Three recently passed agriculture bills have angered Farmers and sparked six months of protest in India. The bills were proposed as giving farmers more freedom to control their own trade and expand their own markets but according to farmers they have major issues. Protests stayed peaceful until recently when they turned violent. This violence has prompted internet shutdowns in 14 of the 22 districts in Haryana state near New Delhi.
The Bills That Caused Protests
Farmers and agricultural workers, who make up nearly 60 percent of India’s population, are outraged over three pieces of agricultural legislation passed in September by India’s parliament with support of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The three bills decrease trade regulations on goods, allow for trading online and interstate, enable farmers and buyers to enact exclusive contracts, and limit the government’s ability to regulate essential commodities. The farmers believe the deregulation will increase competition giving corporate buyers all the power. Giving buyers access to more suppliers gives them the ability to drive prices down. This is further enforced by the bill removing minimum prices for items. Farmers say this practice was barely helping them to squeak by already.
Outrage Sparks Protests
The protest began in August ahead of the three bills passing. According to the NY times many of the protesting farmers are members of the Sikh religious minority and come from the states of Punjab and Haryana. Protests began as peaceful. Thousands of farmers camped outside of New Delhi in tent cities demanding the three Bills be repealed. Al Jazeera reported there were deaths reported from mostly natural causes. The cold, heart attacks, and motor vehicle accidents on the way to protests claimed the lives of dozens of peaceful protesters. This changed on India’s 72nd Republic Day.
Farmers Protesting In India Turn Violent
Tuesday January 26, 2021 a demonstration that was supposed to be peaceful ended with protesters forcing their way through police barricades. The tractor parade turned violent as protestors fought with police and ran a rebellious flag up the ramparts of the Red Fort. Videos show protestors using tractors to break through barricades. One protestor was reported to have died when their tractor flipped over. Why did violence erupt? Has the government attempted to listen to demands of protesters?
What Has The Indian Government Done?
United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres asked for peace and to respect peaceful protests. The government has cut internet access to many protest sites in retaliation to violence. The Supreme Court has issued an injunction temporarily pausing the implementation of the laws but farmers still demand the Bills be repealed completely. With farmers protesting in India daily, we currently don’t have an end in sight.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
The past few weeks in the stock market exchange has been a challenging concept to understand. Terms such as ‘Hedge Funds” and “Short Selling” are tactics used that would not seem so devastating. Like, what is so wrong with funding hedges and then selling them? No, we’re not referring to the hedges your neighbors grow in their front lawn that you must end up paying for to be groomed. This is an economic breakdown of the Reddit attack and how it’s ultimately affecting risk investors on Wall Street.
Why Are Hedge Funds Risky?
Hedge Funds are a risky method that investors take up in order to acquire allotted lumps of cash to hoard into their own bank accounts. This tactic is approached by first taking out a large unsecured loan which they will use in cooperation with a broker who holds large amounts of stock. These investors will buy a high quantity of shares on borrowed money, then turn around and sell them to individual investors. Essentially large investors are borrowing stocks from brokers in order to sell them and in the end make a profit. Now this doesn’t seem like a bad concept, right? Well let’s look at an example.
An Investor takes on a loan of $2 million dollars, this is already a risk because it’s an unsecured loan. The investor will then find a stock with a high price per share, let’s say $100, this will produce a total of 20,000 shares. These shares are then sold to individual investors or other firms, utilizing the theory that the share price will collapse to a lesser dollar amount. The Investor will then buy the stocks back (that are now at a lower price), sell them back to the stock exchange or borrowed broker, and collect the difference. The whole theory involves a gamble on the bet that the share price will drop significantly, in some situations these career investors also have some inside knowledge. Fundamentally, this takes the money from the little people who investor spare money in hopes of a more enjoyable retirement, and places in the pockets of wealthy investors.
Potential Profit
Let’s break down the profit margin of this example. The investor buys $2 million in stock producing 20,000 shares at $100 dollars per share. The price then falls in two weeks to a petty $8 dollars per share, which the investor is lucky to buy back, and then sell again or return to its borrowed broker. Essentially the Investor made $92 per share equaling a total profit of $1.84 million, a grand scheme for someone who does this for a living. This whole process is referred to as “Short Selling”, This can turn mass profits over a course of a few weeks or months.
Teaming Up Against Hedge Funds
Now where does it go wrong? An individual with little amounts of income (No I’m not saying they’re poor, they’re just not Warren Buffet rich) cannot personally take on competitively with these investors to beat them at their own game, but how about 170,000 reddit users with a few thousand to spare. Reddit users, led by screen name user Wallstreetbets, collaborated by agreeing on specific stocks to buy (I.E. GameStop, AMC, and now Doge coin) to all invest in, this jacked up the cost of the shares. Since these Hedge Fund investors had invested in the same stocks with the intention of the price collapsing this hindered the chance of a profit and ultimately costing the Investor millions.
Let’s say that same investor who bought 20,000 stocks at $100 per share had been one to buy those stocks that were mentioned earlier. The stock price is currently $100 per share then skyrockets to $300 per share virtually costing the bet investor $200 per share for a grand loss of $4 million dollars. Also, to keep in mind, this was funded by a loan that must be now paid back. This method could eventually lead to a bankruptcy depending on how much debt was accumulated over the course of many unsuccessful bets. This will eventually end up costing taxpayers, when methods like this are utilized the little people always end up paying. Too Big to Fail investors need to be held accountable for their shady business tactics and not the people they use as an investment. Short Selling practices have become a primary source of income for wealthy individuals, career investors call this an attack on the wealthy, as if it’s an entitlement.
Short Selling
Short Selling practices have been brought to the light of how Wall Street has been operating over past decades, gaining the attention of Infamous investor Jordan Belfort the man portrayed by Leonardo DiCaprio in The Wolf of Wall Street. Other individuals such as Elon Musk, the Tesla engineer and billionaire that surpassed Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, also has had trending posts of the situation. Stock Market exchange practices have seen the height that strength in numbers can bring. Individual business investors have pushed back against wealthy investors to show what the American people can bring to the table when they work together. Making this one of the biggest feats in business economics since the last stock market crash in 2008, proving how brutal the Bull and Bear can be in the stock market exchange.
Written by : Charlie Alvitre
On January 28, 2021 Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi gave a weekly briefing at the white house where she called some members of the House of Representatives “ the enemy within.” This is coming after a month of “memorable Wednesdays,” as Pelosi called them, referring to the riot on Capitol Hill, the second attempt to impeach Donald Trump, and the inauguration of the Biden administration. A reporter asked about a letter that was sent to her and the Majority leader asking for funds for more security at the Capitol and in the Representatives home districts. Pelosi responded by touching on the states using MRA funds for security then went on to call some members “the enemy within”.
Who is the Enemy Within?
Pelosi started out by explaining the Representatives should be using their MRA funds for extra security. Then she said “we want to have a scientific approach to how we protect members. I do believe, and I have said this all along, we will probably need a supplemental for more security for members when the enemy is within the House of Representatives. A threat that members are concerned about in addition to what is outside.” When pressed by a reporter on exactly what she meant she went on to say “we have members of congress who want to bring guns on the floor and have threatened violence on other members of congress.” While Pelosi did not directly name any members directly this comes days after metal detectors were installed in the capitol. This has sparked anger in many Republican lawmakers. A regulation from 1967 allows firearms to be carried by members of congress on Capitol grounds but not on the floor. Democrats are pushing this week to ban lawmakers from carrying firearms anywhere at the Capitol.
Are they really the Enemy?
Republican lawmakers have expressed their concern for the added security. House Administration Ranking Member Rodney Davis was quoted by Fox News saying the security measures were “taking resources completely away from where it needs to be,” and that Democrats “did it without any consultation with the minority.” Barring lawmakers from bringing firearms to the capitol is something newly elected Republican Congress member Lauren Boebert has made it clear she will not stand for. “I will carry my firearm in D.C. and in congress.” she says in a campaign ad she posted to twitter. She goes on to say it’s lawmakers jobs to protect second amendment rights and that’s what she is in D.C. to do. Are Republican lawmakers “the enemy within” for wanting to defend themselves? Taking away the right to carry at the Capitol for lawmakers takes away their right to defend themselves in a city where violent crime averages more than twice the average rate. After the incident on January 6 it is understandable as to why lawmakers would want to go as far as to bring their firearms safely into the chamber. Republican lawmakers will continue to push for the right to bear arms at the Capitol in order to protect our second amendment rights as citizens.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
The United Nations Secretary-General called January 28 for global rules to regulate social media companies like Twitter and Facebook. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said that he believes it should not be a company that has the power to decide whether then-president Donald Trump’s Twitter account should be closed. Guterres stated, “I do not think that we can live in a world where too much power is given to a reduced number of companies.” He also said that he was “particularly worried” about the power of social media companies. Instead, he believes that a “mechanism” should be created “in which there is a regulatory framework with rules that allow [closures] to be done in line with law.”
Impact of Regulated Social Media
Earlier in January, Twitter ended Trump’s nearly twelve-year run and shuttered his account, severing an instant line of communication to his 89 million followers. His Twitter account was regarded by some as the hallmark of his presidency. Facebook and Instagram also suspended Trump. Twitter cited the January 6 insurrection of the US Capitol by his supporters to claim that his tweets could incite violence. People accused the companies of censorship and violating the First Amendment right to free speech. Numerous other people have been censored and removed from such platforms.
Guterres says, “Digital technology is shaping history, but there is also this sense that it is running away with us. Where will it take us? Will our dignity and rights be enhanced or diminished?… We have a collective responsibility to give direction to these technologies so that we maximize benefits and curtail unintended consequences or misuse.”
More people than ever before are on social media and get their information from online sources. False data and selective censorship present a very real threat to society and democracy as a whole. COVID-19 has also presented a unique circumstance. Many people are working from home or using technology to keep in touch as they socially distance. This puts Internet rights at an all time high as far as importance.
Data Security and Political Control
Guterres pointed to “the volume of information being gathered about every one of us, the lack of control we have about… the data related to ourselves, the fact that data can be used not only for commercial purposes to sell to advertising companies… but also to change our behavior, and the risks of that to be used also from a political point of view for the control of citizens in countries.” Guterres said this “requires a serious discussion” and that is one of the objectives of his “Roadmap for Digital Cooperation” launched last June.
Roadmap for Digital Cooperation
The Roadmap’s aim is to promote a “safer, more equitable digital world.” It calls for action in eight areas including achieving universal connectivity by 2030; ensuring digital connection for all, including the most vulnerable; ensuring the protection of human rights on the internet; promoting trust and security in the digital environment; and building a more effective architecture for digital cooperation. The UN claims that “digital technology issues are often low on political agendas. Among the Roadmap’s provisions is a call for strengthening the Internet Governance Forum, which brings people from various groups in the public and private sectors together to discuss public policy issues related to the Internet, “in order to make it more responsive and relevant to current digital issues.”
The key parts of concern on media censorship are digital rights. Digital technologies provide new ways to exercise rights such as the freedom of speech, but rights are often violated online. The UN website states that “Data protection, digital ID, the use of surveillance technologies, online harassment and content governance are of particular concern.” The UN advocates for regulatory frameworks and legislation on the development and use of digital technologies. These regulatory frameworks and legislation should have human rights at their center.
One of these rights is of course the freedom of speech. The UN is against repression and censorship. Under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to… impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
There is also the concept of digital inclusion. The UN is working to lower the access gap to digital technology, so that people of all ages, political affiliations, and nationalities may use technology.
Overall, the UN aims to protect Internet rights and establish a legal framework so that tech companies, governments, and individuals cannot deny the rights of others.
Written by: Miranda Smith
Cloning in America has been an interest of science for hundreds of years. The first attempts in cloning were seen in 1885 on sea urchins. Cloning comes in many forms. Some instances of “clones” occur in nature. Is human cloning on the horizon?
Clones in Nature
Clones that occur naturally range from single cell organisms to identical twins. Organisms such as Planaria (flatworms) reproduce through a process called Binary Fission. The organism splits apart creating a clone-like copy of itself. Fragmentation, the process of growing a new organism from a separated fragment of the parent organism, occurs commonly in starfish. Identical twins are formed when a fertilized egg splits and develops into two organisms who are genetically the same. What happens when science interferes and attempts to create organisms who are genetically the same?
Cloning Plants
Some plants can naturally reproduce through asexual reproduction. This process can occur for many reasons such as a stolon, or runner, rooting from a new bud. We have helped this process along for thousands of years. Plant cuttings can often be rooted and create clones of the mother pant. Some plants such as tomatoes create plenty of auxins, the hormone plants need to start rooting, other needs help from artificial rooting hormones. “Clones” rooted from cuttings often mature faster than their counterparts who start out as seeds. There are no laws against cloning plants. In a survey of 100 Americans 71 believed cloning plants was ethical. In 2016 the Michigan court of appeals deemed Marijuana “clones” as plants. Scientists are currently looking for a way to create clones of original plants through the seeds they create. This would be a major breakthrough in agriculture. Cloning crops with higher yields could help with the world hunger crisis if more food is able to be produced. What would happen if we applied the same idea to animals who are generally used for food?
Cloning Animals
Cloning animals started in 1855 when Hans Adolf Eduard Driesch discovered he could split a two-celled sea urchin embryo and both cells would develop into an individual organism. In 1996 Dolly the sheep became famous for being the first cloned mammal born at the Roslin Institute in Scotland. Since then animal cloning has been a commercial venture to improve the quality of herds. The FDA has deemed meat and milk from cloned animals and their offspring to be safe to consume. The FDA says most cloned livestock are used for breeding then the offspring are used for processing. It is not required for food labels to specify if a product comes from a clone or their offspring. There is a huge controversy over the ethical side of cloning animals. In a survey out of 100 Americans 76 people said cloning animals was not ethical. After taking the survey some people reported back they would only be okay with cloning animals who were endangered in order to repopulate those species. Five people who originally said yes reported they confused the process of artificial insemination with cloning and said removing the genetic traces from an egg is not ethical. Let’s not get confused, what types of cloning are out there and how do we use them?
Types of Clones
There are three different types of artificial cloning. Molecular cloning produces clones of genes or segments of DNA. Reproductive cloning produces clones of whole organisms. Therapeutic cloning produces stem cells for creating tissue to replace diseased or injured tissues. Could any of these types of cloning successfully clone humans?
Cloning Humans in America
Cloning humans has been an interest of science since Dolly the sheep was born; it was the next logical step after animal cloning. Clonaid claimed to have successfully cloned humans resulting in the birth of babies in various countries including the U.S. These babies were never independently verified through DNA and many in the scientific community are skeptical of their claims. Many people on Reddit and TikTok claim to be these babies but none of their claims have been proven. There are no Federal laws that outright ban cloning humans. In a survey of 100 Americans 90 people said they believed cloning humans was not ethical. 20 reported after taking the survey they only agreed with cloning organs or tissues for people who need them. Nine states have legislature banning reproductive cloning, therapeutic cloning, or using any funding to do human cloning. There are currently no proven instances of human cloning but there are instances where therapeutic cloning could be used to benefit patients and the medical community in general. Therapeutic cloning could help cure diseases and is believed to have a lower probability for immune rejection in organ and tissue transplants. Some people believe using stem cells in anyway is “playing God” and not ethical, others say it’s not until you create full human beings. Where is the line for you when cloning in America?
Written by: Erinn Malloy
As this past election season heated up the cold winter days, former President Donald Trump has parted ways with some of his impeachment lawyers. According to house democrats, the reason for impeachment is due to the events that took place at the US Capitol building on January 6th. All but five Senate Republicans are in favor of dismissing the trial before it starts. Trump has had a very hard time finding attorneys who are willing to defend him after he became the only US president to be impeached twice. A lot of the attorneys who previously defended him declined to take on the current case. Former President Trump’s strongest argument will be that the trial is unconstitutional because he is no longer in office. House Democrats are accusing Trump of provoking the riots that took place at the US Capitol building on January 6th. Trump has since announced that he has hired a new legal team, it will be led by David Schoen who is a criminal defense attorney who works both in Alabama and New York, and Bruce Castor Jr. who is a former district attorney in Pennsylvania. Since President Joe Biden has taken office many of the same House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump now agree that it is unconstitutional to even have a trial. Many people have also attempted to forget about Trump’s conduct saying that it was just his way of dealing with frustration over the handling of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election. According to U.S. Senator Rand Paul the vote for a trial is already dead on arrival. The trial is scheduled to start on February 8th.
What are your predications? Make sure to comment below!
Written by: Gary Taylor
President Biden was inaugurated on January 20, 2021 without any of the usual markers of a new administration such as parades and inaugural balls. The beginning of Biden’s administration has been anything but usual as he has given out so many Executive Orders he has broken the record for most Executive orders issued in the first week of a Presidency. He has issued more orders in his first 10 days than the last five presidents who came before him.
While campaigning Biden said “some of my Republican friends, and some of my Democratic friends even, occasionally say if you can’t get the votes, by executive order. You’re going to do something, things you can’t do by executive order unless you’re a dictator. We’re a democracy.” Yet in his first days he enacted many Executive Actions that affected so many Americans. Biden’s press Secretary stated the President didn’t believe Executive Orders should be used for everything.
The administration maintains “the President doesn’t believe they [Executive Orders] should be used for everything” but Biden has no indications of stopping the Executive Actions anytime soon. He claims to be “undoing the damage Trump has done.” Part of the orders directly change policies put in place by Trump’s administration but others implement brand new policies. The official list of Executive Orders rolled out by the Biden administration up until January 28, 2021 include:
Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government (January 20, 2021)
Executive Order on Protecting the Federal Workforce and Requiring Mask-Wearing (January 20, 2021)
Executive Order on Organizing and Mobilizing the United States Government to Provide a Unified and Effective Response to Combat COVID-19 and to Provide United States Leadership on Global Health and Security (January 20, 2021)
Executive Order on the Revision of Civil Immigration Enforcement Policies and Priorities (January 20, 2021)
Executive Order on Revocation of Certain Executive Orders Concerning Federal Regulation (January 20, 2021)
Executive Order on Ensuring a Lawful and Accurate Enumeration and Apportionment Pursuant to the Decennial Census (January 20, 2021)
Executive Order on Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis (January 20, 2021)
Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identify or Sexual Orientation (January 20, 2021)
Executive Order on Ethics Commitments by Executive Branch Personnel (January 20, 2021)
Executive Order on Promoting COVID-19 Safety in Domestic and International Travel (January 21, 2021)
Executive Order on Improving and Expanding Access to Care and Treatments for COVID-19 (January 21, 2021)
Executive Order on Ensuring a Data-Driven Response to COVID-19 and Future High-Consequence Public Health Threats (January 21, 2021)
Executive Order on a Sustainable Public Health Supply Chain (January 21, 2021)
Executive Order on Ensuring an Equitable Pandemic Response and Recovery (January 21, 2021)
Executive Order on Supporting the Reopening and Continuing Operation of Schools and Early Childhood Education Providers (January 21, 2021)
Executive Order on Protecting Worker Health and Safety (January 21, 2021)
Executive Order on Establishing the COVID-19 Pandemic Testing Board and Ensuring a Sustainable Public Health Workforce for COVID-19 and Other Biological Threats (January 21, 2021)
Executive Order on Economic Relief Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic
Executive Order on Protecting the Federal Workforce (January 22, 2021)
Executive Order Enabling All Qualified Americans to Serve Their Country in Uniform (January 25, 2021)
Executive Order on Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers (January 25, 2021)
Executive Order on Reforming Our Incarceration System to Eliminate the Use of Privately Operated Criminal Detention Facilities (January 26, 2021)
Executive Order on Racial Equity (January 26, 2021)
Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad (January 27, 2021)
Executive Order on the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (January 27, 2021)
Executive Order on Strengthing Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act (January 28, 2021)
Executive Order President: Everything has been affected
The president rolled back things like work/volunteer requirements for Medicaid. He also lifted the ban on using federal funds for abortions. The Executive actions that have rolled out of the early Biden administration have affected a vast number of high paying jobs since he has done things such as stopping the building of the wall and pipeline. Biden gave 60 days for federal agencies to redirect wall funds. He also claims halting the building of the Keystone Pipeline would help with climate change and that new higher paying jobs would come from investments in clean energy companies. He claims these are not “Pie in the sky dreams.” For America’s sake let’s hope that is the truth.
We definitely see a radical and unprecedented beginning to an administration. Even the New York Times Editorial Board was quoted asking Biden to “ease up on the executive actions.” In the coming weeks and months the effects of these orders will be felt by many citizens and communities across America. We will have to see what orders or legislation, if any, come from the Biden administration in the coming weeks. But what we know now is that Biden is now known as the executive order President.
A class action lawsuit has been put in place by law firms representing users of the highly productive users of the Robinhood Market Inc. Users are now taking a full-on legal approach to the restriction of stock market shares associated with Wall Street firms and big business stockbroker corporations. Independent investors feel their rights are being violated with the changing of agreements that Robinhood had initial put into effect with the creating of the vial application.
The Wall Street journal has recently been reporting volatile trading transactions in the past weeks and has made a huge upset to the S&P 500, shifting rankings so fast that recovering has made it impossible for career investors to regain their assets. The people of the trading group have stuck together without mercy to big businesses, demanding equal opportunity in these large ticket investments. The shift has made such an impact that Wall Street investors have gone as far as personally attacking groups on media. Hedge Fund billionaire Leon Cooperman states that “This fair share is a B*llshit concept” believing that this is an attack on wealthy people. Cooperman believes “People are sitting at home getting checks from the government” and thinks that it’s inappropriate and “We all have to work together and pull together”.
Billionaires Upset
The wealth of relaxed billionaire investors fabricated this ideology that they are practically entitled to these funds and they shouldn’t have to stay on their feet to keep their investments. Big business corporate investors borrow millions of dollars in the expectation of creating multimillions more in revenue for themselves. This concept creates a terrible situation for the taxpaying workers of America. When large industries like this lose funds they really don’t lose out on wealth. The workers of America end up using their money in order to bail out industries that are “Too Big to Fail”. The American government has spent countless dollars from taxpayers in order to help the same companies that made terrible decisions for themselves while simultaneously blaming the people for their acts in the role.
The American people have wasted too much of our tax funds on bailouts for companies that just turn around and utilize more funds in order to start another industry, operating under the same conditions as the business that they just had fail. The United States was not built as a billionaire casino, it’s time we stop acting like it is and hold these businesses accountable for their poor investments. Many of these companies understand the terms and conditions that it takes to run a risky business such as investing in share yet still choose to do so, as Conservative Americans this is a right people have, but this right does not come with an insurance scapegoat that is paid for with taxpayer funds. Only time will tell how the Robinhood class action lawsuit will play out.
Written by: Charlie Alvitre
The United States has witnessed an uncanny amount of regulated business practices in the past couple years, and now the stock market. It’s not news to anyone of the shady business tactics that Wall Street investors utilize, but now more than ever is it obvious the extent of manipulation. Robinhood, is the latest trend that has been sweeping stocks utilizing a simple user-based investment system that turns average working-class members into Wall Street investors.
Earlier this week Reddit users have teamed up and constructed a gorilla style tactic where investors all dump funds in the same shares. This jacked up the price of companies such as AMC Entertainment, GameStop, Nokia and now a coin based crypto currency known as Doge coin. The restriction has been made to every user and will only allow users to sell their stocks for these companies rather than buy them. This is book definition of market manipulation, making an unfair advantage for big businesses.
Individual stock investors have been limited in purchase amounts so that big businesses can keep their high-cost stocks and not have to worry about losing value they bought on hedge funds. The idea of restricting American people from being able to participate in a bull market just shows the corruption that is circulating in our financial system. The American way is equal opportunity, which has been stripped from small time investors of their opportunity. Robinhood has gone to the extent of completely shutting off stocks in order to protect their own firm’s assets to ensure that they only profit off its users. Updates on the situation will be made promptly.
Written by: Charlie Alvitre
A recent spike in GameStop shares has made headlines soar. Investors from all over found their wealth in short stock purchases from trending phone applications such as Robinhood, Acorn, and even Cashapp. These are investment platforms that allow average everyday people to become Wall Street scale investors. Small time investors have found a light from above on a website known as Reddit where people discuss topics in forums that range from life hacks to “Do It Yourself” projects. One forum in particularly came from an unknown user with the screen name Wallstreetbets. This anonymous user was able to orchestrate a group of over 171,000 people to all buy stock shares at the same time, shooting the value of shares at a height of almost $500 per share, with an original price of around $125 per share.
Many of shareholders and investors will utilize a strategy know as Hedge Fund buying. This is a risky method that relies on borrowed money and investing in high-risk shares. Groups of investors will collaborate in order to take out loans and apply them into a Bull Market orientated method and hope to reap multimillion dollar profits. Anyone with a basic understanding in Economics can see where this can lead to problems and be a burden on taxpayers as the need for bailout is unavoidable. Reddit users decided to utilize WallStreet’s own tactics against them, banning together rocketing prices of shares and then selling out for personal gains.
This has developed into a frenzy of panic selling and investing applications completely shutting off availability to certain company shares, which is considered “Market Manipulation”. Consecutive companies such as AMC Entertainment which had an original share price of $3 last week rose too just under $25 per share. This helped AMC as they were experiencing devastating blows due to the COVID restrictions. AMC Entertainment was able to recover some of their losses due to the closing of every theater in the nation, but stockholders were not to please by this event.
The stock market is continuing to see collaborated share spikes by users across the world and many are wondering the extent this trend will take. These operations create an incredible number of gains and then completely bottom out. Wall Street asset managers are seeing the worst of business operations since the last stock market crash. Bailouts of companies may be seen in our near future, but how far should we go to help these companies who wanted to utilize these funds for personal gains. Future issues have yet to be resolved as many other corporations are soaring from this trend, the stock market has shifted in cost as well as Fortune 500 rankings. This may be the beginning of yet another regulated business process in the making.
Written by: Charlie Alvitre
Through this pandemic we’ve witness all sorts of setbacks, from finances to government failures, now our educators are proving the same. Chicago teachers’ unions are refusing to return to the classroom as they believe their health is at risk. Students of all ages have suffered from this pandemic and many have not seen the end of the problem. Students are removed from classrooms at the rate of two weeks every time they encounter a COVID positive patient, many students experienced this policy multiple times out of the year. At an alarming rate, children are being held back due to the lack of knowledge in the respective course material. So, the question at hand is, do we continue to punish the children?
The Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) took a vote and with an unanimous decision decided that remote learning was in their best interest. This would of course not be in the children’s best interest as it removes one on one learning with individual students and neglects the children that require extra assistance in education. With a union population of over 30,000 teachers, most decided that they would prefer to stay behind a camera for their safety. Educators in Chicago have even taken it as far as illegally protesting in order to refrain from being in contact with children.
On Tuesday January 26th educators held a meeting with the board (which they weren’t too afraid of safety to attend personally) and did not to come to an agreement. Many classes such as P.E., preforming arts, music, and other courses require in-person attendance for children to succeed in what they desire to do in school. Many teachers believe that they are in it to keep themselves safe but at what costs should one take before they hinder success of our future generation.
Public schools house many children that are underprivileged and strive through education in order to have a productive future. Refusal of education is not what this country was built on, the progress of our nation has had many bumps in the road from segregation to poverty plagued cities that did not have local schools. These situations were tackled by motivated educators who fought for a greater community and the greater good of our children. Now the ones standing in the way are teachers themselves. CTU members need to put students first and have their best interest at hand, because that is what our nations instructors are taught to do.
Written by: Charlie Alvitre
We the people of the United States know very little detailed information about the constitution. In 2019, a study showed only 15 percent of Americans knew the Constitution was written in 1786. Only 25 percent knew there are 27 amendments to the Constitution. As American citizens, we should know the rights our country was founded on and the ones that were added on along the way. In our last installment we looked at the Bill of Rights and how that affects us in modern times. The next nine amendments will show us things such as the era of reconstruction after the Civil War and Women’s Suffrage. We will dive into whether or not we still use the 18th amendment and how the way senators are elected changed since the 17th amendment came into play.
11. The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
This amendment exists to keep the federal government from having too much power. In 1793 during Chisholm V. Georgia it was ruled that a state could be sued. This was overturned by the 11th amendment. In basic modern terms the 11th amendment means that if you live in one state you can’t sue another state in federal court.
12. The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; — The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; — The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.– The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
Before the 12th amendment the way the president and vice president were chosen when electors would vote for two candidates. These would be the people they believed to be best qualified as president. Whoever got the most votes would be president and the runner up would be vice president. This system leaves an opening for the president and vice president to be of different parties, which is what happened 1796. It also creates a bigger risk of a tie which is what happened in 1800. The decision was then left up to the house of representatives. The 12th amendment made it so there would be two distinct ballots for president and vice president. It also gives us the favorite son clause which states that states can’t vote for two candidates from their state; they have to vote for one candidate that isn’t from their state.
13. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
The Emancipation Proclamation, issued by republican president Abraham Licoln before his assasination in April of 1865, freed all persons held as slaves in 1863. Then the 13th amendment, ratified on december 6, 1865, ended involuntary servitude and prevented slavery from ever happening again. The only exception being when an individual is being punished for a crime. You can see Modern statistics for prison labor here.
14. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Over all the 14th amendment, ratified July 9, 1868, fixed the prior supreme court ruling of Dred Scott V. John F. A. Sandford. This ruling said that African-Americans could not be citizens. This amendment gives anyone born in the United States citizenship to the United States and the state in which they were born. We also see the federal government protecting citizen’s rights of life and liberty on a state level. These rights were botched when Plessy V. Ferguson deemed “separate but equal” to be constitutional. It wasn’t until Brown V. Board of Education in 1954 that we saw equal rights truly began to form and the Civil Rights movement began. This amendment also prevents anyone who has previously served in office from holding any office a second time unless a two-thirds vote of the house says otherwise. This was mainly written in order to prevent confederate leaders from taking office. We also see a forgiveness of the debt left from the civil war and the voting age being set to 21. In modern day this amendment protects us from the state government taking our rights as free citizens. The 14th amendment has influenced everything from the Civil Rights movement to the fight for rights of those in the LGBTQIA+ communities.
15. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
This amendment was ratified February 3, 1870 and gives the right to vote to men of color. At the time this was written the USA was going through reconstruction after the civil war. The House, at the time, was run by the Republicans and they wanted African Americans to have the right to vote before southern democrats came back and gained control of part of the House. However due to state level Black Codes and Jim Crow laws that were designed so that African Americans wouldn’t have equal rights made it hard for them to actually vote. It wasn’t until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that we really saw a difference in voting for people of color.
16. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Before the 16th amendment was ratified February 3, 1913 the supreme court had deemed income tax as unconstitutional during Pollock V. Farmers’ Loan and Trust Company in 1895. This leads to tariffs and a “direct” tax. These both made people very unhappy which paved the way for the 16th amendment which would now allow for graduated income tax rather than using tariffs and direct taxes. This means today we are federally taxed based on the amount of money we make rather than the census or individual items.
17. The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.
This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.
The 17th amendment was written so that we would have a truly democratic government. Before the ratifying of the 17th amendment on April 8, 1913 senators were chosen by the state legislature which led to buying seats, and corrupt bargaining. This amendment gives us the right to vote for who will represent our state in the senate. Each state is given two representatives in the senate.
18. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.
The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
Ratified on January 16, 1919, the 18th amendment prohibited the manufacture, sale, and transportation of intoxicating liquors. This amendment was later changed by the 21st amendment which we will look at in the final installment of this series. This amendment came from the rampant alcoholism of the early 1900’s. The anti-saloon league, who were backed by people from all different beliefs, ended up helping write the law that goes with the 18th amendment called the volstead act. This amendment does not affect us today.
19. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
The 19th amendment was ratified August 18, 1919 and gave women the right to vote. The National American Woman’s Suffrage Association, ran by Carrie Chapman Catt, was one of the bigger influencers of this amendment. They were seen as a patriotic group by the Woodrow Wilson administration. With Wilson seeing the movement positively he pushed for the 19th amendment after the war. Today this amendment still gives women the right to vote.
The Constitution and the amendments are our building blocks as a country. All decisions in law-making are decided around our rights as people. Those rights are given to us in the constitution and amendments. Knowing your rights as a free American is important so that you know where we came from and how our country is supposed to run. This way, you can be an essential protector of freedom in America. In our next, and final, installment we will look at the repeal of prohibition, how many terms a president can serve, and the lowering of the voting age just to name a few.
Trump and Biden disagree in terms of foreign policy. One of the most prominent is the issue of Iran. Iran remains a dangerous actor and the world’s leading state sponsor of terror. Israeli agents found and shot al-Qaeda’s second highest leader on the streets of Tehran. Iran fuels proxy wars in the Middle East, fights to protect dictators, and props up other international outlaws with illicit trade. Iran launders money, takes hostages, and plots assassinations. Iran could become even more dangerous with the wrong set of circumstances. Fortunately, the Trump administration has handed Biden a better set of relations in the Middle East than the Obama administration handed Trump in 2016. We are closer to our allies, Saudi Arabia and Israel, against Iran, and Trump’s sanctions against Iran put the country through economic hardship. This weakened Iran and made the country more willing to cooperate for fear of worse sanctions. Trump called these sanctions “maximum pressure.”
Iran is less afraid of Biden, who promises to revive the Obama-era Iran Nuclear Deal. Mohammed-Hossein Koshvaght, a former official at the Ministry of Culture and Guidance sees that “today until Trump leaves the White House is the most dangerous period for Iran”. Trump’s sanctions left Iran desperate for relief, and Biden plans to lift sanctions in exchange for the nuclear non-proliferation agreement and “strict compliance”.
Problems with the Nuclear Deal
The problems sited with the nuclear deal include expiration dates on key restrictions, a lack of on-demand inspections of nuclear facilities, and the ability for Iran to maintain its nuclear enrichment capabilities. The agreement is accused of not addressing Iran’s accelerating missile program and giving Tehran the financial resources to sponsor regional aggression and terrorism. Iran also has the ability to cheat, calling supposed “strict compliance” into question. The International Atomic Energy Agency has evidence that Iran is concealing undeclared nuclear material, activities, and sites. Biden will also face difficulty getting Iran to return to compliance as Iranian officials are demanding compensation for sanctions that blocked the business that Iran was supposed to have under the deal, and returning without this compensation would be an uphill battle.
Biden has considered revising the deal, but he thinks he must go back to the old deal before creating a new framework. The problem is that the Iran Nuclear Deal would lift the most punishing sanctions and get rid of the economic leverage that the US currently has over Iran. Biden will, however, enforce “targeted” sanctions for Iran. Obama has credited the current sanctions with bringing Iran to the negotiating table.
Re-entering the agreement is also problematic in the sense that the UN restrictions on transferring arms came terminated in October 2020. The Trump administration issued an executive order threatening sanctions against Russia and China if they shipped weapons to Iran. If this executive order had not been signed, arms sales would already be underway. Biden has not said whether he would or would not enforce those sanctions.
Wendy Sherman
Biden has nominated Wendy Sherman as the Deputy Secretary of State and given her the task of reviving the nuclear deal. She was seen by some as weak on Iran and allowed sunset clauses in the previous agreement. This means that the Iran Nuclear Deal would have to be re-negotiated every so often.
Trump, Israel, and Saudi Arabia
Trump has supported Israel and Netanyahu in the continued annexation of Palestinian territory. Trump has played the role of the diplomat in helping the UAE and Bahrain establish full diplomatic relations with Israel. This has solidified Israel’s position in the region. Trump has also brokered deals and generally supported Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia, in turn, has invested hundreds of billions of dollars in the US. Both Israel and Saudi Arabia are enemies of Iran’s, and Saudi Arabia has led the “fight against radical Islamic terrorism”. Biden wants to moderate the support of Netanyahu, weakening our alliance, as well as give Mohammed bin Salman a harder time. The US would lose such a strong foothold in the Middle East without the support of these two countries.
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps
There was bipartisan to label the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization, and Congress currently imposes sanctions against Iran for hosting them in the country. Trump ordered the drone strike that killed Qassem Soleimani, the then commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Quds Force. Soleimani was responsible for killing more than 600 American military personnel and many more innocent civilians across the Middle East. Thousands more were wounded under his orders. Soleimani directed a barrage of rocket attacks against the US Embassy Baghdad. Soleimani also helped Bashar al-Assad retain power in Syria. While he served, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards detained and murdered countless Iranian protestors. Biden has criticized the killing of this man. Only time will tell how even more differences are formed between Trump vs Biden Iran dealings.
Music has a way of bringing people together; but in this time of imposed social distancing, what are we to do? Also, it is good to know that even though our physical presence at live performances has been taken off the table as a show of support, we are far from helpless to the hazards that the virus and subsequently imposed restrictions have brought to society as a whole. From signed artists to your local music scene, there’s been a large impact made. There has been a hindrance in the sense of the musicianship and the music community as a whole; spanning beyond the behind the scenes music makers, this has had an effect on everyone from executives to audience members, and everyone in between. The pandemic has had an ever-outreaching effect on musicians and fans alike. Having concerts in venues being suspended while the concern over the pandemic has heightened, everyone from the performers to the audience has been affected. So how else has this era had an effect?
“I used to go to at least two concerts a month before Covid… I still have 6 tickets from the past year that I never had the chance to use.“
-Alex Weaver: Live Music Enthusiast, Detroit, Michigan
The Financial Impact
The music industry is worth about $50 billion annually. Now if we break down how the music industry achieves such astronomical revenues, there are basically two main sources from which we prosper: Live Music (Ticket Sales) & Digital Sales (buying the newest releases of your favorite artists). Imagine that you’re a business owner—though many of you may not need to imagine—and one half of your revenue sources have been swiftly swept out from beneath your feet! What are you to do? What would you expect would happen? As you could ascertain, physical sales (which account for 25% of the industry’s revenue) have in fact dropped by one-third.
The Struggling Artist
There are many different ways the artists and industry have seen a result: the camaraderie between bands on the road, the absence of ticket-sale revenue, etc. The nostalgia of the live venue concerts is something that plagues both audiences and performers alike. The fans have suffered from the circumstances as well, but as a devout fan to your favorite band or your local music scene, you may have wondered what way you can show support for the musicians.
What Are We To Do
A lot of the community of any artist’s fan base has transferred into an online forum, remember to follow and interact with your favorite social media page. They always share updates on their progress, new music coming out, their individual or group philanthropic efforts. Even watching or listening to the new content does help the artist achieve popularity online. Also, many people only buy band merchandise when they see it at a show, but remember to find their own availability on the band’s website; this includes the new masks some artists have employed as a merchandising opportunity. There’s also been an implementation of virtual concerts many artists have offered either for a price, or for what I like to think of as “emotional relief” of some sort, a morale boost for their fans. I do understand, however, that this is not a reasonable replacement, at least in the grand scheme of things. We must remember these compromises and alternate tactics are not based in permanence. Bringing the performance to the audience, as opposed to the audience coming to the performance is a temporary accommodation. Although, you must admit, coming from a “top-down” mindset, it’s as rewarding as it is challenging to make such concessions. There’s something to this era that has been forcing the hand of creativity in a positive direction. Coming up with new, fresh ways to simulate that esoteric sensation of being in a crowd of fanatical fellowship, cheering on your favorite musicians seems to be the contemporary frontier.
So Where Does This Leave Us?
In a time of social distancing, we don’t need to remain distant in our community, our passions, our creative influences or our emotional outlets. There may be more idealized simulation methods lying just beyond the horizon. As we patiently wait for these advancements to expand our physical realm in order to shrink the virtual realm; just remember, even though we’ve separated ourselves from one another, does not mean that we’re “separate”. Never forget, even when you’re feeling helpless in the midst of the pandemic, your favorite artists are still there cherishing the support you do provide, and that you are completely free to utilize all these outlets as much as possible for your beloved musicians out there. I’m comfortable in speaking for the entirety of the music industry in saying that they do indeed appreciate your support.
Parler has been in the news and on headlines recently with its current suspension from the Apple Store and Amazon Web Services. Tech giants have censored the app due to users’ involvement in the capital protests, though protestors used multiple social media platforms to plan the storming of the US capital. With the ever-increasing surveillance and censorship of tech giants, more and more people are either turning off social media or looking for new ways to express themselves.
What is Parler?
Parler is a relatively new social media platform, which markets itself as being pro-free speech and an alternative to more mainstream social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter. Parler has generally lower restrictions on users’ content than other social media platforms, which other social media platforms will oftentimes ban people for posting what they consider conservative or far-right views. People may post with a wider range of viewpoints. In this sense, Parler is less biased than its counterparts.
History and Media Censorship
Parler was founded in August 2018 by John Matze Jr. and Jared Thompson in Henderson, Nevada. The site gets its name from the French word “parler” meaning “to speak”. By May 2019, Parler grew to around 100,000 users, around 40,000 of which were brought by Candace Owens, a conservative activist. The site attracted Republican personalities and those who had been banned from other social media platforms. Matze focused his marketing efforts on conservatives, due to the high percentage joining the service. This labeled the app conservative, though it was originally intended to be and still can be bipartisan.
Supporters of the Saudi Arabian Prince Mohammed bin Salman went by the thousands to Parler, after being banned from Twitter. Twitter labeled supporters of the Saudi government “inauthentic” and an “electronic army” pushing the Saudi Arabian government’s agenda. Twitter also flagged posts by Trump about mail-in ballots as “potentially misleading” and posts about the George Floyd protests as “glorifying violence”. English media personality Katie Hopkins was permanently suspended from Twitter after violating their policies on “hateful conduct”, and she later joined Parler. In response, thirteen members of Parliament joined, and some British conservative activists endorsed the site over Twitter. Because Trump was permanently suspended from Twitter, Parler became the top downloaded app on the Apple store on January 8.
A number of major political figures have joined Parler, including Texas Senator Ted Cruz (R), Ohio Representative Jim Jordan (R), New York Representative Elise Stefanik (R), and former UN ambassador Nikki Haley. Jair Bolsonaro, the President of Brazil, joined Parler, and a number of people from Brazil joined Parler.
Parler had become somewhat of a safe haven for people of right and far right views to express themselves. That is, before it was taken down.
Potential Resurrection
Though the app has been taken down on the Google Play Store and the Apple Store, there is still hope for an online presence. After Amazon suspended Parler from its Web Services, Parler looked for a new service provider. Parler was denied by both major and minor cloud service providers. Parler registered its domain with Epik, which is known for allowing services to far-right web pages. The site was hosted by the Russian cloud services company DDos-Guard. So far, there is only a static page that says that it will come back, reaffirms its message, and has a link to a Fox interview with John Matze. Matze claims that their “return is inevitable due to hard work and persistence against all odds.” He also claims that “not one Parler employee has quit”. Matze also promised to have Parler back online by the end of the month.
Matze saw the website registration with Epik as a key signifier that Parler’s return is realistic. The website now also hits a working server, and a single piece of information is returned. Matze also saw it as a “big milestone” to be able to post updates on Parler and that he would “try to get an update out every day” so “people can stay up to date with the site”.With the site being mired in controversy, a person cannot google “Parler” and find the site. Instead, parler.com must be directly typed into the search bar at the top of the browsing window.
Parler Social Media App Potential
With the ever-increasing censorship on social media and fact-checking, Parler has the potential to become a major app. Its popularity on the Apple store after Trump’s Twitter ban and its listing as a top free app on Google Play prove this. Though many users are conservative, Parler is willing to host people of any view on its website- including conspiracy theorists and supporters of foreign governments. The key element is simply getting the website back online.
Written by: Miranda Smith
COVID-19 has been a major struggle for communities and businesses across the states, restrictions make it nearly impossible for small restaurant owners to operate at a successful rate. At the beginning of this pandemic, state governments took it upon themselves to enforce regulations on its economy which gave restaurant owners a devastating blow. Carrie Savage is the owner and operator of Grandpa’s Café located in Berthoud, Colorado, with a staff of over fifteen employees this small business is the sole source of income for many families and closing shop would leave bills unpaid and mouths unfed.
Difficult Decision
Grandpa’s Café is a great place to swing by for a hearty meal and after work drink, that is until the Colorado State Government decided to pull the Liquor license due to uncomplying with state issued health regulations. Carrie Savage was pinned with the difficult decision to shut down business and render all her employees unemployed or stay open and try to maintain operation as usual. Carrie decided that it wasn’t an option to shut down and leave her workers without financial support. The business continued as usual and state health inspectors sited Grandpa’s Café for non-compliance, this meant Carrie’s liquor license would be suspended on spot.
State Government regulated business codes have made a huge impact on small businesses in the past year, many of which ended up closing indefinitely. Many Americans were left jobless at home trying to make ends meet with the change they had left from their last check. It wasn’t until the federal government stepped in to organize a plan to stabilize unemployed households, but by then it was already too late. State Unemployment benefits promoted a healthy check for a short period of time, but many business owners had already suffered a significant loss from business costs. Restaurant managers had to prepare for an anticipated reopening that government officials kept promising but never executed. This costs thousands of dollars in food and supplies that had to be discarded from expiration.
Wrongfully Regulated Business: Mom and Pop Shops
Freedom of business is a huge requirement for sustaining a successful country. When restrictions are placed on businesses it’s not the large companies who suffer, it’s the small “Mom and Pop” shops that laid the foundation for the development of our country. Outsourced imports coming into our country has made a huge impact on the workforce of our nation. The cost of importing goods is way cheaper than it is to have the same goods made in the USA. Many facilities utilize this to their advantage to stop the possibility of violating the new conditions enacted on business.
Small business owners are known to have a general care for their employees as opposed to big businesses that are too large to fail. Carrie Savage is one of those owners who will go above and beyond to ensure her workers are not struggling to make ends meet. The decision to stay open and maintain operating hours has made a huge issue for Carrie as now she faces legal action. American small business owners have already suffered enough for this prolonged restricted economy, how much further should they have to go before they lose everything? “If I win, all small businesses win” Savage proclaims. The original government plan to restrict business was put in place to protect American people from health concerns, but now has become a democratic party scapegoat for their bipartisan plan to take full control of government.
Carrie Savage is not the only American owner that is facing consequences from government actions. Many Americans alike have suffered from cutbacks and restricted work hours, not to mention the unpaid 2 weeks of leave that employees face every time they are believed to have symptoms. Business regulations are meant for the protection of employees and customers, these restrictions no longer become protective when they are being utilized as a plan for personal political party support. Freedom to operate in this pandemic is necessary to lower the chances of another depression. Government officials, predominantly from the Democrats, have already proven statistically they are not capable of protecting the American people both financially and physically. The numbers of Covid-19 victims have significantly risen even after the government has been wrongfully regulating business.
Headed To Court
Carrie Savage has taken initiative to stop the restriction of business by going to court to protect not only her rights, but the rights of other business owners facing the same situation. “I am suing the state for my freedoms”. You can support Carrie and Grandpa’s Café by stopping by and purchasing one of their new daily specials that will be available from 7am-8pm Monday-Friday and will have separate purchasing costs. The takeout specials are as followed, take time to support small community business and the American tradition. Located at Grandpa’s Café call and orders can be placed at (970)-532-2254.
Promotion:
- Grandpa’s Burger and Fries $9
- Chicken Fried Steak, Mashed Potatoes, and Biscuit $8
- Smothered Chorizo Breakfast Burrito $7
Grandpa’s Café Address:
903 Mountain Ave, Berthoud, Colorado 80513
Written by: Charlie Alvitre
A top nuclear scientist named Mohsen Fakhrizadeh was killed on November 27 in his car. The Iranian government downplayed his role in the nuclear program, claiming that he was important due to his involvement in research for coronavirus test kits. He was crucial in Iran’s nuclear program in the early 2000s. Admiral Shamkhani and the Iranian media claim that Fakhrizadeh was killed by remote, electronic weapons, though Iranian versions of what happened are questionable and have changed significantly. However, it appears that Fakhrizadeh was mortally wounded when his car was sprayed with bullets in the town of Absard. A truck is reported to have exploded from a bomb inside of it during the attack. Iranian intelligence and security groups were aware of people plotting to assassinate Fakhrizadeh. Admiral Shamkhani claimed that the Mujahadeen-e Khalq and Isreal are potentially to blame. The Mujahadeen-e Khalq are a left-wing Muslim group who opposed the Shah of Iran, though they have disarmed. They see Maryam Rajavi as the true president of Iran and oppose the government. An unnamed Isreali official was quoted as having said that “Iran’s aspirations for nuclear weapons, promoted by Mr. Fakhrizadeh, posed such a menace that the world should thank Isreal”.
Israel to Blame?
The Iranian as well as the people within the American government blamed Israel. In 2018, a team of Isreali commandos with high-powered torches blasted their way into a vault of a heavily guarded warehouse deep in Iran and made off with 5,000 pages of top-secret papers on the country’s nuclear program. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu cited the documents to hint at equally bold operations to come. He singled out Fakhrizadeh as the leader of Iran’s covert attempts to assemble a nuclear weapon.
Escalation and De-escalation of Tensions
There have been multiple recent attacks against Iran coming from both the US and Israel, and Fakhrizadeh is seen as the most recent victim. Iran has been behind a recent rocket attack against a US embassy in Iraq. Iran also attacked two military bases in Iraq. Israel has recently deployed a submarine in the Persian Gulf in a message of deterrence to Iran. For decades, Israel has embraced a strategy of targeted assassinations in trying to slow down potential progress toward the development of a nuclear weapon among its hostile neighbors. Israeli intelligence agencies have been linked to the killings of scientists as far back as Egypt in the 1960s. Iran first accused Israel of killing one of its scientists when he dropped dead in his laboratory after a poisoning in 2007. Later a series of killings of Iranian scientists were attributed by Iran to Israel. There were efforts at de-escalation after the initial attacks in Iraq, but these have been halted by recent aggression and the US’s alliance to Israel. Trump has warned Iraq after the recent attack on the US embassy. Continual conflict may ultimately lead to war, though there has been repeated de-escalation.
Trump’s Sanctions
Trump has exerted high economic sanctions against Iran or “maximum pressure”, creating desperation in Iranian leadership to get some form of relief (as sanctions are supposed to). To many Iranians, that has made Trump’s last months in office as no time to lash back and risk renewed hostilities. Former official of the Iranian Ministry of Culture and Guidance, Mohammad-Hossein Khoshvaght considers that “From today until Trump leaves the White House is the most dangerous period for Iran.” Many Iranians fear Trump more than Biden, who promised to lift sanctions in exchange for a halt to nuclear research that might produce a weapon. Trump left the Iran Nuclear Deal, claiming that it was a one-sided agreement. As such, the US is not currently bound by its rules. Iran has stayed in the agreement, though it has violated its rules. Biden promises to re-enter the agreement if Iran complies with the deal’s restrictions. Biden also wants more diplomacy with Iran, criticizing the killing of Qassem Soleimani, a major general in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Trump ordered more troops sent to Iran and the surrounding area after the withdrawal from the Iran Nuclear Deal increased tensions with Iran. Biden wants less to do with counterterrorism in the region and less focus on working with local allies. Biden has called for an end to the support of Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen, which Trump has supported.
Iran Nuclear Deal
Under the Iran Nuclear Deal, or JCPOA, Iran was to limit low-enriched uranium by 97 percent for fifteen years. This figure was supposed to be enough for civilian power and research but not building a nuclear weapon. However, the number of centrifuges allowed was sufficient for a nuclear weapon but not nuclear power. For ten years, the act limits Iran’s centrifuges by two thirds, having Iran place them in storage. The only plant allowed to enrich uranium was the Natanz plant. The problem with this act is the enforcement mechanism. The JCPOA does not require Iran to submit to International Atomic Energy inspections of facilities and military sites where nuclear activities are suspected to have occurred. Iran, a serial cheater on its nuclear and international obligations, can delay inspections of such facilities for up to 24 days, giving it significant time to hide evidence of covert nuclear activities. Trump got out of the nuclear non-proliferation agreement in May 2018, but Iran stayed in the agreement in fear of sanctions. Saudi Arabia and Israel praised the US for leaving the agreement, though it is unclear yet how Iran will react or if tensions will continue to escalate with a Biden administration.
January 6, 2021 was a dark day that will go down history books. A day that began as peaceful for many people who attended President Trump’s “Save America” ended when a group of people breached the capitol building during the final Electoral count. One person was killed by Capitol police, Ashley Babbit, she was a Veteran. Three others passed away during the event due to “medical emergencies.” The last time a large-scale breach occurred was in 1814 when British burned the capitol building. How did a day that started off with “a feeling camaraderie” according to an eye witness turn so tragic?
Capital Breached Timeline
Both sides of the media have erupted with information about when things happened. President Trump began speaking around noon and spoke for over an hour. There has been media reporting as early as 1:15 PM EST that a group began to fight with security. This seems a little off because the walk from where Trump spoke to the capitol is around 30-45 minutes on a good day according to Google maps and an eyewitness account. Did these people not finish listening to Trump speak or does the media have the timeline wrong? Associated Press says the breach occurred at 2:30 EST. This seems like a more realistic timeline given that our witness said as late as 2 PM things seemed very calm with “a family-like” atmosphere around the capitol.
Shortly after 2 PM EST the protestors made their way into the various chambers of the capitol building. Right before 3 PM EST Michael Waltz told Fox News the house floor had been evacuated due to “protesters penetrating the capitol and tear gas had been deployed” shortly after, a curfew was announced for 6 PM to 6 AM EST.
Many members of congress were evacuated. During Stinchfield on Newsmax, Texas Republican Pat Fallon said he and a few other members stayed back and used hand sanitizer dispensers as clubs attempting to help security and hold back the people who were breaking windows. Why did Capitol police seem to just let people in, in videos that have surfaced on Newsmax during an interview with the Founder of “Baby Lives Matter,” Taylor Hansen?
This would not be the first instance of lax security in the Capitol. In 1954 a group of four Puerto Rican Nationalists were able to bring their handguns past security in the visitors’ gallery. They wounded five congress members. Those people were angry the U.S. had control of Puerto Rico. Who were the people that stormed the Capitol on January 6? What were they angry about?
Capital Breached Theories
The results of the election have caused widespread anger amongst Trump supporters. Were these Trump supporters lashing out in anger; Disgruntled voters who felt the election and the process that makes us America was cheated and stolen from Trump? The president and his daughter took to twitter pleading for peace. The president’s tweets and a video Twitter later took down. The president has been currently locked out of his accounts by Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. Trump stands for law and order so it seems a little odd that his followers, even disgruntled, would do something that even conservative outlets are calling “an act of terrorism.”
This brings us to our second theory, Antifa. Republican Mo Brooks of Alabama, in an interview for Newsmax said that intelligence had come in before these events that Antifa was going to dress as Trump supporters and come to the rally to cause trouble. Could this have been one last attempt to portray Trump and his followers as evil?
Urging Peace
As the story progresses different theories of who or why will come to light as investigations continue. The only thing we can know for sure right now is the President and the Republican urges PEACE. Washington wants a peaceful transfer of power. The actions of that small group of people does not reflect what Trump or any of the Republican party stands for in any way, shape, or form. We value the constitution, law and order, and getting things done in congress in an honest and fair way.
During an afternoon event on the eve of the U.S. Senate runoff election in Georgia President-elect Joe Biden Spoke in support of Democratic candidates Jon Ossoff and Reverend Raphael Warnock. Early in his speech he talks about how the people of Georgia can “chart the course, not just for the next four years, but for the next generation.” This is very true. The people of Georgia hold a unique power right now; they have the ability to change who holds the power in Washington.
During this campaign-like speech the President-elect brought up the $2,000 stimulus checks. He promised, “If you send Jon and the Reverend to Washington those $2,000 checks will go out the door restoring hope and decency and honor for so many people who are struggling right now. And if you send Senators Perdue and Loeffler back to Washington, those checks will never get there. It’s just that simple. The power is literally in your hands.”
What would happen if democratic nominees Jon Ossaff and Rev. Raphael Warnock were actually elected? There are 100 seats in the Senate; Republicans hold a Majority currently. Even if only one of the races ends favorably for Republicans they would be able to keep that majority. Keeping the Majority means they will be able to keep a check on policies backed by the Democratic party. If the Republicans lose the Senate, with the seats in the House already being Majority Democrat, we will see a leftward powershift in Washington.
This would help the Democratic party tremendously. Biden makes that point by saying, “With their votes in the Senate, we’ll be able to make the progress we need to make on jobs, on health care, on justice on the environment, on so many important things,” referring to the Democratic candidates. Biden also said electing the candidates would end “the gridlock that has gripped Washington and this nation.”
Both Republican candidates David Perdue and Kelly Leoffler publicly backed the $2,000 checks along with President Trump and the Democratic party last month. The stand still came when Kentucky Republican Mitch McConnell, current Senate Majority Leader, blocked the checks. The current agreed upon amount, which has begun hitting bank accounts across the nation, is $600. McConnell blocked the $2,000 checks suggesting instead that the Senate should begin to examine the integrity of elections and limits on big technology companies.
Donald Trump not only threatened to veto the legislation all together but took to Twitter saying “$2000 for our great people, not $600!” Later that same day Perdue tweeted “President @realdonaldtrump is right — I support this push for $2,000 in direct relief for the American people.” Leoffler also sent out a tweet saying “I agree with @realDonaldTrump — we need to deliver $2,000 direct relief checks to the American people.”
The future of our nation depends on the people of Georgia. This is one of the reasons why voting is important. It is up to the voters of the peach state which direction our country will go. Their votes have the ability to shape the future of this generation.
Written by: Erinn Malloy
We the people of the United States know very little detailed information about the constitution. In 2019, a study showed only 15 percent of Americans knew the Constitution was written in 1786. It gets a little better, 25 percent knew there are 27 amendments to the Constitution. As American citizens, we should know the rights our country was founded on and the ones that were added on along the way. The first ten amendments are known as the Bill of Rights. These rights were given to us, to keep the government in its place, and make us a free nation. The founding fathers didn’t want the government to take over too much like the British. It is important to know all your rights as an individual free America. In this three part series, we will look at all 27 amendments starting with the Bill of Rights.
- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment one is probably the most important. The freedoms it establishes are what make Americans a free people. In short, this means in modern times, we have freedom to go to the church of our choice, post how we feel on social media, or even peacefully protest things we decide are wrong. The first amendment was written by people who left the grip of the monarchy. They wanted to make sure the citizens and anyone else in America, were free to express themselves and their concerns with the country’s leaders. This makes us one of the freest countries in the world.
2. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The second amendment was written to protect the people from the government. When this was written there was a fear of the government becoming too powerful and citizens not having a way to defend themselves as in Europe where citizens could not own guns. The founding fathers decided citizens must never be disarmed in case they needed to protect their country from a tyrant taking over. In modern times, this gives you the right to own firearms in order to defend life and liberty. There is a lot of debate about civilians owning automatic and military grade weapons. If you consider the purpose of the second amendment then you would realize that banning civilians from owning military grade weapons or weapons in general goes against the second amendment. The second amendment makes us free and helps make sure that freedom is protected at all costs.
3. No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
This is one of the least litigated amendments in modern times. This means that you do not have to house troops in your home against your will. This is different from warranted investigations and the entry of government officials to your home. This solely means that you do not have to house and provide for troops. They have separate accommodations. Currently, we have military housings and barracks that troops occupy.
4. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The fourth amendment is where entry of your home comes into play. This protects you from illegal search and seizure of your personal space and items. In order for you to be searched there must be probable cause, a warrant must state what they are looking for exactly and where they are able to search for it. When this was written, the writers were remembering “general warrants” the British had for troops to search for things the colonists had not paid taxes for. This keeps the police from being able to enter your home without a warrant. They can still search your car or detain you in a public space with probable cause or given permission to search. Any evidence that is in plain view of officers is subject to search and seizure.
5. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
You may hear this in hollywood as “I plead the fifth.” This means you don’t have to incriminate yourself and tell the government anything about a crime you may or may not have committed. You don’t have to answer questions that would incriminate you in any way. When this was written, the colonists wanted to make sure every person had the ability to be innocent until the state proved otherwise. It is up to the state to prove guilt, you don’t have to prove you’re innocent. This amendment was one of the big factors in the decision to begin to mirandize people who were arrested in 1966 after a court case in Arizona. This amendment also says the government has the ability to take your property granted they give you just compensation; they can take your property as long as it benefits the public good. This means if a builder wants to come and build a hospital the government could pay you for your house and make you move since the hospital would benefit the public.
6. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
In this amendment, we are given the right to having a trial. This means you can’t be sent to prison without having a trial with evidence proving your guilt. To prove guilt, the burden of evidence is put upon the state to provide. Your neighbor can’t say that you broke into his house and police come and throw you in prison for years. You can thank amendment six. We are also given a right to an attorney and witnesses to testify for your side. Cases rarely go to a jury in modern times since plea bargains are often offered for lesser sentencing to save time and money in the system. When this was written, the founding fathers were dealing with the British judging crimes in a secret night court away from public view. They wanted to be sure we would have a right to public trials so that the government would be kept honest. This amendment applies to both federal and state cases.
7. In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
In modern times, this amendment gives you the right to a jury in federal civil court cases. This applies only to federal court. This was written to ensure that we would always have the right to a jury whether it be a criminal or civil case. The burden of proof in these cases is on the plaintiff (the person making the claim). They must provide a “preponderance” of evidence showing the claim has a 50 percent chance, or greater, of being true. When this was written, in order for a civil case to go to court it had to be over 20 dollars which was a month’s wages. In modern times, in order for a case to go to federal court, there must be a dispute of $75,000 or greater.
8. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
This was written in response to the torture tactics of the British. There is a lot of debate on what constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in modern times. Some people believe the amendment is basically irrelevant because it’s based on a time that was very different than today. Others think the definition of cruel and unusual punishment should change with socially accepted morals. There is a lot of debate when it comes to the death penalty and the excessive use of solitary confinement in the prison system. There have been cases of prison conditions for inmates on death row and in solitary confinement that were found to go against the eighth amendment.
9. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
This means any rights not established in the Constitution are also protected. That means you are entitled to exercise your rights as an individual. There was a lot of debate with the original authors of the amendment. James Wilson did not want to include a bill of rights in the constitution at all. This was based on a fear that if the rights were put on paper those would be the only ones we would get and the government would take over every other aspect. This amendment was put in place to prevent that from happening. Even the rights that aren’t officially recognised, are protected.
10. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
This amendment exists to keep the federal government from taking powers that aren’t laid out in the constitution. In modern day, this is used to be sure any powers taken by the federal government do not go against what is already established. This amendment is basically a safety net ensuring that all other amendments are looked at when the federal government is making laws.
The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are our building blocks as a country and the rights of today. All decisions in law-making are decided around our rights as people. Knowing your rights as a free American is important so that you know where we came from and how our country is supposed to run. This way, you can be an essential protector of freedom in America. In our next installment, we will look at the abolishment of slavery, the prohibition of liquor, and women’s right to vote just to name a few.
Author: Erinn Malloy
President Elect, Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden has recently announced that he is the center of investigation for “tax affairs” by federal prosecutors and only time will tell how this will play out. This information was discovered just before Joe Biden was confirmed by the Electoral College as the President Elect. Publicly available document show that Hunter Biden along with his ex-wife Kathleen Buhle had an Internal Revenue Service lien on them for unpaid taxes totaling $112,805,09, until this past March. Separately, Hunter Biden had individual income tax liens of almost $453,890 which were placed on him by the District of Columbia, back in July. That lien was due to taxes owed for 2017-2018.
During the presidential election, republican candidate Trump and his supporters made Hunter Biden the center of political attacks in connection financial dealings with other countries. President Trump and fellow republicans have tried to characterize the president – elect as corrupt, due to Hunter Biden’s financial dealings with other countries. The Trump administration has been investigating the Biden’s for a while.
Back in 2015, Hunter Biden served as a board member at Burisma, which is a Ukrainian energy company, where he earned a reported $83,000 a month. The Justice Department has also been examining some of Hunter Biden’s business dealings with China and the Ukraine, along with other claims of money laundering and financial dealings. During the election campaign, Hunter Biden was the focus of complaints for business dealings with both China and the Ukraine. Other emails have shown that Hunter Biden pursued shady business dealings involving China’s largest energy company, including one that he described as “interesting for me and my family.” President Elect, Joe Biden has called the investigation into his son “foul play”, the president Elect has also said that “I’m proud of my son”.
Attorney General William Barr said that he saw no reason to appoint a special council to investigate allegations against Hunter Biden. Although Hunter has struggled with financial issues in the past, with his past as an attorney, he has said that he will fully cooperate with all investigations. Only time will tell how this investigation will go.
What are your thoughts 1360 KHNC audience?
Author: Gary Taylor
President select Joe Biden has made huge claims of taking on big oil companies during the 2020 Presidential debate. Joe claimed that he wanted to transition from crude oil to clean renewable energy by 2050. Biden declared that federal subsidies should no longer be available to oil reserves and instead offered to clean renewable resource companies. The former Vice President claims that as a kid in Delaware he experienced firsthand the devastation that pollution causes to local cities.
These statements were made clear his intentions if elected president. During the debate President Trump even asserted that those claims were too big and that oil workers would ultimately suffer from job loss. Joe Biden recently has been assembling his advisory cabinet for the transitioning of administration, which have taken a completely different turn than that of his accusations. Joe Biden’s close ties with oil companies foreshadowed the future of his decisions as commander in chief. Joe’s son, Hunter Biden, was made head of the Ukrainian oil project which has brought criticism for all parties. Joe has recently announced some of his choices for his advisory in the upcoming year.
Environmentalists have become skeptical over Democratic Party leaders as they have also noticed that Biden’s choice in cabinet members have similar connections. Many of the candidates Biden has been evaluating all have connections to oil reserves and don’t seem to have the same environmental intentions as Joe have stated. Staff in the White House have stated that they feel “Betrayed”, as they honestly believed Joe had intentions of proceeding with the transition of renewable energy. This comes from not just the GOP side of the house but Democratic representatives as well.
The idea of abolishing oil companies in the United States would only assist bad news Biden in selling his foreign oil as a source of income from future budget plans. Essentially giving him power of monopolizing oil refineries and controlling the market value and price of oil. Anyone with an understand of economics can see how this can easily evolve into an issue for Americans that not only have oil related jobs but also depend on oil for operation of their businesses. Companies such as J.B. Hunt and XPO Logistics would suffer cutbacks to accommodate for their slack on the profit margin. These companies would likely see employee layoffs and closure of regional offices. Workers would have to relocate to maintain employment of risk having to find employment elsewhere.
The plans presented by bad news Biden seem to already be dropping the confidence from state leaders and business owners. A future president that has already began altering his goals and leaving voters stranded. The idea of another hard recession could easily become a reality if these situations are not addressed. President Trump has made statements about Democratic Corruption and still shows that he will back up the American people even after the relinquish of duty.
Author: Charlie Alvitre
Amy Coney Barrett is the newest justice on the Supreme Court, coming into office after the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Trump said that “it is highly fitting that Justice Barrett fills the seat of a true pioneer for women”, pointing to how Ginsburg served as a role model for many American women. She is new, so her ruling patterns have not been established, but what do we know about her so far?
Amy’s Background
Amy Coney Barrett was born in New Orleans, Louisiana. She was the oldest child out of seven children. A devout Catholic, she went to private schools in elementary and high school. She received a BA in English Literature. She then received a law degree from Notre Dame and graduated at the top of her class. After graduating, she worked for Judge Lawrence Silberman and Justice Antonin Scalia. She also worked as a law professor at Notre Dame.
Letter of Recommendation
I had the opportunity of speaking with Professor Roger P. Alford, who worked with Amy Coney Barrett. He wrote a letter of approval for her and sent it to the Senate Judiciary Committee. He “had very good things to say about her”. In the letter, he praised her ability to balance family life and work. He said that “she is always prepared, always thoughtful, and always caring”. She has a loving community around her and a supportive husband. He said that she was humble, not wanting to compare herself to others or have others compare themselves to her. She is the first woman on the court to be the mother of school-age children.
Amy Coney Barrett Track Record
Her record indicates that she favors rulings of conservative justices. She supports an originalist interpretation of the Constitution, rather than a contextualist approach. This means that she supports reading the Constitution as it was originally intended instead of reading it from a modern standpoint. Amy also does not see stare decisis as binding. She will rule in favor with her interpretation of the Constitution rather than follow rulings of previous justices that she disagrees with.
Amy is expected to give the court a rightward tilt, though it is unknown what she will do until her ruling patterns have been clearly established. She has been given a hard time for her Catholic faith, though she claims that she will let the Constitution guide her, not her opinion. She would prefer not to “legislate from the bench” and instead supports judicial independence. Amy was questioned about her ideas about severability on the Affordable Care Act. She responded by saying that the unconstitutional aspects of laws would be severed, but the rest of the law would be kept intact. She would not abuse her power as a justice by finding small parts of laws she disagreed with unconstitutional to get rid of them.
She has a track record of siding with conservative justices. She dissented less frequently with conservative justices than liberal justices. Many people believe that she will be very similar to Scalia, and her work for him shows how much she respected him. She has said that she would not blindly follow Scalia. She follows his philosophy of originalism but may reach a different outcome. She has upheld the Second Amendment in previous rulings, dissenting against a ruling not allowing a man convicted of a white-collar crime to own a gun. She is pro-life, though she has not said that this will come out in her rulings. She has not implied that she intends to overturn Roe vs. Wade. Her pro-life tendencies also give her a bias against capital punishment.
Standing Strong During Senate Hearing
Barrett was asked questions during Senate hearings, everything from why the Bill of Rights was adopted to how she would react to pro-life groups. Senator Lindsey Graham instructed her not to interfere with them. She agreed, saying that judges are not supposed to legislate. Many of her responses follow a similar approach. She cannot give her opinion on legislative questions. Doing so would undermine democracy. She saw the question of substantive due process as such an issue. Many of the Republican Senators appeared to offer her advice and help her out in the hearings. Senator Hawley pointed out that it was unfair to attribute all of the worst rulings of Justice Scalia’s to hers. He confirmed that she was an independent woman with her own mind and opinions.
Amy Coney Barrett Being Appointed
The debate about whether it is fair or unfair for the Trump administration to appoint her at the end is ironic due to its similarity to the Marbury vs. Madison Supreme Court case, where Adams was appointing judges to frustrate his successor. The Constitution itself says nothing about when a president may appoint judges. This makes it Trump’s discretion.
Author: Miranda Smith
Administrative Static is an irreverent legal affairs podcast that exposes the unlawful side of administrative power. Hosts Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione will decry federal and state agency abuses, trot out legal arguments, grill expert guests, and bandy about the latest cases and controversies.
Joe Jaquint host one of the longest running financial radio programs in the country delivering economics with attitude with news to disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed.
This hour-long broadcast deals with some everyday experiences of the hosts as well as open discussions of the challenges of living as a conservative in an increasingly anything goes world. Topics cove the full range of daily events as they unfold around us, as well as urban survival topics from education to family planning. In these times of unprecedented change and challenge we hope to shed insight and wisdom to what often seems to be only chaos.
Occasionally we will have businesses on that are integral to the fabric of northern Colorado and communities around us. When time permits listeners are encouraged to call and provide input to our discussions.
The Taheebo Tea Club is a labor of love, life, and health! Our pure pau d’arco taheebo bark to make taheebo tea is available in our “On-Line Store” which is located near the upper left side of this web page. If you’re not certain whether your online order was successful, just call (818) 610-8088.
The Taheebo Tea Club is a labor of love, life, and health! Our pure pau d’arco taheebo bark to make taheebo tea is available in our “On-Line Store” which is located near the upper left side of this web page. If you’re not certain whether your online order was successful, just call (818) 610-8088
In this age of rapidly accelerating technology the threat to our liberties is a very real and present danger. Alex Jones is a unique voice that sifts through the information and exposes the underlying intentions.
