untended by the blinding hatred massive numbers of people had for the president and that carried over into how they thought about his supporters.
It’s the easiest thing in the world to throw out red meat rhetoric to people who already agree, and take shots at moderates on our own side as being RINO’s who don’t fight enough. As to imply that somehow that you yourself are the true fighter. Many conservatives do this. You’ll notice I never use the term RINO. Because it’s stupid, it’s weak. And it’s a losing strategy, are we to just embody the cancel culture we rail against until there’s none of us left and the Democrats run everything? We are supposed to be utilizing the left counterculture to grow our own base. As they cast everyone out up their little game woke Olympics, we should be holding the door open and inviting people in to join the party. Left-wing cancel culture should be something we use to our advantage not simply emulate. If we begin replicating the same pathologies we complain about on the left within our own ranks, then we are no different then the book left in all but one way, they are winning. Fighting doesn’t mean raising our voices to eachother in our little conservative safe-spaces.
It seems to me a lot of the people in conservative political or media actually have no genuine interest in helping or implementing legitimate solutions. Not all. But some clearly don’t have an interest in that. .. And here’s why. Their dedication to the cause is based on money. They sell ads on their page or show, and to maintain cashflow they need a loyal, super active following. It doesn’t matter if the audience expands necessarily. Just that it’s predictable, and they can utilize that predictability to profit off of “rage-bait.” Crisis peddling, and selling people a sense of victimhood. By fostering hate and distrust. They are just feeding the monster. And the monster is especially hungry when it’s angry, and it’s especially angry when it’s losing. So in a weird way, a lot of the political media benefits most when the movement to which they claim to belong is losing. It benefits from a revved-up mob that’s easy to manipulate and rigidly in a desperate and outraged condition. Almost by design incentives they have no motivation to persuade anyone, in fact they profit off of inflaming the unpersuadable.
The Media Work for Ratings, not You
The media are not in the business of winning elections, even though they might seem like it. They’re in the business of ratings. People are more likely to write a glaring review than a glowing one if they’re not prompted. That’s because people respond more easily to negativity than positivity. This is actually representative of a psychological phenomenon that actually makes perfect sense when you think about it. Why are human beings so more susceptible to negative emotion? Put simply because you can only be so happy but you can be very much dead and same for everyone you care about. It’s why we have ‘loss aversion’ and will hang on to things even when they’re harming us or when we have a much better opportunity at hand. The media pedals what sells. And they’ve seen through years of investigating politics that inflaming one side against another sells. It gives you a team. It delineates the world into good guys and bad guys and cleans up the insecurity that’s endemic to policy. And it sells.
This is the pernicious illusion we need to constantly be looking out for, especially from your own side. Becuase many influencers are truly in it for the right reasons, maybe they are just misguided a bit. But there are those who, whether they know it or not, truly want to be on the losing side. It’s actually better for their business. Once you see this you begin to understand why our media that in-part drives our culture feels so toxic. The hyper-partisan media and their revved up mob audiences seem to only get bigger as everything they touch gets worse. Outrage drives traffic and these entities can cash in.
Think about this and pay attention to when you see it going on around you. Remember that. Especially if the first inclination is to constantly call out the farthest fringest of a movement and trying to apply that to the entirety of their opposition instead of confronting the strongest intellectual arguments of their opposition and contend with them in good will. Or when they are constantly calling out their own side for not being “Pure” enough, or not “fighting” aggresively enough, as this indicates that they are more focused on driving outrage and trying to move up their own conservative hierarchy. As conservatives we have a problem where we are always trying to root out traitors. I call them RINO hunters. And what’s the purpose? We actually need people who bridge the gap between us and those who we need to win over, if we let ourselves, or worse yet, intentionally keep pushing that divide and idealogical conformity we will inevitably tear apart the social fabric of this country and all of the things that we “conservatives” talk about conserving will be lost. Until there are none of us left and the democrats run everything.
Moderates get a lot of hate for being wishy-washy. But being strong doesn’t necessarily mean toeing the party line. It takes more strength and fortitude to tell the people you could have eating out of your hand with your ‘fight’ mentality that they might be wrong. Even that, on some issues, the opponents may be right. But that’s the only thing that’s going to get people to work together on things. Why do you think the senate and house are gridlocked every time congress is split down the middle with no clear majority? That’s the result of a lack of independent thinking and an unhealthy devotion to the ‘fight for your base no matter what’ mentality. Concession is weak when forced on you from someone with a position of strength. It’s not weak when you make it yourself after careful consideration.
Pots Calling Kettles Black
The right-wing cancel culture, the intolerance and fratricide is a self-destructive movement that we should be questioning. The entire point in free-speech, the entire point in democracy is to allow us to disagree and hopefully elect representatives that are interested in representing the broadest possible swathe of their constituency, not just the slim subsection of their supporters that helped elect them, but everyone. And that message is actually effective, that’s why Joe Biden uses it so much, irregardless of the fact that he has yet to follow through with anything bi-partisan or at any point to contradict his party and supporters. That is the true test of a representative’s character: are they willing to make concessions unpopular with their base to cater to the broader public or the greater good, knowing they may be punished for it?
What does all this result in? Well it results in the manifestation of counter-productive events like Jan. 6th. I did a long radio show on how awful this was. The whole point was that it was pointless, it was an exercise in futility and frustration. It was politicians getting carried away with fiery rhetoric and performing for you. It was a performance with no substance. Some people questioned why I wasn’t hopping on board to fight. And it’s because I’ve been in fights, and that wasn’t a real fight. When I fight, I fight to win; that wasn’t fighting. It was a performance. The politicians involved in the effort to block the election knew better and they still did it. They still said that they were fighting. So, apparently the best way to fight, according to them, was to engage in unwinnable battles that persuade nobody and leave their supporters even more desperate and down-trodden than before. That’s what’s really frustrating in all this. It’s just an exercise in frustration. It’s almost as if the people who do this, the politicians, the influencers, they deliberately choose unwinnable battles. So they’ll never have to deliver on the promises they were empty from the get-go, perhaps.
Another example was when the left was going crazy tearing down statues and the conservative base was rightfully angry about it. And instead of being angry at the left, many smart people began to turn on republicans. They said that if republicans were real fighters they would do something about this. Even though no republican governors were allowing this to happen in their cities. So what else were they supposed to do? What did we want or expect from them? Is that really what we would want? We want our Republican representatives to dawn some riot gear and go battle antifa toe to toe beneath a george washington statue in a democrat-run city? Would that somehow fix things? Sure it’d be entertaining, but it wouldn’t be making our country a better place.
I’d just like to encourage us to think more carefully about what actions we want to see implimented and is that really a winning strategy… or if we’re just defining “fighting” as engaging in pointless, unwinnable battles that win over nobody, wastes our time, dissapoints us, and and makes our social divides worse. Becuase real fighting is hard, real fighting involves intellectual debates with a certain level of goodwill given to people who genuinely disagree with us, and sometimes for fair reasons.
We actually need people who think differently, who can identify different problems and solve them in different ways. Real fighting means making the movement broader, not just angrier. It requires stratigic thinking. I takes engaging the real difficult arguments. It requires well-concieved, airtight logic. It takes presenting our case with a moderate audience in mind across a variety of platforms. It means actually understanding conservative principles and actually understanding why they make better policy solutions. It means taking the time to understand where and how government actually works and what problems it can actually solve. This so that we’re not convincing people to storm the capital to try to solve a problem that could only actually be solved by engaging in local politics and reform laws at the state level. And we need to be honest about that.
There is a way to really fight. The conservatives are generally correct that for too long representatives really didn’t fight hard enough. But know we need to learn how to fight effectively. Fighting effectively is just as important as the will to fight itself. We need to be demanding that our or politicians bring people to our side and engage in substantive debate in congress and in the culture. The winning message we have as conservatives, if we actually try to sell it, is level-headed conservatives. And we do it with intellectual honestly and confidence and pride. We don’t need to hide our policies from moderates. This is a mistake. Just be honest and make room for accommodations. Lead with what we really think, and we’ll actually be rewarded for it if we package it in a moderate, confident and inviting way. Let’s not let our media engage in the circular firing squad and act in ways that drive people out. We can actually work proactively, if we understand how government happens and what’s reasonable for members of congress to do vs what’s reasonable for governors to do vs mayors, and what isn’t a legitimate role for government. We can actually learn how to fight these battles effectively.
Written by: Liberty Revolt
Former police officer Derek Chauvin was tried for the murder of George Floyd on April 20. George Floyd’s death has caused a number of Black Lives Matter protests and riots across the country. George Floyd was accused of buying a box of cigarettes with a counterfeit $20 bill. Squad cars arrived on scene and George Floyd was pinned by three police officers. Allegedly, within seven minutes of the first squad car showing up, he was unconscious and showing no signs of life. He and onlookers called out for help because he was unable to breathe.
Ruling and Sentencing
Chauvin was found guilty of second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. The judge, however, said that politicians’ influence over the public could be grounds for appeal. Jurors were asked to consider three charges: second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter. The second-degree murder charge required the jury to agree that Chauvin caused Floyd’s death, without intent, while committing or attempting to commit an assault. For the third-degree murder charge to stick, jurors had to agree that Chauvin unintentionally caused Floyd’s death with reckless disregard for human life. The charge does not indicate intent. Finally, the second-degree manslaughter charge needed jurors to conclude that Chauvin was guilty of creating an unreasonable risk by consciously taking a chance of causing Floyd’s death or injuring him.
The judge will focus on the most serious charge of second-degree murder, which gives a maximum of 40 years behind bars. Chauvin’s sentencing will be based on this charge because all charges stem from the same action. Minnesota sentencing guidelines allow defendants like Chauvin who have no criminal history to receive less time, though prosecutors want a harsher sentence. They plan to ask Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill to consider “aggravating factors,” including that Floyd was treated with “particular cruelty” and his death occurred in front of children, as part of the sentencing decision.
Political Influence
Biden spoke to Floyd’s family during the trial. Maxine Waters (CA-D) made comments the weekend before the trial at a rally in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. She said that she hoped the jury would find Chauvin “guilty, guilty, guilty” of the death of George Floyd. Judge Cahill got frustrated and said, “I wish elected officials would stop talking about this case”. Politicians trying to influence the Chauvin case represents a violation of the separation of powers and potential grounds for appeal if the jury acknowledges influence. Politicians should allow the jury to be impartial, especially if they do not want an appeal.
Public Reaction
The death of George Floyd spurred some of the largest civil rights protests in decades. Some of these protests turned violent. Cities including Minneapolis, Atlanta, and Lewisville saw clashes with police, buildings and cars set afire, and looting. By evening, many demonstrations had given way to another night of violence and destruction, with protesters ignoring curfews imposed in dozens of cities. Police used tear gas and stun grenades and fired rubber bullets in attempts to disperse the crowds. More than 17,000 National Guard troops were activated in states across the US due to civil unrest.
There has been a surge in protests around the time of the Chauvin trial. The protestors have been outraged at the killing of George Floyd. These have been nationwide. Washington DC, New York, Chicago, Minneapolis, and other cities have seen these recent protests. Protestors did not seem elated or return home after Chauvin was found guilty. It was simply a steppingstone. Protestors want big changes to the justice system and police force. Protestors were seen with signs that read “the whole damn system is guilty as hell”.
Similar Case
When George Floyd was killed, the case drew comparisons to the death of Eric Garner six years earlier in New York. The two men uttered the same dying words to the police officers forcefully restraining them: “I can’t breathe.” In Mr. Garner’s case, none of the officers who pinned him on a Staten Island sidewalk and placed him in a banned chokehold ever faced criminal charges. On Tuesday, Mr. Garner’s mother, Gwen Carr, said she was glad to hear that Derek Chauvin had been convicted of murdering Mr. Floyd. A grand jury found that the officer who had placed Mr. Garner in the chokehold in July 2014 had not committed a crime. Federal prosecutors declined to bring civil rights charges, and it took the New York Police Department five years to fire the officer, Daniel Pantaleo. Only one other officer, Sergeant Kizzy Adonis, was disciplined.
Written by: Miranda Smith
Dena Dean was a fun, bright, and bubbly sixteen year old who lived in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Dena was born February 26, 1982. She loved her friends and her life. She often spent time at the racetrack hanging out with her friends and family. Dena was part of the marching band and on the honor roll at school. Dena was, by all accounts, a “ray of sunshine.” She really knew how to make people smile and feel good. Dena worked at the local Arby’s until her death in 1998.
Dena’s Last Movements
On June 6, 1998 Dena Dean was supposed to pick up her best friend, Brandi McClellan, from work at Marvin’s Grocery store. Dena came to hang out with Brandi before Brandi’s shift was over at 10:30 PM. Around 10 PM Dena left Brandi in the store to meet up with her boyfriend in the parking lot.
Witnesses from a different store which shared Marvin’s parking lot saw a young woman, investigators believed to be Dena, standing next to a vehicle and having an argument with the person inside. The witness saw the vehicle speed away after but never saw the girl again. When 10:30 PM came around Brandi noticed Dena’s car in the parking lot but Dena was nowhere to be found. A schoolmate and her mother noticed Brandi was visibly upset and offered to take her home. Brandi refused, wanting to wait for Dena. That mother called the Dean family and told them their daughter was missing.
Dena Is Missing
The Dean family sprung into action starting an initial search for Dena, which included searching around the store and paging Dena many times. Brandi went to Dena’s boyfriend’s house looking for Dena. He told Brandi he had not seen Dena when he left the store. He decided to go bowling and shoot pool with a friend. If you would like to hear the details of his alibi and this case check out the podcast Momma Kirby’s Murder Mysteries, episode three “Dena Dean: A Tulsa Nightare.”
Dena’s body was found on June 12, 1998 not far from where she was last seen. She was on a hilltop that teens would frequent as a lover’s lane and to have small get-togethers. Over the years many suspects have come up and been cleared through evidence. There is currently a Cold Case Task Force working the Dena Dean case. They are seeking answers for the Dean family, and honestly all of Tulsa. This case caused the whole community of Tulsa to change how they lived. Every year they have memorials for Dena on her Birthday. No one will ever forget Dena. Dena’s family, friends, and community will not rest until they receive the answers they deserve.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
NASA plans to return humans to the moon, the space agency announced that SpaceX will build the vehicle that will take astronauts to the lunar surface. Nasa is targeting the Moon’s South Polar region. This area holds abundant deposits of water-ice, which could be turned into rocket fuel and breathable air to support a future lunar base. Landing here will be challenging because of the long shadows that obscure the moon’s surface.
SpaceX is given NASA Contract
The Artemis missions and new space vehicle will carry the next man and the first woman to the moon’s surface. The lander is based on SpaceX’s Starship craft. SpaceX was competing against bids from many people such as traditional aerospace giants and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. NASA awarded the $2.9 billion contract to SpaceX, owned by Elon Musk. “NASA has chosen SpaceX to return us to the moon,” a representative said in a press conference. The representative said the next phase will involve testing the technology. “With this award, Nasa and our partners will complete the first crewed demonstration mission to the surface of the Moon in the 21st century as the agency takes a step forward for women’s equality and long-term deep space exploration,” said Kathy Lueders, the organisation’s head of human exploration.
The Artemis Program
The Artemis program was first initiated under former President Trump. The Biden administration has supported the program. Trump’s team pushed for a crewed mission to the moon’s surface in 2024. Congress has not provided the amount of funding for the program that would be needed to complete the work by that deadline. NASA is reevaluating costs to determine the soonest date they could launch people on a lunar mission. The Artemis I mission is expected to launch in late 2021. This test flight of Orion and NASA’s SLS will not be crewed. Artemis II will be using the SLS and Orion crafts to fly a crew around the moon and back without landing. This is similar to the Apollo 8 mission of 1968. Artemis III will use SLS, Orion, and SpaceX’s Starship to help a crew journey the quarter million miles to the moon’s surface. Plans are for Orion to dock with a Human Landing System, such as SpaceX’s Starship. The ship will wait in orbit around the moon up to a hundred days before the mission arrives. The spaceship will bring the astronauts to the surface of the moon.
The crew will also launch from the moon on the ship to transfer back to the waiting Orion spacecraft, and fly home. The Starship, resembling the rocket ships from the golden age of science fiction, has been in development by Elon Musk for years. This craft has a lot more space than the previous Lunar Modules. For now it will transport people from lunar orbit to the surface but it is also a crucial component of the entrepreneur’s long-term plans for settling humans on Mars.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo violated ethics rules by misusing federal resources for personal benefit, according to the reported findings of an investigation by the State Department. His wife, Susan Pompeo, was also mentioned in the report for misusing federal resources. The Pompeo’s asked employees to do personal tasks for them. These tasks were very personal in nature, including making hair appointments, taking care of their dog, and picking up dinner on more than 100 occasions. A close ally to former President Donald Trump, Mike Pompeo served as CIA director from 2017 to 2018. He left that role to serve as Secretary of State from 2018 until the end of Trump’s term in office.
What does the report say?
Mike Pompeo and Susan Pompeo, asked agency staff, including a top State Department appointee, to “undertake work of a personal nature, such as picking up personal items, planning events unrelated to the Department’s mission, and conducting such personal business,” the State Department’s Inspector General said in the report. The report also says it found evidence that Susan Pompeo tasked a senior adviser to the former secretary with purchasing or delivering personal items, ranging from flowers for friends, photograph prints, magazines for the Pompeo family, and T-shirts for a friend’s daughter in Ukraine. Many of these requests would be asked outside of regular business hours and there would be no extra compensation for the employee performing them.
The report did not find the couple exceeded ethical boundaries with the special agents protecting them.The Inspector General’s office said the Pompeos’ had committed violations of ethical conduct, in regard to the requests of personal nature. Pompeo no longer serves as secretary of state so the office said he was not subject to disciplinary action. The report made recommendations designed “to mitigate the risk of future senior leaders committing similar violations” and called on the State Department to clarify policies regarding what would be considered inappropriate. The State Department already agreed to implement all recommendations.
What did the Pomeos’ have to say?
In a letter to the inspector general’s office, Pompeo’s attorneys accused investigators of political bias. “Rather than a fair, independent, and impartial review of the facts and relevant rules, the Draft Report is replete with factual errors and incoherent and unjustified conclusions that betray the drafters’ apparent biases against Mr. Pompeo and his family,” Pompeo’s attorneys said in the letter. “At best, the Draft Report amounts to little more than a compilation of picayune complaints cherry-picked by the drafters in an effort to twist innocent, routine and even praise-worthy behavior into something nefarious,” they added. “At its worst, it is rife with deliberate misstatements and half-truths concocted to support the drafters’ seemingly politically motivated goal to find purported ethical lapses by Mr. Pompeo.” His attorney also said a majority of requests made by Susan Pompeo were asked of a longtime friend who was also her husband’s senior advisor.
Mike Pompeo also released a statement. “At no time did I, or my wife Susan, misuse taxpayer money or violate rules or ethical norms,” Mr. Pompeo said. “Our actions were constantly reviewed by dozens of lawyers, and we made massive efforts, and did, comply with every requirement. This latest IG report is yet another attempt to slander me and worse, my wife by our own government.” Pompeo is considered a potential candidate for the GOP’s presidential nomination in 2024.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
Chris Magnus is President Biden’s pick for the leader of the U.S. customs and border protection. Magnus’ new responsibilities include patrolling the border while USCIS runs legal immigration services. Both positions require Senate confirmation and were run by acting leaders under former President Donald Trump. Chris Magnus has been known for not respecting former President Trump’s policies on undocumented immigrants and supporting sanctuary cities. Magnus is currently police chief in Tucson, Arizona, where he rejected federal border security grant money from Operation Stonegarden in 2020. The decision sparked criticism from the head of Tucson Police Officers Association, Tony Archibald. The nomination comes as a rising number of people attempting to enter the country along the Southwest border.
Chris Magnus immigration policies
Magnus leads the police force in Tucson, which is not a sanctuary city but calls itself an “immigrant welcoming community.” Tucson has changed police policy to make it harder for officers to enforce immigration laws. “As the police chief here, I’m deeply troubled by the Trump administration’s campaign against ‘sanctuary cities,’ which refuse to turn over undocumented immigrants to federal authorities. Washington is trying to retaliate against them by withholding funding for things like crime prevention, drug treatment and mental health programs,” Magnus wrote in an op-ed for the New York Times in 2017. “Almost all local law enforcement agencies, regardless of the ‘sanctuary’ or ‘immigrant-welcoming’ policies adopted by their jurisdictions, cooperate with federal authorities to go after drug cartels, human traffickers and transnational gangs.” Also in 2017, Magnus opposed orders from Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly. Kelly ordered prioritizing enforcement operations for undocumented immigrants convicted of crimes. The orders allowed local authorities to capture and deport most undocumented immigrants they encounter through a program that cities and counties could join. Magnus said that those policies would hinder investigations. The obvious disregard for orders is not the only thing that has the public concerned about this choice.
Magnus’ Issues with Transparency
Some immigrant advocates say Magnus’ nomination could bring about positive change, but Tucson attorney Isabel Garcia said his actions following an in-custody death concerns her. “What concerns me with him is his absolute lack of transparency, that he spent almost two months with information that his agents had a death in their custody, he didn’t tell the mayor, and he didn’t tell us,” she said. Magnus’ department came under fire over the in-custody death of Carlos Adrian Ingram-Lopez. Garcia said Magnus’ role in that situation needs to be looked at closer if he is to lead Customs and Border Protection. Customs and Border Protection has often been criticized for its own transparency issues with in-custody deaths. Others on the right worry that maybe this nomination from the Biden Administration is not to help immigration but to keep Arizona a blue state. Arizona is a very important swing state.
Magnus previously worked at the police departments in Fargo, North Dakota, and Richmond, California. He has been described as having “extensive experience in addressing immigration issues,” because of Tucson’s close proximity to the border. The number of undocumented migrants apprehended by the Border Patrol along the Southwest border has been rising for some time. The Biden administration has to turn back adults, due to a public health order Trump issued at the start of the pandemic, but is allowing unaccompanied children and some families to stay. The U.S. government picked up nearly 19,000 children traveling alone across the Mexican border in March, the largest monthly number ever recorded.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
Every year over 50,000 teens are labeled as troubled and sent to tough love and behavior modification camps. These places are designed to stop bad behavior through various therapies. This isn’t always the case, thousands of children and teens are abused every year by the staff members who are supposed to protect them. There is currently a movement to end places like this called #breakingcodesilence. You can sign a petition here. A quick search on Reddit reveals thousands of people who claim to be products of this industry. There are accounts of these troubled teens not being allowed to eat or shower. These children are sometimes being tossed around like rag-dolls by the staff members who are supposed to protect them. There was an account on reddit of a wilderness teen camp in the mountains of Tennessee from the person who watched a teen girl who almost died of a snake bite because the staff literally left the children alone on the side of a mountain with no way to get help at night time. The only way she survived was her other camp members sprung into action and carried her in the dark down the mountain on foot. To me these types of behaviors don’t sound conducive to healing or fixing a troubled teen. In fact, these seem a lot like new traumas these children will have to relive everyday. These types of stories are what surround today’s topic, Turn-About ranch in Escalante, Utah.
Hannah Archuleta
Sexual abuse allegations by a teen against Turn-About Ranch in were announced in a lawsuit filed by women’s rights attorney Gloria Allred and Utah attorney April Hollingsworth. Hannah Archuleta was 17-years-old when she was taken to the ranch in October 2019 after being on the “Dr. Phil” show. Dr. Phil has been known to send many teens to Turn-About ranch. Hannah claims she was sexually assaulted by a male staff member ten days after she arrived, but did not report the incident because she was afraid to. “At the ranch, I was alone and isolated from all of my family,” said Archuleta.
One month later, Archuleta alleges a second sexual assault by the same staff member, and reported the incident to a female staff member. Hannah says she was called a liar, but told to write a detailed letter in her report. This is one of the biggest issues with the troubled teen industry, children are labeled as problems and automatically deemed less credible. Generally their actions are direct reflections of how they are treated in daily life. Giving many troubled teens the mentality of “well they think this way of me anyways might as well act like it,” because no one will give them the tools in order to learn how to be any different. Hannah faced immediate retaliation and punishment for writing the letter, including being forced to face a wall or shovel manure for hours, left outside in freezing temperatures, and forced to sleep on a wooden plank, among other vindictive actions. “I expected to be treated with understanding, instead I experienced retaliation from the ranch after I spoke up in what appeared to me to be punishment for reporting my abuse,” Archuleta said. This is not the first allegation against Turn-About Ranch.
Danielle Bregoli aka Bhad Bhabie
Danielle went on the Dr. Phill show and for a while was known as the “cash me ousside” girl. Now, she is so much more with many gold and platinum records and she is even the youngest female rapper to ever be recognised by Billboard. She was sent to Turn-About ranch by the Dr. Phil show. While she was there she was not allowed to sleep, starved, “stripped of her personality,” and even witnessed a murder. The worst part is that she says Dr.Phil was well aware of the conditions he was subjecting her, and other kids, because her parents signed a release to send all her info back to Dr.Phil while she was in “treatment.” Bhad Bhabie posted a video of her allegations against Turn-About and Dr.Phil which he responded to in an interview. In the interview they only bring up Danielle on the Dr.Phil show, which she says she was coached by producers to act how she did. Dr.Phil tries to say he is unaware of how children are treated and he doesn’t keep up with them after the show. He calls the TRAUMA she experienced unfortunate and acts like it wasn’t a big deal. Bregoli said that upon entering the ranch in 2016, she was placed in teepee and forbidden to shower or sleep. “You have to sit there for three days,” she said. “They wouldn’t let me lay down for nothing. Like, I was falling asleep and they’re like, ‘Oh, get up, get up.’ So I’m just sitting here like, ‘This is gonna be really bad’ when I see these people have no sympathy.” Her allegations came a month after Hannah Archuleta announced her lawsuit against Turn-About Ranch. In 2012 a mother sued the ranch for allegedly torturing her daughter when she lived there in 2005.
This is only the snowflake on top of the iceberg for the troubled teen industry. This is not the only facility with abuse allegations against it. These are not the worst allegations out there. Often these troubled teens are being supervised by people who are not qualified. Many facilities only require you to be a highschool graduate and 21 to be a counselor. This leads to many “troubled teens” becoming counselors themselves. They either excel and help a lot of children or they continue the cycle of abuse because that’s what they know. The troubled teen industry needs reform and regulation, right now it’s a breeding ground for the very mental disorders it claims to fix. These facilities are creating trauma for children instead of giving them the love and attention they desperately need.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
Technology is all around us. It started off simple; the internet didn’t even exist until 1983. As someone who is in the odd place between Gen Z and Millenials, I have had the unique opportunity to watch technology grow up with me. When I was a child, we really didn’t have smartphones around and the ones that were touch screens did not connect to the internet. In the year 2000, phones began to connect to the internet through 3G but many of the “smartphones” were not even touch screens. I remember getting in trouble at church for being on Yahoo Instant Messenger on some phone that slid up to reveal the keyboard. The internet, and technology in general, has come a very long way in the last 20 years. The question is, has it come too far?
1984 and beyond
In the novel, 1984, London is controlled by the Ruling Party. The Ruling Party controls everything from speech and language to free thought and self expression. The Ruling Party has placed video monitoring systems in homes and watches every person’s every move. They always tell people, Big Tech… Excuse me, Big Brother is watching them. In modern times we have Alexa and Siri who are always listening and sometimes even pick things up they aren’t supposed to be privy to. The government says they respect our privacy but it is well known they have the technology to listen to really any electronic device. We have cameras on everything from doorbells to refrigerators now. This makes it extremely easy for anyone, especially the government, to look into our everyday lives, given they have the right technology to do so. In the novel, even rebellious thoughts are illegal, which feels eerily similar to the restrictions social media has been imposing on the people who use their platforms. Currently Donald Trump has been banned from many social media sites. Some sites even banned the FORMER PRESIDENT from ever having an account again. How can they banish someone who was one of our leaders? What happened to free speech?
Big Tech Takes Over
Banning Donald shows how easy it is for Big Tech companies to control the rulers of our nation. If people are controlled by fear on social media then they can’t show the public their true self and allow us to make our own assumptions. If everyone is filtering what they have to say based on impossible community guidelines, how will we deduce which people are genuinely good leaders or not? How do we truly know when a post is something that person truly feels or if it is only a partial thought because the rest of the thought would not meet community guidelines? Rulers should not be afraid that if they express true feelings and thoughts they will be “cancelled” and permanently banned from social media. Social media, our devices, and search engines already track our every move on and off the screen.
Why should they be allowed to tell us how to think and feel? Other than censoring our every move Big Tech companies watch them all, too. Phones with location turned off are still able to trace every move made via the connection to a data network. Anything you search on google, amazon, or safari shows up in other apps as ads. Sometimes you can just mention something for an obscure topic you never speak about and an ad will show up on social media. Is this the result of perfect subliminal messaging? Does our brain take in ads we don’t notice? Do those ads plants seeds for ideas, or are we actually being listened to and watched in our everyday lives? In recent weeks I have seen ads for things I only spoke about in passing conversations such as sugar free honey, DIY barn door kits, and cat trees shaped like trees. None of my previous search history should cause these ads to be targeted at me, which we all know is how ads work today.
The only logical answer is Big Tech and Social media are watching our every move. The best way to combat this is to never have your location on unless you have to, use search engines that don’t track your history, and don’t set up voice recognition on your phone. These actions won’t completely cut your traceability but they will make you just a little harder to find out there in the interwebs.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
Caylee Anthony was born in august of 2005 this year she should have been turning 16 this year. She should be out with her friends, getting her license, going to school dances. She would be doing sports or maybe she would be an artist. Caylee Anthony doesn’t get to do any of that because her life was cut short during the summer of 2008 when she was almost three years old. She never got a chance to live her life.
Caylee Anthony was loved by so many people who were involved in her life. Her grandparents would take her swimming often, she loved to play with her toys, she was your typical toddler. She lived with her mother and grandparents up until her death. The cause of death for Caylee Anthony is currently undetermined. Her skeletal remains were found December of 2008 and the famous Dr.G medical examiner was unable to determine a definite cause of death but she did rule the case a homicide. Who was responsible for ending the life of this beautiful little girl?
Casey Anthony’s Lies
The only person who ever stood trial for the death of Caylee Anthony was her mother Casey Anthony. Every single piece of evidence pointed to her being involved in Caylee’s death. All this evidence is laid out in the podcast Momma Kirby’s Murder Mysteries. You can also find real 911 audios and links to videos of the full trial and interviews with Casey Anthony in the facebook group Momma Kirby’s Murder Mysteries – Fan Talk.
Casey lied to investigators, her family and friends, and the world about what happened to Caylee and even about mundane day to day things. She would tell people Caylee was in multiple places when she wasn’t. There are even instances where she’s told someone Caylee was in one place then told someone else she was in another place at the same time. She claimed to have been an event planner at Orlando studios. This was a lie. She claimed she had a nanny named “zanny.” This person did not exist. She claimed someone had kidnapped Caylee and would not give her back. This was a lie. Casey Anthony would lie and tell bigger lies in order to cover them up.
Casey Anthony’s Lies on Trial
During her trial, Casey’s lawyer told everyone in the courtroom that Caylee Anthony was not a victim of homicide but a victim of accidental drowning in her family’s swimming pool. While he cross examined witnesses he would often speak over them and ask them the same question multiple times in a row. The judge would often have to tell Casey’s lawyer to allow the witness to speak and finish speaking before asking a new question. The claim he made about Caylee passing in the swimming pool has zero physical evidence to support it. This move in court is what, I believe, led to Casey Anthony’s not guilty verdict despite all of the physical evidence against her. The verdict caused an audible gasp in the courtroom and in living rooms across the nation as we all watched the trial unfold live. If her mother wasn’t responsible for murdering Caylee then who could have been? No one else has ever been investigated… at least no one who actually existed. Does this mean Caylee will never have the justice she deserves? Make sure to listen to the hour long Caylee Anthony Podcast.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
Facebook removed a video of Donald Trump doing an interview with his daughter-in-law Lara Trump. The interview was for Lara’s show “The Right View.” Facebook says the removal of the interview is due to Trump’s multiple indefinite social media bans. The removal shows just how far Facebook is willing to enforce its suspension, which followed the riot in the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.
They Want to Erase Donald Trump
Lara Trump was rightfully upset about her father-in-law being censored; censorship in the media seems like something that goes against the first amendment. “This is not the country we want to live in. This is something that happens in communist countries, guys. But, I think the message here is they want to erase Donald Trump.” Lara said in an interview with Fox. “They want you to forget he ever existed. They don’t want you to see him, they don’t want you to hear from him. Look away, move on, shut up and go on about your lives, forget Donald Trump existed. This is really scary stuff.” It is very scary stuff indeed. How can we just remove a Former President from the public eye? An email Lara Trump posted shows a message warning her team about uploading the Facebook video. The email reminded them that “content posted on Facebook and Instagram in the voice of President Trump is not currently allowed on our platform (including new posts with President Trump speaking) and will be removed if posted, resulting in additional limitations on accounts that posted it.”
Facebook’s Nick Clegg, vice president of global affairs, wrote at the time that the decision was made in “extraordinary circumstances in which a sitting president was actively fomenting a violent insurrection designed to thwart the peaceful transition of power; five people killed; legislators fleeing the seat of democracy. This has never happened before – and we hope it will never happen again, it was an unprecedented set of events which called for unprecedented action.” The decision to block Trump’s access was praised by Trump critics and the Left but was majorly concerning to Trump supporters and free speech advocates who warned it set a dangerous precedent. They are exactly right, today it is President Trump tomorrow it could be you, if you haven’t experienced extreme censorship on social media already. Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, has said he is uneasy with Facebook’s power to silence world leaders. Even Bernie Sanders, a major critic of Trump, said he was not comfortable with Big Tech blocking Trump’s access to social media after the Capitol riot. Which social media will Trump be allowed to have again?
Trump Banned by Big Tech
Lara Trump Posted the photo of the email reiterating Trump’s ban on her Instagram saying we are one step closer to Orson Wells novel 1984. It seems like we get closer and closer to having a real life “Big Brother” because of Big Tech. YouTube and other social media companies also indefinitely suspended Trump’s account, censoring him almost completely. Snapchat and Twitter permanently banned Trump. YouTube said it would lift Trump’s ban when the risk of violence was over. Facebook has left the decision in the hands of an advisory board after Trump appealed his ban for both them and Instagram.
Even if all of these options fail Donald Trump has a plan B. Trump spokesman Jason Miller said the former president would return to social media with his own social network if all else fails. “I do think that we’re going to see President Trump returning to social media, probably in about two or three months here, with his own platform,” Miller recently told Fox News. “This is something that I think will be the hottest ticket in social media. It’s going to completely redefine the game. And everybody is going to be waiting and watching to see what President Trump does, but it will be his own platform.” Parler has offered the former President a 40% ownership in exchange for making Parler his main social media account. It is unclear how involved Trump actually was in negotiations and whether or not the deal pushed through. It is very clear, however, Trump will thankfully not be silenced anytime soon.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
Governor Andrew Cuomo has been accused of some horrible things recently. The accusations range from asking a woman to learn Danny Boy for his own pleasure and groping an aide under her blouse. So far there are 10 accusers, the most recent coming out of the Rochester area. Members of the Democratic party have even called for him to resign including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York. The accusations go back years so it is surprising that he has not come under scrutiny until now.
Cuomo Asked to Resign
Gilibrand did not know about the most recent accusation when she said “I don’t know any details about the most recent accusation, as I’ve said previously allegations to date have been serious and concerning because of the nature of the allegations. now, with possibly nine accusers, I think it’s going to be very difficult for the governor to do his job given that he’s lost the support of most of his governing partners, which is why I suggested he should resign.” Cuomo’s attorney released a statement concerning the most recent allegations against him. “During times of crisis, the governor has frequently sought to comfort New Yorkers with hugs and kisses. As I have said before, the governor has greeted both men and women with hugs, a kiss on the cheek, forehead or hand for the past forty years.” This seems to be a pretty weird excuse especially in this day and age where classes about sexual assault and what constitutes as sexual assault is taught in many work places.
The Victim’s Stories
Sherry Vill of Greece, N.Y., said that Cuomo kissed her while visiting her home in 2017 after it was damaged in a flood. Her son even caught the moment on camera. Gloria Allred, Sherry Vill’s attorney, said Cuomo suddenly grabbed Vill’s face and kissed her in front of her home during the visit. According to Vill, who is married, the governor told her “you are beautiful.” “I felt embarrassed and weird…I felt he was coming on to me in my own home,” Vill also said Cuomo invited her to an event to which he did not invite any other members of her family. “Cuomo said, ‘That’s what Italians do kiss both cheeks,'” Vill told reporters in an online news conference.
Charlotte Bennett, a health policy adviser in the Democratic governor’s administration until November, told The New York Times Cuomo asked her inappropriate questions about her sex life, including whether she ever had sex with older men. Bennett was a new aide in the Executive Chamber when Cuomo told her to learn the song lyrics to “Danny Boy.” When she wouldn’t sing the song for him later in the day Cuomo started singing it himself to get Bennett to join in. While this incident took place there was a witness in the room, Melissa DeRosa. Her lawyer, Debra Katz, said “Instead of DeRosa saying to the governor, you need to stop this, he continued to press her to sing Danny Boy, which is really humiliating, and when she doesn’t do it, he starts singing Danny Boy with this booming voice and says ‘Sing with me, sing with me.”
Lindsey Boylan A former member of Cuomo’s administration says he once kissed her on the lips without consent. Boylan said that during her three years in the Democrat’s administration, Cuomo “would go out of his way to touch me on my lower back, arms and legs.” He also compared her to one of his ex-girlfriends and remarked they should play strip poker together.
Cuomo’s current aide Alyssa McGrath alleges Cuomo harassed her by peering down her blouse and commenting on her necklace, asking about the status of her divorce, among other incidents. Alyssa McGrath told the New York Times that the unidentified accuser confided to her how Cuomo touched her breast under her blouse. “She froze when he started doing that stuff to her,” McGrath stated. “He told her specifically not to tell me,” McGrath said. She also said Cuomo was well aware of her and the unidentified aide’s friendship and regular communication.
These are not all of the current allegations but just these alone are troubling to think about. This is one of the leaders of our country yet some of our precious citizens feel scared and threatened by him. This wouldn’t be the first time people have feared Cuomo, he has the reputation of being a bully.
Other Reasons Cuomo should Resign
New York City public advocate, Jumaane Williams, described Cuomo’s aggressive behavior as “kind of an open secret.” Cynthia Nixon, who ran against Cuomo in the Democratic primary, said, “We’ve all seen it: Andrew the bully. He bullies other elected officials. He bullies anyone who criticizes him.” Just last month, New York Assemblyman Ron Kim said Cuomo called him and threatened to “destroy” him if he didn’t support Cuomo during the nursing home scandal. The scandal in itself is another major reason for concern. If you haven’t heard about it, don’t worry I’ll give you a brief rundown. The outrage was based on a number of decisions made by Cuomo. First, he required nursing homes to accept Covid-19-positive patients when New York’s hospitals were overflowing. He then decided to hide data about deaths of nursing home residents. Court orders, leaks, and investigations revealed that Cuomo dramatically and intentionally understated the pandemic’s toll on nursing home residents in New York.
This is a corrupt leader. He lies to us, makes some of our own feel unsafe in their workplace, and is known to be a bully by his colleagues. Cuomo should resign from his political position because as a leader of our country he is held to a standard which he is not meeting. We can not allow corrupt leaders to stay in office. We need honest, compassionate, and well mannered individuals to run our cities, states, and most of all our country.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
JonBenet Patricia Ramsey was in pageants and by all accounts loved them. She loved to sing, dance, and entertain any chance she got. She was a child who loved life and was very happy. She was born August 6th, 1990 in Atlanta, Georgia to parents John Benet and Patricia Patsy Ramsey. She had an older brother named Burke. Patricia “Patsy” Ramsey was former Miss West Virginia and battled cancer off and on her whole life until 2006 when she passed away. John Ramsey was a successful businessman. The family’s world was shattered when JonBenet was murdered just six years after her birth. You can listen to 1360 KHNC’s new upcoming podcast Momma Kirby’s Murder Mysteries on JonBenet Ramsey’s murder case.
JonBenet Murdered
A 911 call came in around 6 am the morning after Christmas. Patsy Ramsey begged the dispatcher to send the police because her daughter had been kidnapped. She gave the dispatcher a few details about the ransom note she held in her hands. Officers showed up to the scene quickly and began looking for JonBenet. Her body was found by her father and his friend Fleet White after the police had already searched the home twice. JonBenet was bludgeoned, strangled, and sexually assaulted resulting in her death on Christmas night 1996.
The police at the time didn’t have proper resources and stayed focused on the Ramsey family as suspects. The media took this case and ran wild with it resulting in the world crucifying the Ramseys in the court of public opinion before they were ever looked at by a Grand Jury. The Grand Jury voted to indict the Ramseys for helping cover up their child’s brutal murder. The D.A. asked famous homicide detective Lou Schmitt to investigate the murder. He believed that the Ramsey’s were not responsible. This led to the D.A. saying they did not have enough evidence to indict the Ramseys. If you would like more information about evidence related to both theories you should check out my podcast Momma Kirby’s Murder Mysteries. I present the evidence in unsolved cases and allow you to make your own assumptions. I am using my voice to make sure victims of unsolved homicides are never forgotten.
The Hunt for JonBenet’s Killer Continues
Lou Schmitt’s family continues to investigate JonBenet’s case. The case is currently still open with the Boulder Police Department. A D.A. exonerated the family in 2008 two years after Patsy Ramsey lost her battle with cancer. On her deathbed she asked Lou Schmitt to catch JonBenet’s killer. She also made arrangements for Burke Ramsey in the event someone ever accused him of killing his sister. During a hearing for a lawsuit against an investigator, who theorized Burke had killed his sister on a documentary about the case, Burke Ramsey’s lawyer told the judge he had promised Patsy on her deathbed he would defend Burke against accusations all the way to a court of law. The only known arrest for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey was a man who was later found to be someone who just wanted some sort of sick fame. Over the years many theories have come out surrounding JonBenet’s death. What do you think happened?
Cancel culture is now, unfortunately, a phenomenon ingrained into the background of life, politics, branding, social media, small social circles, and the workplace. In this series we look at people, businesses, and movements that have been cancelled. The first installment gave us some insight on the origins of cancel culture and the Witch Hunt it has become. Our last installments told us about how MyPillow CEO, Demi Lovato, and even Dr.Seuss have been affected by the movement. We also looked at a letter from Harper’s Magazine which criticizes cancel culture. Cancel culture, which former President Donald Trump called “the very definition of totalitarianism,” describes the phenomenon of frequent public pile-ons criticizing a person, business, movement, or idea. In this installment we will look at Meyer Leonard, Mr. Potato head, and Jimmy Fallon.
NBA Cancels Meyers Leonard
The Heat has removed Meyers Leonard indefinitely after he made offensive comments on a twitch live stream. Leonard was then traded to the Oklahoma City Thunder and was dropped from the team as of yesterday. He was using foul language and used remarks that are offensive to the jewish community. Leonard, who was already out for the rest of the season with a shoulder injury, apologized with a statement that read in part: “I am deeply sorry for using an anti-Semitic slur during a livestream yesterday. While I didn’t know what the word meant at the time, my ignorance about its history and how offensive it is to the Jewish community is absolutely not an excuse and I was just wrong.” Some members of the Jewish community dont believe Leonard should be cancelled. New England Patriots wide receiver Julian Edelman, who is Jewish, was among those who reached out Wednesday in hopes of educating Leonard — even inviting him to a Shabbat dinner when Edelman is in Miami. “Today we need to be about building bridges and not tearing those bridges down and throwing that person on the other side and saying, ‘I’m done with you,’” said Rabbi Andrew Jacobs of Ramat Shalom Synagogue in Plantation. “It’s an opportunity not to eliminate this player, not to sweep the situation under the rug and pretend it never happened, but to give him an opportunity to learn. And in turn, all of those fans of his can learn from him, and we can teach a whole new generation of people this important lesson.” The Jewish community seems intent on mending the bridge with Leonard and educating ignorance rather than completely writing him off. What happens when someone does something openly racist and isn’t cancelled for it until years later? This is the situation with our next case Jimmy Fallon.
Jimmy Fallon Cancelled For Black Face
Jimmy Fallon’s return to The Tonight Show began on a serious note addressing controversy after a 4video resurfaced of Fallon in blackface. He wore blackface while doing an impression of Chris Rock in 2000 on Saturday Night Live. He issued an apology on Twitter saying the decision was terrible and unquestionably offensive. Fallon said he was advised “to just be quiet and to not say anything” about the incident for fear of further criticism. Fallon did not follow that advice when he spoke out upon his return to The Tonight Show. “I’m not going to have a normal show tonight. I’m going to have a different kind of show,” Fallon said on air. “I’m going to start this personally and then expand out because that’s where we all need to start: with ourselves and looking at ourselves in the mirror.” Fallon then welcomed onto the program NAACP President Derrick Johnson, who called the opening monologue “powerful.” Fallon later spoke with CNN anchor Don Lemon, who also praised the comedian for his opening. People seem to be open to the star’s apology.
Mr. Potato Head Cancelled?
This seems to be a case of mistaken cancel culture? You be the judge. The media was reporting not too long ago that Mr.& Mrs. Potato Head had been cancelled. Hasbro created the confusion when it announced that it would drop the “Mr.” from the brand’s name in order to be more inclusive and so all could feel “welcome in the Potato Head world.” It also said it would sell a new play set this fall without the Mr. and Mrs. designations that will let kids create their own type of potato families, including two moms or two dads.
Hasbro appears to want to expand the brand, while not killing off its most iconic characters, which appeared in the Toy Story franchise. “While it was announced today that the POTATO HEAD brand name & logo are dropping the ‘MR.’ I yam proud to confirm that MR. & MRS. POTATO HEAD aren’t going anywhere and will remain MR. & MRS. POTATO HEAD,” the company tweeted in response to the confusion. What do you think of Hasbro dropping the Mr. and how they handled the confusion?
Cancelling originally started as a movement in 2017 to take platforms away from people who didn’t deserve them. Cancel Culture, when used the way it has been recently, goes against one of the first layers of our country’s foundation, the first amendment. We shouldn’t cancel ignorance, we should educate it. We should also forgive people who make the correct steps to fix and own their mistakes as long as they learn from them. “We live in the age of cancel culture, but this isn’t something that started this week. It is something that they have been doing to us and others for years,” Eric Trump told The Associated Press. A movement that was designed to make society a more positive place and hold people of higher status accountable has left us walking on eggshells on social media, in the workplace, and within our own groups of “friends.”
Written by: Erinn Malloy
Biden is showing a markedly different approach in foreign policy by comparison to former president Donald Trump. Biden has been criticized by the media for being weak on both China and Russia. However, I see him as weak on China and tough on Russia, though Putin sees weakness in him. Biden vowed to be tougher on both countries, with Democrats continually bringing up Russia collusion stories. The best thing to come out of the collusion accusations were not facts, but Trump x Putin fan-fictions and satire. Look on YouTube or the Internet for such entertainment. I do not believe that there ever was such collusion, but the idea of them together romantically always really made me laugh. So the real question is how tough Trump was on China and Russia and how Biden is doing in comparison.
Trump on China
Trump began his term by launching the trade war with China he promised on the campaign trail. By mid-2020, Trump was no longer in the forefront of Chinese policy, because he became increasingly consumed by domestic troubles (mostly due to COVID). This gave his aids clearance to pursue tough-on-China policies. It is important to note that Trump alone did not shape the China relationship, but his trade war destroyed global norms and paved the way for the pursuit of policies that were unthinkable beforehand. Trump and Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen talking on the phone in 2016 was an early mark in the shift. It was the first direct contact between top US and Taiwanese officials since at least 1979. In 2017, Trump started the trade war by levying tariffs on billions of dollars in Chinese goods. In 2018, Trump started cooperating with agencies and departments. The National Security Strategy’s Indo-Pacific was approved, and a Trump-era China strategy began to emerge. The US Pacific Command changed its name to Indo-Pacific Command in a move seen as countering China’s rise. The Department of Justice launched its China Initiative, an effort to disrupt China’s covert activities in the US. In 2019, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo became a leading figure in the US push against China, publicly accusing the Chinese Communist Party of seeking “international domination”. In 2020, after years of tariffs and negotiations the Phase One trade deal is signed. With the trade deal signed, Trump allowed staff across agencies to push through long-desired actions on China-related issues. Trump was also bold enough to blame China for the virus, something the WHO tried to get out of.
Trump on Russia
Trump joked with Putin about not colluding, though one of the first things Trump did was to sanction Russian people involved in an election interference attempt. Depending on whether Trump was guilty or not of collusion, it was either to look good or to truly try to stop election interference. Trump took policies against Russian support for the Maduro regime in Venezuela and the Assad regime in Syria. Trump also took policies to support Ukraine, supply the country with weapons, and sanction Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. Sanctions were given for poisonings and the harm of political opponents. What was puzzling was why despite all this, Putin appeared to like Trump. After a lot of research, it looks like Putin liked Trump’s willingness to negotiate and focus on ways the two countries could cooperate. Trump was willing to negotiate with a variety of actors in the international arena that other politicians were unwilling to negotiate with. The US and Russia cooperate on nonproliferation (try to prevent the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction), counterterrorism, scientific research, Arctic management, public health, and the mission to build a stable and prosperous Afghanistan. The US Department of State claims that the “long-term goal of the United States is to see Russia become a constructive stakeholder in the global community”. If Trump could not bring a lot more cooperation, at least he got into less confrontation than Biden did with Putin.
Biden Policies so Far
The Biden administration has gotten into conflict with both China and Russia. The Chinese summit in Alaska was rough, and both sides took jabs at each other to appeal to reporters. China and Russia both appealed to Black Lives Matter, pointing to it as a sign of domestic weakness. Putin himself challenged Biden to a public debate to humiliate him. He added sarcastic remarks about his health to challenge his virility. Both countries see Biden as weak, and an administration they can insult without facing punishment. Biden, it appears, does not have the same future of positive cooperation with either country.
Where Putin praised Trump, he insults Biden. A Chinese official claimed that “the US could not speak from a position of strength”. China must be weakened to be negotiated with, and Trump did that relatively effectively with his trade war to lead up to his Phase One deal. Biden does not exude the same level of intimidation Trump did. Biden will need to change his approach or face problems from both countries. There is some hope with Biden sanctions over Uyghur human rights abuses, though he has yet to take the hard stances Trump did.
Written by: Miranda Smith
If you live on the east coast and saw a strange light in the sky around 6 AM on March 14, 2021 you witnessed the launch of the new SpaceX satellites. The satellites launched in Florida and gave quite a show, and in some cases a scare, in many states. What were they launching and why?
SpaceX Launch
At 6:01 a.m. Sunday morning, a rocket lifted off from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. People all along the East Coast, from Florida up to Maine, saw the rocket streak across the sky. The veteran rocket is the first in SpaceX’s fleet to launch and land a record nine times. The two-stage launcher blasted off from Pad 39A. Weather forecasters at the 45th Weather Squadron predicted ideal conditions for launch. There wasn’t a cloud in the sky, as the rocket climbed to orbit. The predawn sky made some crazy effects in the atmosphere during this launch. The sun illuminated the rocket’s plume creating a dazzling spectacle in the sky many mistook for a comet or UFO. This type of phenomenon only occurs at dawn and dusk. This particular dawn SpaceX was launching 60 Starlink satellites into orbit, helping SpaceX inch ever-closer to filling its initial constellation of 1,440 satellites. The satellites were carried by SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket. What type of Rocket is the Falcon9?
SpaceX Falcon 9 Rocket
According to the SpaceX website the Falcon 9 is a reusable, two-stage rocket designed and manufactured by SpaceX for the reliable and safe transport of people and payloads into Earth orbit and beyond. Falcon 9 is the world’s first orbital class reusable rocket. Reusability allows SpaceX to refly the most expensive parts of the rocket, which in turn drives down the cost of space access. SpaceX regularly uses the Falcon 9 to bring its Dragon spacecraft to the International Space Station. Falcon 9’s first stage incorporates nine Merlin engines and aluminum-lithium alloy tanks containing liquid oxygen and rocket-grade kerosene.
The nine Merlin engines on the first stage are gradually throttled near the end of first-stage flight to limit launch vehicle acceleration as the rocket’s mass decreases with the burning of fuel. These engines are also used to reorient the first stage prior to reentry and to decelerate the vehicle for landing. The second stage, powered by a single Merlin Vacuum Engine, delivers Falcon 9’s payload to the desired orbit. The second stage engine ignites a few seconds after stage separation, and can be restarted multiple times to place multiple payloads into different orbits. SpaceX has two types of payloads, the Fairing carries satellites and the Dragon carries people and cargo. SpaceX also has a spacecraft that carries people called the Crew Dragon.
The first successful launch of the Dragon occurred in October of 2012 for cargo and in the summer of 2020, SpaceX sent two NASA astronauts to the International Space Station with the Crew Dragon spacecraft. This made SpaceX the first private spaceflight company to send a crewed spacecraft to space. Doug Hurley and Bob Behnken left Earth for the space station on May 30, 2020 and returned home on Aug. 2, 2020. There have been recent headlines about SpaceX possibly sending civilians to space for “Space Tourism.” Would you want to go to space?
Written by: Erinn Malloy
On the Southwestern border with Mexico, thousands of immigrants are crossing. Over 4,000 of these immigrants are children, many of whom are crossing alone. People are calling this situation a crisis, but the White House itself refuses to label it as such. Many of these immigrants come from Central America, though there have been immigrants from as far away as Romania. Federal authorities are struggling to keep up with the crisis.
Humane?
Ambassador Jacobson calls the reason for the recent surge of migrants “hope”. She claims that they are hoping for better treatment under the Biden administration. They are also hoping for a better life. Democrats have long attacked Donald Trump’s policies on immigration, but immigrants are still being packed into detention centers. What makes this worse is that they are crowded into these detention centers during a pandemic. Human smugglers and the noise in Washington incentivize these immigrants to try to cross the border in mass.
More than 4,000 children have been stuck in Border Patrol-run facilities, which are akin to jail-like conditions, for extended periods in the absence of enough shelter space to properly care for them. These people are desperate, fleeing poverty, repression, crime and natural disasters.
Biden Immigration Policies Causing Border Crisis
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said, “It’s more than a crisis. This is human heartbreak. This crisis is created by the presidential policies of the new administration. There’s no other way to claim it than a Biden border crisis.”
Biden and many Democrats denounced Trump’s wall and the former president’s immigration policies. Biden campaigned on easing immigration controls, including a moratorium on deportations, an end to former President Donald Trump’s “wait in Mexico” policy for asylum-seekers and halting construction of the border wall. Biden has also created an immigration bill that would offer legal status and a pathway to citizenship for 11 million of the US undocumented population. It also gives a fast-track process for young “Dreamer” immigrants brought to the country illegally as children. His softer status toward immigration has given migrants good reason to believe it would be easier to get to the US and that they would be allowed to stay.
Trump, by comparison, tried to end DACA, stepped up deportation, and imposed stricter limits on refugees, asylum-seekers, and legal immigrants. Illegal immigrants were more fearful of Trump, not believing that they could cross the border and stay in the US easily.
ICE Being Abolished
Many people have criticized Biden for his strict limits on deportations and arrests, claiming that he has essentially abolished ICE without really abolishing it. In a sense, federal agents are hindered in doing their jobs. “The men and women of ICE, they took an oath to enforce immigration laws,” said Thomas Homan, who served as acting ICE director under former President Trump. “It’s unfortunate they can’t do the job. … And it’s unfortunate that many criminals are going to be walking the streets of America because this administration simply thinks they’re not important enough to take off the streets.” ICE is charged with enforcing the nation’s immigration laws — including arresting and deporting people living in the country illegally.
The new guidance directs ICE agents and officers to focus on non-citizens who recently crossed the border illegally, or who are deemed to be threats to national security or public safety. The guidance defines a public safety threat as someone who has been convicted of an aggravated felony, such as murder and rape, or of actively participating in a criminal street gang. Field officers have been instructed to seek pre-approval from supervisors before making arrests of non-citizens convicted of other crimes, such as minor drug offenses, immigration offenses, and driving under the influence. In practice, that means ICE arrests would be limited largely to immigrants who have been convicted of felony offenses and are already detained in federal or state prisons. These policies are, obviously, extremely restrictive of ICE’s actions.
US Ill-Equipped To Handle Surge
Biden has played to the general Democratic base in giving very weak immigration policies, but these have come with a price. The weakening of ICE has made the US ill-equipped to handle the surge. It has also given rise to more immigrants being willing to take greater risks and many unaccompanied minors winding up in detention centers. More than 100,000 migrants attempted to enter the U.S. in February, more than three times the amount for February 2020 and the highest level for the month in five years. The White House continues not to acknowledge the extent of the crisis. Biden press secretary Jen Psaki has questioned press numbers and has refused to give specifics.
Written by: Miranda Smith
Cancel culture is now, unfortunately, a phenomenon ingrained into the background of life, politics, branding, social media, small social circles, and the workplace. In this series we look at people, businesses, and movements that have been cancelled. Our last installment told us about the origins of Cancel Culture. We also saw how PePe Le Pew and the band Mumford and Sons have been affected by the movement. Cancel culture, which former President Donald Trump called “the very definition of totalitarianism,” describes the phenomenon of frequent public pile-ons criticizing a person, business, movement, or idea. Here we will look at MyPillow and even Dr.Seuss.
MyPillow CEO Cancelled
MyPillow CEO, Mike Lindell was cancelled after openly supporting the theory that former President Trump was a victim of election fraud resulting in him losing the election. Lindell’s Twitter account was “permanently suspended due to repeated violations of our Civil Integrity Policy,” a Twitter spokesperson told NPR. It was not immediately clear which posts from Lindell led to his removal from the social media platform. In an “interview” with NewsMax, Lindell was brought on to talk about Twitter banning his account which led to him being spoken over by interviewers. He was not allowed to speak more than a minute before he was being interrupted. Finally one of the interviewers, rather than listening to what Mike Lindell had to say, got up and walked off set in a moment many people are calling a “live cancellation.” Cancelling has had an effect on Lindell’s brand, MyPillow; retailers like Bed Bath & Beyond and Kohl’s have stopped selling MyPillow altogether. “They’ve attacked my company,” Lindell said. “They’ve attacked companies that I’ve worked with. … They’re trying to cancel me out. I just got off the phone with Bed Bath & Beyond … They’re dropping MyPillow.” Lindell was targeted by the Cancellation mob because he openly stood with Trump resulting in a loss of sales for MyPillow. Cancelling does not seem to have the same effect on everyone, in the next case being cancelled caused a surge of sales.
Dr. Seuss cancelled
In 1936 Theodor Geisel was on a ship from Europe to New York when he started writing rhymes on the ship’s stationery during a storm. The rhymes morphed into “And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street,” a book about a boy who witnesses outrageous and crazy things. The book started Geisel’s career as Dr. Seuss; he went on to publish more than 60 books that have sold some 700 million copies globally, making him one of the world’s most popular children’s authors. Over the past few years, people have called for Dr. Seuss’s cancellation more and more for the racial undertones that were drawn in his books. Dr. Seuss books are a staple in children’s literature but Learning for Justice, a left-wing educators group, has been trying to cancel the children’s author. The group under the Southern Poverty Law Center promotes racial and social justice being taught to students as young as five-years-old. All of the books being recalled by Seuss’s team are “And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street,” “If I Ran the Zoo,” “McElligot’s Pool,” “On Beyond Zebra!,” “Scrambled Eggs Super!,” and “The Cat’s Quizzer.” The announcement that the six books would no longer be printed seemed to drive a surge of support for Seuss and his classics. Dozens of his books shot to the top of Amazon’s print best-seller list right after the announcement to stop publishing. Why do you think being cancelled has had a different effect on Dr. Seuss than others such as MyPillow CEO, Mike Lindell?
Cancelling originally started as a movement in 2017 to take platforms away from people who didn’t deserve them. Cancel Culture goes against one of the first layers of our country’s foundation, the first amendment. Why should we have to be worried about being “cancelled” by society over things that should be categorized as free speech such as who you support in politics? “We live in the age of cancel culture, but this isn’t something that started this week. It is something that they have been doing to us and others for years,” Eric Trump told The Associated Press. A movement that was designed to make society a more positive place and hold people of higher status accountable has left us walking on eggshells on social media, in the workplace, and within our own groups of “friends.” Our next installment will look at some of the craziest reasons people have been cancelled as well as a letter a lot of high profile people have openly signed which a lot of people on the left are calling problematic.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
Kia is telling owners of nearly 380,000 vehicles in the U.S. to park them outdoors due to the risk of an engine compartment fire. The recall applies to some models year 2016 through 2021 that do not have Smart Cruise Control. Smart Cruise Control is the feature that enables the vehicle to use radar and automatically maintain a safe distance from other cars on the highway. Until these recalled vehicles have been repaired, the safest place to park them is outside and away from homes and other structures.
Why are Kia’s being recalled?
An investigation of Kia and Hyundai engine fires in 2019 opened after the nonprofit Center for Auto Safety filed a petition seeking the investigation. When the inquiry began, the agency said it had owner complaints of more than 3,100 fires, 103 injuries and one death. According to the National HighwayTraffic Safety Administration the electrical circuit in the hydraulic electronic control unit in these vehicles may short circuit, which could cause a fire in the engine compartment. Hyundai, which is a major shareholder in Kia, recently recalled 82,000 electric SUVs, which ended up costing roughly $11,000 per vehicle to fix. That recall was also due to fire risk due to a problem with the vehicle’s battery packs. These are not the only instances of Kia and Hyundai vehicles spontaneously catching fire as instances have surfaced all over the country in multiple models. The recent recall was issued for Sportage compact sport-utility vehicles from 2017 to 2021 and Sportage sedans from the same time period. 2016 to 2019 Candenzas are also included in the recall. The report says, “dealers will be instructed to install a new fuse kit which contains a 25A fuse instead of 40A. Kia will reimburse owners for repair expenses already incurred pursuant to Kia’s General Reimbursement Plan filed May 11, 2020.”
Has your Kia been recalled?
If you have any of the likely affected models some things to watch out for are illumination of various warning lights on the instrument panel including tire pressure warning light, ABS warning light, and MIL warning light. Other signs include burning or melting odors and/or smoke coming from the engine compartment. Vehicle owners can visit NHTSA.gov/recalls and enter their 17-digit vehicle identification number to see if their vehicle is under recall. If it is, vehicle owners should call their nearest dealership immediately to schedule a free interim repair. Owners can also download NHTSA’s new SaferCar app for Apple or Android. You can enter information about your vehicle, carseat, or various other parts in the app and it will send notifications if a recall is issued. Owners will be notified starting April 30. Dealerships will replace fuses in the electrical junction box to fix the problem. Kia is denying U.S. allegations and according to Fox they want to avoid a “protracted legal fight,” but engine failure and fire problems with Hyundais and Kias have affected more than 6 million vehicles since 2015.
In November, NHTSA announced that Kia and Hyundai must pay $137 million in fines and safety improvements since they moved slowly to recall more than 1 million vehicles which had engines that could fail. The fines come from the behavior of the company involving recalls of multiple models dating to the 2011 model year. Kia was to pay $27 million and invest $16 million in safety performance measures. Another $27 million payment will be deferred as long as Kia meets safety conditions. If you drive a Kia, or any vehicle for that matter, it is always better to be safe than sorry and check for any recalls associated with your vehicle.
President Joe Biden is being sued by a coalition of 12 states, led by Missouri attorney general Eric Schmitt, over the Green New Deal. “This order would result in new regulations that would significantly burden Kansas agriculture, energy production and manufacturing,” Schmidt said, “No president has authority to impose this massive job-killing cost on our economy by executive order.” The Green New Deal inspired the decision to calculate the costs of greenhouse gasses. In the 46 page complaint the states called calculating the costs of greenhouse gasses “inherently speculative, policy-laden, and an indeterminate task.” The states want a judge to declare section five of Biden’s executive order unconstitutional and block the working group Biden created from implementing rules.
Why are 12 States suing Biden?
On his first day in the White House, Biden signed Executive Order 13990. In addition to stopping new oil and gas leases on public lands and revoking permits for the Keystone XL pipeline, which cost many people their jobs, Biden told federal agencies to calculate the “social cost” of greenhouse gas pollution by estimating “monetized damages” to inform future federal regulations. This includes changes in net agricultural productivity, human health, property damage from flood risk and the value of ecosystem services. “It is essential that agencies capture the full costs of greenhouse gas emissions as accurately as possible, including taking global damages into account,” Biden says in his order. “An accurate social cost is essential for agencies to accurately determine the social benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions when conducting cost-benefit analyses of regulatory and other actions.” The breakdown of the social costs, according to a working group created by Biden’s administration, shows $269 billion for carbon dioxide, $990 billion for methane, and $8.24 trillion for nitrous oxide totaling approximately $9.5 trillion. The group published interim social costs on Feb 26, but final rules will not go into effect until June 1, 2022. USA Today says Biden campaigned on being the “most aggressive” president on climate change, which he called “an existential threat.” His goal is to decarbonize the U.S. power sector by 2035 on the way to reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Claiming that Biden’s administration cannot set these values, the lawsuit from the 12 states claims that the action violates the separation of powers, “the most fundamental bulwark of liberty.”
The 12 States Suing
State attorney generals from Missouri, Arkansas, Arizona, Indiana, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee and Utah have banded together challenging Biden’s authority to implement the social cost criteria into regulatory actions. The lawsuit says, “Setting the ‘social cost’ of greenhouse gases is an inherently speculative, policy-laden, and indeterminate task, which involves attempting to predict such unknowable contingencies as future human migrations, international conflicts, and global catastrophes for hundreds of years into the future.” The complaint goes on to say “If the Executive Order stands, it will inflict hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars of damage to the U.S. economy for decades to come, It will destroy jobs, stifle energy production, strangle America’s energy independence, suppress agriculture, deter innovation, and impoverish working families. It undermines the sovereignty of the States and tears at the fabric of liberty.” The lawsuit also talks about how “manure and flatulence from livestock” produces roughly one-third of methane emissions in the United States. This would mean social costs of producing meat, milk and eggs would add up to $268 billion annually. “Under President Biden’s executive order, which he didn’t have the authority to enact…hard-working Missourians who have lived and worked this land for generations could be left in the dust,” Schmitt said in a statement.
This is not the first time the states have come together in a lawsuit against a president over climate change. The Obama administration was sued for implementing its Clean Power Plan aimed at slashing carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the challenge in 2015 and the program never actually came to action. Then in 2019, the Trump administration was sued for its attempt to weaken the previous effort to put national limits on carbon emissions from power plants. So far the Justice Department has not commented on the current suit according to multiple news outlets.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
After more than 400 entries, a new Colorado driver’s license design has been chosen after more than 55,000 Coloradans placed their vote. The Iconic Colorado contest launched in August of 2020. The contest received 407 submissions (280 front-side entries, 127 back-side entries) from 119 submitters. Three finalists were selected by a committee that included motor vehicle administrators, artists and Governor Polis. “The more I learn of the stories of Coloradons across our state, I always feel the sense of pride they have in calling Colorado their home,” said Polis. “This contest, these new driver’s licenses are an extension of that pride.” The public voted on the top three designs. In addition to the two grants, winners will be featured in all of the DMV’s relevant media releases as well as having their name featured on all Colorado identification credentials.
Front of Colorado License Entry Winner
Matt Nunez, 26, placed first for front of license entries with his Mount Sneffels entry. He is a fifth-generation Coloradan from Colorado Springs. He comes from a long line of family members in military and government service, including his late grandfather, Joe Nunez, who served in the State legislature. Nunez spent his childhood abroad and across the U.S. before returning to Colorado after college. He began taking photos in high school and favors landscape photography after spending summers in Colorado during college. He works as an economic development professional for the city of Glenwood Springs. Nunez said the final entry product was a “labor of love,” as it took months to develop the photo. “I am a proud Western Slope resident and although it’s not Hanging Lake, which is our local crown jewel, I’m glad that I was able to help make western Colorado represented on our driver’s license,” Nunez said. Nunez’s work can be found on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter.
Back of Colorado License Entry Winner
Gabriel Dupon’s submission features Sprague Lake located in the Rocky Mountains. Dupon is 19 and from Wellington. He is a Colorado native who loves to be creative and make the unknown extraordinary. He does this by taking pictures of the beauty that surrounds him and using it to inspire others with his work. Dupon runs his own photography business which does primarily portrait and event photography. Dupon also enjoys the many outdoor activities Colorado has to offer such as alpine skiing and rock climbing. Dupon said that he wanted to capture the lake in a new way and show people what they can’t see. Dupon says “This photo definitely displays iconic Colorado, but I would also say it conveys Colorado authentically.”
Colorado License Runner Ups
Fred Lord began developing photography at age 12. After 14 years of mountain living he and his wife have retired to Northern Colorado. Jenn Cunningham, of Morrison, Colorado, is a fine artist who typically works in acrylics. She is inspired by the wonders of nature and wonderful animals. Jenn’s work can be found on Facebook, Instagram and Etsy. All of the entries really showed the beauty of Colorado and the wonderful things about the landscape and wildlife. “While this last year has been challenging for all of us in Colorado … This contest has certainly been a bright spot for so many people,” Governor Polis said. The new Colorado license designs will be released in fall of 2021. The photos look a little different when they are on the license because of the many security features from the DMV that protect against fraud and identity theft. Artwork will be screened down to 35% so elements like mountains, trees or birds may not print as spectacularly as they look in the original design but the licenses will show beautiful and authentic Colorado landscape.
What do you think about the new Colorado license designs?
Written by: Erinn Malloy
CBD gummies, CBD drinks, CBD supplements, CBD balms, CBD bath bombs, CBD vape juice, the list goes on. CBD seems to be popping up in some of the most interesting products sold, at some of the least expected places. CBD is seeming to be, in the holistic health community, the latest and most versatile addition to everything from ingestible to topical products. The list of delivery methods for CBD to enter the body is seemingly endless, which is what makes it so popular and versatile. You may have noticed a rise in the popularity of CBD-infused products in your local stores. Now, not everyone knows exactly what CBD is.
What Is CBD?
CBD is an abbreviation for the organic chemical compound Cannabidiol, a naturally occurring chemical produced by the cannabis plant. Although Cannabidiol (CBD) is a product of the Marijuana plant, it is not to be mistaken for THC (Tetrahydrocannabinol: the psychoactive compound of the Cannabis plant), this is a common misconception. CBD is just one of the many cannabinoids present in the marijuana plant, only one of which (THC) is psychoactive. THC is what is responsible for giving the user that notorious “high” feeling we’ve all heard about. What many people don’t know is that Humans, as well as many other animals, do indeed have a neurological cannabinoid
receptor system, similar to the opiate receptor system. The body actually naturally produces Endocannabinoids, or cannabinoids inside the body; as far as we can tell in neuroscience, CBD interacts with the endocannabinoid receptor system inside the brain which subsequently influences the activity of other neurotransmitters. The relevance of mention to the animal kingdom comes from the recent developing popularity of products like “pet tinctures”, which pet owners have started introducing into their favourite creatures’ diets for a variety of reasons. These products are specially made with pet-friendly ingredients and are usually produced for and marketed toward a particular species, since not all animals have the same dietary restrictions.
Tinctures are a concentration of CBD extract that is usually suspended in an ethanol or alcohol-based solution. There are also oil-based tinctures, but these are usually considered to be labeled or packaged as “CBD Oil”. The usefulness of these tinctures and concentrates is usually defined by the extent of its application; with these products, now along with the wide spectrum of CBD-infused products, these solutions can be added into your favorite cooking recipe or many other things for “dosing” your nutritional portions.
Why Should I Try CBD?
CBD is thought and believed, but not scientifically or medically proven to assist in alleviating certain symptoms of conditions and ailments; although it is not, and should not, be used to prevent, treat or cure any disease or ailment in and of itself. There has not been an adequate amount of research to make such conclusions. Although, these correlations seem to be the entire basis of the marijuana debate and in determining the merit of CBD efficacy. CBD seems to be the most integral component of the medicinal application of the marijuana plant, only we have yet to determine what that specifically means, or what conditions or symptoms CBD would be best used for; not to diminish the medicinal value of the compound. As with any natural or synthetic supplements, consulting a medical professional should be on your list of to-do’s if you plan to join this craze, to see if it is, in fact, a good fit for you. All of this is only applicable to the readers who reside in such CBD legal states (see image).
In CBD We Trust
As individual states have been doing their own research on the substance, there have been found to be great results in the effectiveness of introducing CBD into the body. Some have seen a similar benefit of what most states have already seen in their own medical marijuana programs. Considering these states reserve that certification for patients with a certain severity of ailments, CBD seems to be a good, non-psychoactive alternative useful and safe enough for the population over 21 to handle. Not to mention, the obvious economic benefits, so it is a mutually beneficial exchange.
What Does The Future Hold?
With the rise of the opioid crisis, medical science has developed a sense of urgency in the necessity of non-opioid pain management. Now, there has not been enough definitive research in the infancy of the CBD industry to clearly say whether or not CBD is the answer. Just as is the case with any SSRI’s, as well as pretty much any drug, the effectiveness of its use is heavily defined by the biochemistry of the user; so this may need to be something to find out individually. CBD works in different ways unique to the individual, which makes it an elusively utilized substance as far as any pinpoint use, which is why it’s so difficult to categorize in the medical field as far as its merit and benefit. In the grand scheme of things, is CBD the end all be all solution to the opioid crisis? Unfortunately, not quite so; but in the neurochemistry field, one thing is sure: it’s definitely a step in the right direction.
Written by: Tyler Laske
A Colorado Springs man has been accused of illegally killing over a dozen big game animals. Iniki Vike Kapu has pleaded guilty to poaching charges in three counties. The guilty plea comes after a long investigation by Colorado Parks and Wildlife officers following a citizen tip in October 2018 where a red truck was found abandoned in the Pike National Forest with a dead deer in the back with the meat spoiled. Colorado law requires hunters to prepare all hunted big game for human consumption or else it can result in class five felony charges.
A decision by Colorado Parks and Wildlife last week from hearing examiner, Steven Cooley, suspended Kapu’s hunting privileges in Colorado permanently. “Mr. Kapu’s crimes against wildlife are the essence of what defines a poacher by taking wildlife without regard for the laws protecting them,” Cooley said. “Iniki Kapu is viewed as a serious threat to Colorado’s wildlife, and his violations are among the worst. The severity and level of indifference for wildlife in this case are rarely seen and cannot be tolerated.” Kupu’s hunting ban also extends to the 47 other states that make up the Interstate Wildlife Violator Compact, which is all but Hawaii and Massachusetts. Kapu was not present for his suspension hearing but he has 35 days to appeal the decision.
Kapu was accused of killing 12 deer, 2 turkeys and a bighorn sheep ram. He pleaded guilty to illegal possession of wildlife twice in 2019 in Chaffee and Teller County. He then pleaded guilty again in February 2020 in Fremont County. Kapu also pleaded guilty to illegal possession of three or more big game animals. He was fined $4,600 and sentenced to six months in jail and three years of supervised probation in Fremont County. He also surrendered the weapons he used for poaching.
Agency wildlife manager in Colorado Springs, Frank McGee, gave this warning to any future poachers. “Colorado Parks and Wildlife aggressively pursues anyone who illegally takes wildlife. When you poach, you are stealing from all residents of Colorado,” he said. “And your acts are an insult to all the hunters who follow the rules, who buy the licenses that pay for wildlife management, who respect the hunting seasons and abide by principles of fair chase.”
Anyone with any information about this case or knowledge of a possible crime against wildlife should contact Colorado Parks and Wildlife or your local Wildlife Agency.
A Bill requiring Colorado homeowners to securely store their weapons in certain living situations has passed its first committee. The Bill would make it a misdemeanor to not safely secure weapons in living situations that include juveniles and people in the home who are ineligible to own firearms. HB21-1106 has sparked opinions from both ends of the political spectrum. Those who in support believe the Bill will lower the number of accidental shootings and youth suicide rates.
New Colorado Gun Bill A “No Brainer?”
Dr. Maya Haasz spoke on behalf of Children’s Hospital Colorado testifying about the many cases of gunshot wounds she experienced during her time as a physician of pediatric emergency medicine. “The cry of any parent whose toddler has died is agonizing,” Haasz said. “When the toddler has been fatally shot playing with a sibling, when that death was entirely avoidable, the added layers of guilt and what-ifs add a new, almost tangible level of pain for everyone involved.” Democratic representatives, Monica Duran and Kyle Mullica, introduced the Bill. “This is about accident prevention,” Duran said. “And this is about saving lives.” Mullica commented on what would be considered safe storage. “Obviously, storing it in a safe would count as safe storage,” said Mullica. “A trigger lock or a cable lock counts as safe storage.”
Littleton, Colorado has passed a similar ordinance requiring gun store owners to lock up their inventory after hours due to gun store “smash and grabs” being on the rise. Viewers sent in comment to the Denver7 inbox saying things like they “support LittleRock’s decision” and called it a “no brainer.” Others were not happy with the new ordinance saying “So the city’s plan is to punish the victim of a crime while not bothering to try and find the actual criminals?” Old Steel Gun Shop, Giovanni Galeano, argues locking up all firearms at night would be costly and difficult to do. “It would be hard to believe that a city would want to put a business out of business.” Many gun owners practice safe storage yet accidents still happen. Many opposed to the Bill believe teaching gun safety is the most effective way to deal with these accidents.
New Colorado Gun Bill Unconstitutional
Those against the Bill such as Erik Stone, a Teller County Commissioner and NRA-certified firearms instructor, believe the focus should be on teaching juveniles gun safety because the time needed to remove a lock could create a situation in which the gun is now useless for home defense. “In firearms classes, we actually talk about, first safety, always safety, that’s how you prevent firearms accidents. You don’t do it by creating laws that have penalties after an accident occurs. It’s completely ineffective.” “This bill is an egregious violation on our constitutional rights,” said Greg Trout during a committee hearing at the Colorado State Capitol. “It would give criminals an advantage when breaking into our homes and businesses. It gives them critical time to break through the door and perpetrate that crime.” The biggest question surrounding the Bill is whether the courts would find it constitutional. During District of Columbia v. Heller decision in 2008 the Supreme Court got rid of a law in Washington D.C. that required handguns to be stored disassembled or with a trigger lock. Supporters of the bill argued that the court’s problem with D.C.’s law was its wording didn’t allow gun owners to have a working weapon for self-defense. “This makes it impossible for citizens to use them for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional,” wrote Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia.
Mullica and Duran argue this is not a gun grab or about infringing on anyone’s rights. Duran says, “You talk to a majority of gun owners and they believe in safe storage. But the fact is there are kids still getting hurt.” Do you believe HB21-1106 would be more effective than educating children about gun safety? Will the Bill help lower the number of firearm related accidents if it is passed through Colorado legislation?
An amendment has been proposed by House Democrats to lower the voting age to sixteen. The amendment was introduced by Representative Pressley as an amendment to the constitution, which currently states that the legal voting age is eighteen. This statement is found in the 26th Amendment to the Constitution. The amendment was part of the HR 1 voting rights package. The vote was unsuccessful and killed at 125-302 with the majority of Democrats voting in favor (125-93).
Pressley has been outspoken in her view on lowering the voting age. She claims, “A sixteen-year-old in 2021 possesses a wisdom and a maturity that comes from 2021 challenges, 2021 hardships, and 2021 threats”. She goes on to call sixteen and seventeen-year-olds “courageous” for facing their “challenges”. She also claimed in February that she was “shocked” it was a polarizing issue. She herself is a member of “the Squad”- a group of six House members known for their progressive views. She made this comment during a Facebook Live conversation with Representative Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Ibram X. Kendi. Kendi claimed that lowering the voting age is an example of anti-racist policy.
The amendment to lower the voting age was first attached to HR 1 in 2019, and the amendment failed after getting just 126 votes in the House. Some states, including Hawaii, have also considered lowering the voting age to sixteen.
Poor Political Knowledge
The problem is that a voting age of sixteen is simply too young. Sixteen-year-olds and teenagers in general do not have a great knowledge of politics. According to Southern Poverty Law Center, only 8% of high school seniors can identify slavery as the cause of the Civil War. If they do not know the correct cause of the Civil War, how are they supposed to understand racism and its implications in our society? Only one in four Oklahoma high school students could name the first president of the United States in a survey conducted by the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs. A 2012 National Election Studies report found the youngest age group to have the lowest political knowledge. Younger voters have also witnessed fewer election cycles, been exposed to less political news content, and have less experience based around politics.
Major Life Changes
No one can argue that a younger person has more life experience than an older person, but most key changes occur around eighteen. It is at the age of eighteen when someone is generally considered an adult. At eighteen, high school students generally graduate. Graduation generally serves as the gateway to a career, college, or military service. Fewer sixteen and seventeen-year-olds hold down jobs than eighteen and nineteen-year-olds., according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. Eighteen-year-olds can get married and buy houses. These changes and experiences greatly influence the perspective of a young person.
Peer Influence
High school students are much more susceptible to peer influence than adults. High school students do not make many major decisions. They go to school as they are told and usually live under a roof with their parents. They are a bit naïve from lack of life experience, making them quick to fall for promises and generally not think things through.
“Courageous” Sixteen and Seventeen-Year-Olds
Going back to Pressley’s comments on the challenges sixteen and seventeen-year-olds face in our current climate, it is worth noting that education has negatively been impacted by the coronavirus. Sure, it has been challenging for sixteen and seventeen-year-olds, but it has been challenging for everyone. Whether someone has been through “challenges” or not should not decide the right to vote. School lockdowns starting in spring 2020 reduced instructional and learning time and placed students at a risk of becoming disengaged. An educated populous is key to having a successful democracy. Current students have had a lower-quality education than their older peers.
Ploy for Democrats to Receive More Votes
I see the whole argument for a lower voting age as a ploy for Democrats to receive more votes. It does not, to me, sound like a good idea. It is worth noting that younger generations have the highest percentage of Democrats. According to a graph published by Gallup, the highest percentage of Democrats by age is nineteen, with the graph starting at nineteen. It is more or less an amendment to turn the voting pool in their favor.
Conclusion
House Democrats have proposed a bill that has not been passed and would radically change our democratic process. Within it is the amendment to drop the voting age to sixteen. Sixteen-year-olds have less political knowledge, less experience, more peer influence, and weaker education than adults.
Written by: Miranda Smith
Coca-Cola is facing major backlash from people online over their “diversity training,” in which employees are told to “try to be less white.” Coca-Cola has responded to allegations of anti-white rhetoric after an internal employee leaked screenshots of the seminar. Karlyn Borysenko, an activist for banning critical race theory, shared images on Twitter of the “racism training.” The slides on the course, ‘Confronting Racism,’ included tips for staff on how to be “less white.”
Being “Less White” According To Coke
The slides included tips such as “be less arrogant, be less certain, be less defensive, be more humble, listen, believe, break with apathy,” and “break with white solidarity.” The presentation tells employees in order to confront racism, they must understand “what it means to be white, challenging what it means to be racist.” It goes on to say white people in the United States and other western nations, are “socialized to feel that they are inherently superior because they are white,” and “that by age 3 to 4, children understand that it is better to be white.” This builds a false stigma that all white people are racist. This course was found in Coca-Cola’s curriculum on Linkedin. The biggest question, did they use this course as mandatory training?
Does Coke Use “Less White” Training Materials
According to Snopes they were able to confirm Coke does have the course under their materials on Linkedin but that does not mean it is mandatory viewing for all employees. Coke has denied using the “be less white” materials, however, Snopes has been unable to confirm that. Borysenko said the screenshots were sent by an “internal whistleblower” from Coca-Cola, who told her the course was “required.” Her tweet from Feb. 19 now has 36.6k likes and 30.5k retweets. LinkedIn has pulled the course featuring DiAngelo, the author of “White Fragility.” “The Confronting Racism course featuring Robin DiAngelo is no longer available in our course library, at the request of the 3rd party content provider we licensed this content from,” Nicole Leverich, vice president of corporate communications, told Newsweek in an email. “We provide a wide variety of learning content, including more than 270 courses on the topics of diversity, inclusion and belonging. We will continue to add new courses to help people learn the skills they need to be more successful in their career, including the foundational skills we all need to be effective allies and help build a more equitable future.”
DiAngelo maintains she was unaware of the course. “The slides included were not created by Dr. DiAngelo,” said her rep, Caitlin Meyer. “She was unaware that the videos had been re-edited in this way, or that they were being marketed as a course/training on anti-racism, since the way the content was put together did not accurately represent the way she would facilitate that type of work.” Coca-Cola maintains the “be less white” presentation is not mandatory and they will continue to refine their curriculum.
Nearly three dozen House Democrats have written a letter to President Joe Biden urging him to relinquish the sole ability to launch nuclear weapons. The letter was posted on Twitter by Politico. It is currently not a requirement for the President to meet with advisors before ordering a launch of nuclear power. The military is required to honor the strike as long as it goes along with the Laws of War.
The Letter About Nuclear Weapons
According to Fox News the letter says “…Vesting one person with this authority entails real risks.” It goes on to say “Past presidents have threatened to attack other countries with nuclear weapons or exhibited behavior that caused other officials to express concern about the president’s judgment.” This is referring to the fear that Former President Donald Trump would start a nuclear war in 2017 when the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a public hearing on the subject.The other concern is that any President coming into office has the sole authority to start a nuclear war. “While any president would presumably consult with advisors before ordering a nuclear attack, there is no requirement to do so,” the letter adds. “The military is obligated to carry out the order if they assess it is legal under the laws of war. Under the current posture of U.S. nuclear forces, that attack would happen in minutes.” How would the military react to an order that was illegal?
How Would The Military Handle A Request To Launch Nuclear Weapons?
According to Officer, Gen. John Hyten, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the military will only follow legal orders. “I provide advice to the president,” Hyten said. “He’ll tell me what to do, and if it’s illegal, guess what’s going to happen? I’m gonna say, ‘Mr. President, that’s illegal.’ Guess what he’s going to do? He’s going to say, ‘What would be legal?’ And we’ll come up with options of a mix of capabilities to respond to whatever the situation is, and that’s the way it works. It’s not that complicated.” This seems to make it hard for a President to start a Nuclear War but it’s not impossible for them to launch Nuclear Weapons. Why does the President have this authority in the first place?
Why Does One Person Have The Ability To Launch Nuclear Weapons?
During the Cold War, the idea of nuclear war meant having to respond, by launching our Nuclear Weapons, within minutes to Soviet weapons coming towards the United States. Time would be of the essence making sense to leave the decision to one person. You wouldn’t need time-consuming consultations with Congress. The letter gives suggestions such as the President receiving approval from the Line of Succession, such as the Vice President and the Speaker of the House before they are able to launch Nuclear Weapons. The letter adds that “neither of whom can be removed by the President if they disagree to concur with a launch order.” Is changing this policy constitutional?
Is Changing The Policy For Launching Nuclear Weapons Unconstitutional?
Republican Senator, Mike Lee, of Utah said on Fox and Friends that it is weird and unconstitutional to change the launch code policy that gives the President the power to launch Nuclear Weapons. “Look, there is one argument or another with regard to whether or to what extent we ought to be involved in foreign conflicts at any moment. One could have one opinion or another about at what point it is appropriate for Congress to declare war rather than have the president order discreet strikes. The fact is the president is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. This is why we subject presidents to a very rigorous review process. That is they have to win elections. Once they’ve won an election you really do have to pick that horse and then ride it. You’ve gotta let the president be the commander-in-chief…” Democratic Senator John Tester says we have to cut older weapon systems that are no longer effective and the world has moved past. Do you believe the world has “moved past” Nuclear Weapons?
Google removed Former President Donald Trump’s 2020 campaign app from the Play Store. The app originally went up during the 2016 election. The app had apparently stopped working according to Google. Google did not specify what the faults were. The original purpose of the app was to provide campaign news, schedules and a place for donations. The IOS version seems to still be up. According to TechCrunch when you visit the main screens of the IOS version you are met with an error message but it does not affect your ability to browse past content.
The Android version of the app has been suspended. Google told Insider “The Trump 2020 campaign app recently stopped working and we reached out to the developer multiple times in an attempt to get them to address the issue, people expect that apps downloaded from Google Play provide a minimum level of functionality and our policy is to remove non-working apps from the store if they are not fixed.” Many reviews before it was suspended said things such as “will not open,” “the app doesn’t even work,” “absolutely terrible doesn’t even work,” and “wouldn’t open keep saying check connections.” One user implied the issues were Google’s fault, saying “worked great, until Google canceled it.”
Google maintains the app has not been banned, only suspended for non-functionality, and can be reinstated when the developers update the app. It is unclear what the faults are exactly but according to Android Police when they tested the app, before and after its removal, it would get stuck at the loading screen with a spinning ”T.” The app had not been updated since October 30, 2020, says app store intelligence firm Sensor Tower. This could have been a key factor in the app no longer functioning correctly.
Parler, a social media app used predominantly by conservatives, has come back to life after more than a month. The platform was taken off Apple, Google, and Amazon stores and servers. The website is currently up and running and waiting for users to make their new accounts. Parler has even gained a new interim CEO, Mark Meckler. Why was Parler taken down in the first place?
Parler Being Singled Out
During an interview with Fox and Friends, Chief Policy Officer of Parler, Amy Peikoff, made it clear they felt Parler was singled out. Parler received backlash for “allowing violent speech” this is something they have made it clear they do NOT support. Peikoff said Parler is “a non-partisan town square in which people of varying viewpoints can have productive discussions. Force and threats of force stop those discussions.” Google and Apple both took Parler from their app stores around the same time. Piekoff says Google did not contact Parler removing the platform from the Play store. Peikoff says Parler was “set up,” a theory that doesn’t seem too far fetched.
Parler Was Set Up
It doesn’t seem right for Parler to be removed for “violent speech” when on Twitter, around the same time, one of the trending topics was #hangmikepence. They allowed this trend for hours after they permanently banned Former President Trump. Twitter is obviously trusted to resolve issues themselves and don’t lose their spot as the 6th most popular free social app on Google Play Store. Why wasn’t Parler given the same opportunities to remove violent content? Peikoff believes it is because the platform believes in Free Speech which is now seen as a conservative view and not a promise this country was built on. Peikoff also stated many accounts that had violent writings seemed to be parody accounts. This theory and even further back up by the fact that #parlerapp on Tik Tok has 6.6 million views with the top videos all being videos from around the time Parler was shut down. These videos show people flaunting how they were going to destroy the app with ratings and fake accounts “like they did Trump’s app.” The videos show screen recordings of people making fake accounts and posting violent speech. Parler was set up and singled out for being a place conservatives felt safe. Their safe space was taken down and for a while they were greeted with a message reminding people why Parler was created in the first place. Now they are back up and running, giving users a place they can go once again.
Parler Back Online
Parler has made a comeback with interim CEO Mark Meckler. Former CEO John Matze was fired from the Board of Directors and gave statements saying the app was trying to censor him which is odd given the foundation of the platform is free speech. Peikoff called these statements “inaccurate and misleading.” Parler is on the hunt for a new CEO while their website gets back up and running. They are currently using a hosting platform called SkySilk. SkySilk seems to have faith that Parler will be able to moderate their app perfectly fine. SkySilk said it believes Parler is “taking the necessary steps to better monitor its platform. Skysilk does not advocate nor condone hate, rather, it advocates the right to private judgment and rejects the role of being the judge, jury, and executioner,” the company said. “Unfortunately, too many of our fellow technology providers seem to differ in their position on this subject. … SkySilk will support Parler in their efforts to be a nonpartisan Public Square.” The website had a design and logo change and is ready for new users.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
An exchange with a Politico reporter led white house aide to resign after his derogatory and threatening comments made headlines. Politico reporter, Tara Palmeri, and her male co worker contacted white house aide, TJ Ducklo, while writing an article about his relationship with a reporter who was assigned to cover the white house. This was an assigned story not one the reporters were pursuing independently. Ducklo, who did not want the story to be run, contacted Palmeri. The phone call was full of threats and offensive language such as Ducklo telling Palmeri things like “I will destroy you” referring to her career.
Whitehouse aide blows up at reporter
Tara Palmeri is the co-author of Politico’s Playbook newsletter. She was given an assignment to write about the potential conflict of interest that is raised by the relationship between whitehouse aide, TJ Ducklo, and Axios reporter, Alexi McCammond, who covered the Biden campaign according to vanity fair. Both Palmeri and her male co-worker contacted Ducklo but he called Palmeri shortly after Biden’s inauguration in January. According to Vanity Fair, during the off-the-record call Ducklo made derogatory and misogynistic comments. He accused Palmeri of only reporting his relationship because she was “jealous” that an unidentified man in the past had wanted McCammond and not her. Ducklo also accused Palmeri of being “jealous” of his relationship with McCammond. Ducklo also threatened to end Palmeri’s career if she ran the story saying “I will destroy you.” All of this is coming weeks after President Biden issued a statement on his first day in office about the standards he expects from his staff in regards to how they treat people.
Does the standard apply to white house aides
His first day in office President Biden issued a statement saying “I am not joking when I say this: If you are ever working with me and I hear you treat another colleague with disrespect, talk down to someone, I promise you I will fire you on the spot. No ifs, ands, or buts,” Playbook highlighted this and asked, “Serious question on our minds this morning: Does this standard apply to how mid-level press aides treat reporters?” After the initial incident Politico editors contacted White House staff the following day. When those calls were finished Ducklo sent Palmeri an email apologizing. He was then suspended for a week without pay and told he would not be allowed to work with any Politico reporters. Whitehouse secretary Jenn Psaki said “And that, in our view, was a — was an important step to send the message that we don’t find it acceptable,” referring to not working with anymore Politico reporters. She also called the one-week suspension a “serious punishment.” This seems like a step down from Biden’s promises but Psaki did not acknowledge why Ducklo would not be dismissed. In response to the incident Ducklo has decided to resign.
White house aide resigns over “I Will Destroy You” threat
The White House announced Ducklo’s resignation. “We accepted the resignation of TJ Ducklo after a discussion with him this evening,” Jen Psaki said in a statement. The conversation occurred with the support of the White House chief of staff, Ron Klain. Psaki added the White House was committed to treating others with dignity and respect. Ducklo posted on Twitter saying he wanted to “learn from it and do better.” He also said “I used language that no woman should ever have to hear from anyone, especially in a situation where she was just trying to do her job.”
There has so far been no comment from Palmeri regarding the incident. The White House says the incident was over Ducklo’s personal life not over their policies and does not align with how they want to treat people. They did not comment on why it took so long for action to be taken and struggled to answer questions regarding Ducklo working with female reporters in the future; both of these issues were fixed by Ducklo’s resignation.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
During an interview with Norah O’Donnell President Biden said he believed former President Trump should not receive classified briefings as is custom. The interview itself focused on a wide range of topics from if Biden believed Trump should be impeached and if changing minimum wage would be introduced to the Senate with the current stimulus bill.
Biden Says Trump Has No Need For Briefings.
When asked directly if President Biden believed Donald Trump should have access to intelligence briefings he responded with “I think not.” He was asked to elaborate. Biden said “because of his erratic behavior unrelated to the insurrection.” The President agreed with his previous statements calling the former President “Dangerous” and an “existential threat.” O’Donnell asked Biden his worst fear if Trump continued to receive intelligence briefings. He then went on to say “I’d rather not speculate out loud. I just think that there is no need for him to have the intelligence briefings. What value is giving him an intelligence briefing? What impact does he have at all, other than the fact he might slip and say something?” Biden isn’t the only person who has made it clear they don’t think Trump should have access to Intelligence briefings.
People who don’t think Trump should have access to intelligence briefings.
Sue Gordon, a former Principal Deputy Director of Intelligence in the Trump administration, wrote in an op-ed. “My recommendation, as a 30-plus-year veteran of the intelligence community, is not to provide him any briefings after Jan. 20,” Gordon argued Trump is a “potential security risk” in light of his “significant business entanglements that involve foreign entities.” Democratic Representative Adam Schiff, Chairman of the House of Intelligence Committee, said on Face the Nation “There is no circumstance in which this president should get another intelligence briefing, not now and not in the future.” He goes on to mention intelligence partners around the world safeguarding information and how that makes us less safe. Rolling Stone quoted Senator of Maine, Angus King, having similar opinions. “There’s a grave danger of him inadvertently or willfully revealing classified information.” King also said “There is no upside. There is no reason that he needs to have this information.” Isn’t this the same stuff people have been accusing Trump of while he was President? Has this affected the president’s current standing in relation to receiving briefings? Are they allowed to ban Trump from receiving briefings?
Can they ban Trump from receiving Intelligence briefings?
According to the National Security Act of 1947 (title VIII section 801 a) the President shall, by Executive order or regulation, establish procedures to govern access to classified information which shall be binding upon all departments, agencies, and offices of the executive branch of Government. This means that Biden can potentially ban Trump from receiving Intelligence Briefings. Most former Presidents are allowed to receive Intelligence briefings in the event their advice is needed. The biggest fear seems to be leaking information which Trump was accused of many times throughout his presidency. According to the NY times Trump openly talks about wanting to run for President again and another fear is him using the Intelligence to fit his “political agenda.” Most of the pushback seems to be coming from the Left. There was a lot of call from the Right back in November for, at the time, President-elect Joe Biden to receive Intelligence Briefings. Why aren’t they supporting Trump the same way now? According to CNN, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said “The intelligence community supports requests for intelligence briefings by former presidents and will review any incoming requests, as they always have.” This means if Trump were to request an intelligence briefing his request would be reviewed like any other former President. CNN also reported a Senior Administration Official had confirmed Trump currently had not requested any Intelligence briefings. Do you think former President Trump should be banned from receiving Intelligence briefings?
Written by: Erinn Malloy
