JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
What does the Economic Nobel Laureate Letter mean for the Election?
As the election approaches, with the economy being one of, if not, the most important issues, twenty three Nobel Laureate economists signed an open letter endorsing Kamala Harris for President.
Elon Musk’s Worrying Involvement in the 2024 Election
Ahead of the 2024 election, Elon Musk has emerged as one of Trump’s key allies, endorsing Trump and repeatedly praising him, with Trump returning in kind. Politically, Musk occupies a unique niche.
The Week That Was: Global News in Review
Brief #166 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Abran C
In this week’s global news review, we focus on the BRICS summit in Kazan, where leaders like Putin and Xi discussed alternatives to the U.S. dollar. North Korea’s deployment of troops to Russia raises geopolitical tensions, while Israel’s airstrikes on Iran escalate the ongoing conflict. In Cuba, a nationwide power outage follows a hurricane, and elections in Chile and Uruguay signal potential political shifts. As these critical developments unfold, stay informed on the changes shaping our world.
A Tale of Two Januarys | Why this former Republican is voting for Kamala Harris
I spent most of my adult life in the Republican Party. I enthusiastically supported John McCain in 2000 and 2008. I voted even more enthusiastically for Mitt Romney in 2012. My ideology is grounded in fiscal responsibility, personal liberty, strong national defense, and federalism.
Trump’s Political Waltz with Putin and Zelensky As Election Day Approaches
Trump on Putin. “I’m going to hit you…”
Former US president and incumbent Republican candidate for the presidency, Donald Trump has never hidden his enthusiastically warm attitude towards Russian president Vladimir Putin.
A Billionaire and A Buffon Join Forces
It’s easy to laugh at Elon Musk’s childish dance onstage with Trump and even easier to laugh at Trump’s moves, especially when they replace an actual campaign speech.
The Right To Vote in the U.S. Constitution – Part Two
After the Civil War Congress passed a number of constitutional amendments to try and manage and limit the restrictions states used to limit who could vote in elections.
A Win for Democracy: Two Georgia Judges Rule Election Board Must Certify Election Results
On October 14, 2024, Judge Robert McBurney of the Superior Court of Fulton County, Atlanta Judicial Circuit issued a final order in the civil action Adams v. Fulton County.
Harris and Trump Will Treat Our European Allies Differently
The United States finds itself in a tumultuous time. Both at home and abroad, our country’s staying power is being tested. As we prepare for an election that is days away, the world is watching as we choose one of two very different views of foreign affairs to lead us through the next four years.
Reflections on School Shootings from an Educator
Reflections on School Shootings from an Educator
Education Policy Brief | By: Rudy Lurz | September 09, 2024
Featured Photo: www.newsweek.com
__________________________________
I originally wrote this article in February 2018. I return to it after each school shooting to see if my thoughts have changed. They do not.
Since the date of this original post, many more cities and towns have been added to that heartbreaking fraternity of tragic and unnecessary death. Oxford Township, MI. Uvalde, TX. Winder, GA, to name a few.
JD Vance, echoing Bill O’Reilly’s “price of freedom” viewpoint, recently called school shootings a fact of life in American society. Like others in the past, his answer is to create more security at schools. As I noted six years ago, this is a blithe reply that is unlikely to significantly alter the body count.
This brief has been shortened from its original length. The original post from 2018 can be found here.
ANALYSIS (based on previous article from February 2018)
As a teacher, hearing the news of last week’s tragedy hit me hard. All school shootings affect me in a similar manner. Even lockdown drills create a crippling feeling in the pit of my stomach. As I huddle with my students against the wall in the dark, contemplating oblivion, I wonder how we have fallen so far as a society.
I once had a semblance of optimism. After years of pain, vitriol, and random terror, I don’t have that optimism anymore. As dozens more cities and schools have become hashtags, and more dates on the calendar have been stained black, stoic fatalism has settled in.
My despair is not assuaged by policy statements from the right or left. Let’s break down these arguments, moving right to left on the political spectrum. Here is what Republicans propose:
I. Arm the Teachers
Imagine your 11th-grade math teacher. Now imagine your school librarian. Now imagine your 9th-grade English teacher.
Imagine a hallway filled with screaming kids, running from a lunatic with an assault rifle. Is old Mr. Fuddlesticks going to step into that hallway and win that firefight with his .38 special?
Analysis: This is a bad idea all around. Body count: unchanged, maybe even higher.
II. Beef Up Security
Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich was one of many who wrote in favor of additional security measures at schools. Using familiar rhetoric of “good guys with guns,” he pushed for more uniformed officers on campus.
I think Mr. Gingrich is half-correct. More security on campus would keep students safer. It would also bring the first rapid-response officers much closer to the scene. It wouldn’t stop the body count. If a school has a 70-acre campus with over a dozen buildings, are you going to put uniformed police officers in each of them?
Analysis: More cogent proposal. Expensive. Body count reduced, but not eliminated.
III. Fortified Campuses with Security Measures at Building Entrances
Do you love TSA lines at the airport? Then bring them into schools. Radically restructure open campuses nationwide into single-building entities with a security checkpoint at the entrance(s). You’ll probably have to spend billions creating covered connections between buildings, along with billions more for hiring screeners and equipment to monitor each backpack and student entering the building.
You also create a huge target in front of the school as everyone lines up to enter. Will you do the same for football and basketball games, or will sports become the next sacrifice as a society?
Analysis: Expensive as holy heck. Body count: unchanged. Schools radically altered.
IV. Patriot Militia on Campus
This is a popular idea I’ve seen pop up on right-leaning social media. Veterans will volunteer to patrol their kids’ schools for free.
The patriot militia will likely be faster than local PD’s rapid-response teams since they’re already on campus. Just like Mr. Gingrich’s proposal for more security, there are similar issues on large campuses. Will they patrol every building? As a teacher, I also worry that some members of this patriot militia could turn into vigilantes.
Analysis: Similar to Mr. Gingrich’s proposal but cheaper. Slightly reduced body count, but also adds the complication of vigilantism/reprisals against students and teachers.
Now let’s analyze the proposals from Democrats:
A. Ban Assault Rifles (and maybe more?)
Let’s assume you can. Let’s say we get a reprise of the 1994 Clinton-era assault weapons ban passed. No assault rifles = no school shootings, right?
Doubtful. The Columbine massacre of 1999 happened in the middle of Clinton’s assault weapons ban. Some of the weapons used during that slaughter could be classified as conventional. The Virginia Tech mass shooting, one of the deadliest in U.S. history, was committed with a humble 9mm handgun.
The toothpaste is out of the tube on this one. While I like the idea of an assault weapons ban, and I think stopping production of all new AR-15s will be useful, it won’t stop the violence. 357 million guns are in circulation and you can’t find them all.
The violence will slow down, but it will continue.
Analysis: Sound and fury. Record levels of vitriol. Violence in the streets if you attempt confiscation. Body count in schools: slightly lower. Weapons of choice might change, but kids will still die.
B. Raise the Age for Gun Purchase, Expand Background Checks, Close Gun Show Loopholes, Restrict High-Capacity Magazines (30+), Fund Mental Health Facilities, Raise Taxes on Ammunition, Restrict Access to Firearms for Everyone with a History of Domestic Violence and/or Status on No-Fly Terrorist Watch Lists, Charge Parents of School Shooters with Negligent Homicide, Improve Detection of Threats with Cybersecurity Advances
These are the ideas that have a chance at denting the violent epidemic of school shootings. It won’t be enough. The numbers will be moderately reduced, but to me, it’s a math equation that can be done on a napkin. 320 million Americans. 357 million firearms. Let’s assume that just one in a million is deranged enough to shoot up a school. We’ll still have at least 1-2 school shootings a year.
Analysis: Body count moderately reduced. Incidence number: reduced. Best ideas so far.
FINAL THOUGHTS
The moments after school shootings feel like an American rendition of the dystopian Hunger Games. We are all glued to our TV sets. We hear stories of the carnage. The faces of the fallen are displayed on CNN and Fox News.And we do it all again next time.
Whether you are left, right, center, or somewhere on the fringes, we all must face the realization that there is something seriously wrong with our country right now. You can’t just repeat one or two of these common talking points and triumphantly sit back in your chair and believe you have the answer. Or maybe you can.
I can’t. My name is in the American Hunger Games lottery.
I hope that the odds are in my favor and that today is not the day that my kids and I are chosen as tributes to this madness.
Stay in-the-know with the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism, so please consider donating to keep democracy alive today!
At the 11th Hour: Can We Geoengineer the Carbon Genie Back into the Bottle?
At the 11th Hour: Can We Geoengineer the Carbon Genie Back into the Bottle?
Environment Policy Brief | By: Todd J. Broadman | September 04, 2024
Featured Photo: www.carbonbrief.org
__________________________________
Just as technology in the form of transforming carbon into energy has been linked to environment catastrophes, the scientific community is actively fabricating technical applications to counter CO2 accumulation. Among the geoengineering methods attracting attention is Solar Radiation Modification (SRM). SRM deploys sulfate aerosols to the stratosphere to cool the planet. Yet another approach is called Direct Air Capture (DAC) and as the term indicates, DAC technology extracts CO2 from the air. Air is pumped through CO2-absorbing resin, captured, and then stored underground. Although the oceans already capture about a quarter of the earth’s CO2, there is a proposed technology to boost seawater absorption by pouring-in huge amounts of sodium hydroxide and freshwater.
The Biden administration has yet to put together a cogent policy on geoengineering. There have been “White House studies” such as last year’s SRM study that concluded the “risks and benefits of SRM need to be considered vs. the risks and benefits of no SRM.” Like carbon emissions itself though, there is recognition that any policy must be cooperative and global to have any real impact. The U.S. emits approximately 5 billion tons of CO2 each year and the Biden administration has announced an intent to “draw down and store” 20% of that total.
Some, like the Brookings Institution, are of the opinion that the U.S. “cannot afford to wait to act” and that the U.S. ought to take the lead in creating geoengineering standards. To that end, commercial ventures have taken up the (for profit) mission. The larger ones aim to make money through a combination of tax breaks, grant funding, and luring revenue from those who seek carbon credits. Prominent players in this market include Global Research Technologies, wholly-owned by Occidental Petroleum, who are selling carbon credits in units of metric tons of CO2. In order to scale the technology, they have mapped out locations for 130 Direct Air Capture plants across the U.S.
In addition to Occidental Petroleum’s investment, fellow oil titans Chevron and Shell have divisions actively pursuing CO2 capture solutions. Even though on its face, there seems to be an irony in their efforts to remedy the very source of their profits, the technology comes with an added bonus: the captured CO2 is deployed to pressurize existing wells for added oil extraction. Former DOE staffer, Jennifer Wilcox, claims that DAC technology is providing oil corporations “an opportunity to pivot … these are the companies that have the resources and the assets to actually do it.”
Referring to the promise of DAC technology, Occidental Petroleum CEO, Vicki Hollub, says “This gives our industry a license to continue to operate for the 60, 70, 80 years.” And to sell carbon credits alongside, as part of this new geoengineering business model. Such is the profit potential that Occidental purchased DAC technology firm Carbon Engineering for $1.1 billion. Annual revenue for such credits is forecasted to grow to $135 billion by 2040 according to the Boston Consulting Group. Bill Gates alone purchases some $10 million worth of credits each year.
The risks of geoengineering are many. Solar Radiation Modification, which involves the release of sulfate particles (termed Solar Aerosol Injection) into our stratosphere from thousands of planes. The aerosols are designed to provide a shield and protect the Earth by reflecting the sun’s rays. Scientists are eager to begin experiments. The mathematical models anticipate that to have the proposed effect, the plane platoons would have to fly continuously for many decades. There is currently “little information” on the environmental risks of such a massive endeavor according to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and that a major investment in research is required. Meanwhile, aside from a requirement to make the Commerce Department aware, there are no geoengineering testing regulations in the U.S.
ANALYSIS
The proposed need for geoengineering is based upon a couple of practical assumptions: firstly, that there will not be a significant cut in carbon emissions over the next decade, and secondly, even if there is a significant cut, the residual impacts of existing CO2 on climate systems will still be felt for decades to come. The thinking is that this residual amount in the air can be drawn down through massive scaling of the technologies. Because the cure, so to speak, may be more harmful than the disease, worldwide coordinated research and regulation is required before moving forward.
“Geoengineered technologies are next to useless,” according to University of Hawaii oceanographer David Ho, and that sweeping conclusion is based on the current annual rate of carbon released: 40 billion metric tons. Scale matters. The hope though, is that these technologies will make a dent, will reduce the number and intensity of environmental catastrophes. The technology may be a positive force for environment justice in so far as developing countries who were minor contributors to the problem, can reap large benefits, and have it paid for by the wealthier nations. Ho adds an ethical element: “it’s almost our responsibility to give them a tool to remove it.”
One recent U.K. report had the ominous conclusion that geoengineering will be “ungovernable … and will have extremely costly social and economic consequences of such a magnitude to make [it] untenable.” Its authors compared the risks of a massive deployment of geoengineered technologies to the spread of nuclear weapons. “We don’t know exactly what the risks are, because no one has been crazy enough to do this before,” says Ben Day of Friends of the Earth, “It’s kind of like the thinking that got us here in the first place: Thinking that we can control Earth’s systems without unintended consequences.”
Still others, like University of Notre Dame’s Emily Grubert, asserts that “paying the oil companies to stop doing oil” is counterproductive and are lobbying to nationalize the carbon-removal industry. They see that using citizen tax dollars to subsidize for-profit polluters is not the policy direction we should be heading.
Tax and foundation dollars are heading into university research arms. The University of Chicago now has a Climate Systems Engineering initiative tasked with studying geoengineering technologies. The Simons Foundation has issued grant funds to look at ways to cool the atmosphere such as unmanned sail-powered ships, which would continuously blast tiny salt crystals into the atmosphere to brighten clouds and reflect sunlight into space. The Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, a private marine research non-profit organization, is awaiting EPA approval to pour a 6,600-gallon mixture of sodium hydroxide solution and freshwater into the sea in order to increase the pH and thus pull added carbon from the air. At scale, it is estimated that every large ship on earth would need to be deployed to have any impact (and large ships run on diesel fuel).
Aside from the dangers of using these geoengineered remedies for accumulated CO2, we still have to deal with carbon-dependent societies, and there is a fear that rather than make the kind of sacrifices necessary to cut emissions, developed countries will turn to them as a handy way of continuing commerce as usual with billowing smokestacks.
Engagement Resources:
- https://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/ serves as a resource for people around the world who are opposing climate geoengineering and fighting to address the root causes of climate change instead.
- https://www.climate.columbia.edu/ the nation’s first climate school – started to educate future climate leaders, support groundbreaking research, and foster essential climate solutions from the community to the planetary scale.
- https://www.scientificamerican.com/ covers the most important and exciting research, ideas and knowledge in science, health, technology, the environment and society.
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
The Week That Was: Global News in Review
The Week That Was: Global News in Review
Foreign Policy | By: Abran C | September 10, 2024
Featured Photo collage by Indy Silva for U.S. Resist News, 2024
__________________________________
A man walks on a damaged road following an Israeli army raid in Jenin. West Bank. Wednesday Sept.4.2024 (AP Photo/Majdi Mohammed) What to know about the deadliest West Bank operation since the war began | AP News
Israeli Raids in The West Bank
For more than a week, Israeli forces have carried out the largest operation in the occupied West Bank in over two decades. Israeli military officials have said that the operation was carried out in order to eliminate militants in the various refugee camps that they say pose a threat to Israeli civilians in the West Bank. The ensuing military action in the Occupied Territory has been devastating for Palestinian civilians. Infrastructure has been destroyed, services such as electricity and water have been cut, families have been confined to their homes, and emergency services evacuating the wounded have been slowed or halted on their way to hospitals. During the recent raids 33 Palestinians have been killed thus far, and over 680 people have been killed since October 7 last year.
Many of the refugee camps that were the targets of the military assault were originally established to house Palestinians who fled or were forced from their homes during the war surrounding Israel’s creation in 1948. However, over time with the lack of resolution on the status of a Palestinian state, the refugee camps turned into permanent crowded informal neighborhoods subjected to frequent military raids. Additionally, last week a 26 year old American citizen, Aysenur Eygi, was fatally shot in the West Bank where she was taking part in a protest against Israeli settler occupation. Since Oct. 7, there has been a surge of violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians in the West Bank, and an increase in the construction of settlements in the occupied territory. Israel’s policy of settling its civilians in occupied Palestinian territory and conducting frequent military raids breaks fundamental rules of international humanitarian law and is a constant hindrance to peace negotiations. Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies”.
Alternative for Germany party leader Bjorn Hocke has been fined more than once for using Nazi slogans, but economic issues and traditional values are more important for many voters in eastern Germany [Ronny Hartmann/AFP]
Far-Right Wins in Germany For The First Time Since WWII
A far-right party has won elections in Germany for the first time since the end of World War II. The success of Alternative for Germany (AfD) has caused concern among the country’s mainstream political parties.The far-right party won the East German state of Thuringia and came in a close second in Saxony. The AfD’s gains were especially large among young voters in both states. Björn Höcke, the leader of the AfD in Thuringia is considered one of the most extreme politicians in the party, having been convicted twice already by a German court for using Nazi rhetoric.The far-right party, for now, is likely to face difficulties in securing the cooperation of rival parties. However the AfD’s growing popularity among German voters continually places it ever closer to replacing mainstream parties and implementing its far-right ideology in the EUs’ most populous country.
Support for halting German military aid for Ukraine and restricting immigration were key issues during the East German elections. Chancellor Scholz’s center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), the Greens and the fiscally conservative Free Democratic Party (FDP), took significant losses in the ballots. Nearly one in three voters in both the states of Thuringia and Saxony supported the AfD. Their win despite warnings from officials over selecting the political extreme, speaks to the widespread public distrust in mainstream parties and institutions in Germany.
Great Hall of the People, Beijing, September 5, 2024. REUTERS/Florence Lo
China-Africa Summit
Dozens of African leaders gathered in Beijing last week for a summit that saw China promise billions in investment and loans to African countries over the next three years. Chinese President Xi Jinping, in addition to investment, proposed that relations with all African countries that have diplomatic ties with China be elevated to a “strategic” level above what is currently in place.
The summit signaled China’s continuing influence on the continent over Western powers. Chinese companies have already invested heavily in mining for the resources Chinese industry needs, and it has made billions in loans to build railways, roads and other infrastructure under Xi’s Belt and Road project. African leaders are seeking to continue to industrialize their economies and expand exports to reduce the trade deficit with China, which has become the continent’s largest bilateral trading partner.
Edmundo González looks on on the day he casts his vote in the country’s presidential election, in Caracas, Venezuela, July 28, 2024. Photo by Leonardo Fernandez Viloria/Reuters
Venezuela Opposition Candidate Gonzalez Seeks Asylum in Spain
Last week Venezuelan opposition leader Edmundo Gonzalez fled to Spain, seeking political asylum amid turmoil in his country after a disputed presidential election. The Venezuelan opposition maintains that it has evidence that Gonzalez won the July 28 presidential election by a wide margin against current President Nicolas Maduro.
The crack down on post election protests has left some 27 people dead and 2,400 more arrested. Spain has been a major point of exodus for Venezuelans, particularly those leading the opposition to Maduro’s regime. So far this year 44,000 Venezuelans have immigrated to Spain. The last government statistics from 2022 said that some 212,000 Venezuelans lived in Spain. Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado is trying to reassure supporters that her opposition coalition still has a chance of gaining control of the presidency despite the departure of their presidential candidate into exile.
A Mexican flag stands in the empty corridors of the federal court during a strike led by judicial workers on August 19 [Fernando Llano/AP Photo]
Mexico’s Outgoing President and Judicial Reform
Mexico’s Congress is expected to vote soon on the controversial constitutional reforms to the judiciary proposed by outgoing Mexican President Andres Manuel López Obrador. The judicial overhaul is backed by incoming president Claudia Sheinbaum, and has sparked strikes by judicial workers and strained relations with the United States and Canada. The constitutional reform would see more than 7,000 judges and magistrates elected by popular vote rather than appointed by the President. It would reduce the number of judges on the Supreme Court from 11 to 9, and shorten their terms from 15 to 12 years. It would also create a new body to supervise judges.
Following the announcement of the reforms came criticism from the US ambassador to Mexico. American ambassador Ken Salazar called the proposal a risk to democracy that would endanger Mexico’s commercial relationship with the United States. President Obrador’s administration put relations with the United States and Canadian embassies on pause. Obrador called the comments “disrespectful of our national sovereignty” and claimed it amounted to interference in Mexico’s domestic affairs.
For more updates, articles, in-depth analysis and weekly reviews on Global News, click here.
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
A Guide to the Upcoming Presidential Debate
A Guide to the Upcoming Presidential Debate
Elections & Politics | By: Inijah Quadri| August 30, 2024
Featured Photo: Official MSNBC YouTube (WATCH LIVE: Harris and Trump Presidential Debate)
__________________________________
Presidential debates remain a vital part of the democratic process, providing voters with a direct view of how candidates present their policies and react under pressure. The 2024 general election features an upcoming debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris on September 10, 2024, which has garnered heightened attention due to the stark differences in their debate styles. Trump’s tendency toward aggressive, unscripted exchanges and Harris’s measured, policy-driven approach are expected to set the tone for this critical debate. The debate between Tim Walz and JD Vance, set for October 1, will also play a crucial role in the vice-presidential race.
Analysis
The presidential debates in 2024 face challenges in ensuring fairness, especially given Trump’s historical tendency to break from traditional debate norms. Trump is known for turning debates into a spectacle, often dominating conversations through verbal aggression and personal attacks. In the chaotic 2020 debates, such tactics led to widespread frustration with the lack of substantive discussion. As a result, microphone muting systems were introduced for 2024, designed to prevent interruptions. However, Kamala Harris has notably rejected the use of these mute functions for the upcoming debate, signaling her confidence in addressing Trump’s direct attacks without enforced silencing.
Harris’s strategy appears to focus on confronting Trump’s rhetoric head-on, allowing for immediate rebuttals rather than relying on a mute button. This reflects her debate style—calm, composed, and fact-oriented. Her strength lies in presenting clear, structured arguments, which could help her dismantle Trump’s less policy-focused approach. However, Harris’s challenge will be maintaining composure amidst Trump’s unpredictability. Trump’s strength is his ability to engage his base with a high-energy performance, but his weakness lies in his frequent disregard for facts, which Harris is likely to highlight.
Moderators are the gatekeepers of debate integrity, responsible for maintaining order and ensuring that candidates adhere to the rules. In 2024, moderators like Jake Tapper and Dana Bash have been selected for their experience and ability to navigate contentious discussions. The effectiveness of these moderators will be judged by their ability to pose challenging, relevant questions while ensuring that each candidate has a fair opportunity to respond.
This year’s debate formats also reflect a broader shift in how debates are consumed. The decision to eliminate live audiences, focusing attention solely on the candidates’ responses and removing the distractions of applause or audience reactions is rather welcome. This makes it even more important for candidates to deliver concise, impactful statements that resonate with online audiences.
In addition to the presidential debate on September 10, the vice-presidential race between Tim Walz and JD Vance is heating up, with their first debate scheduled for October 1, 2024, hosted by CBS News. This debate is expected to focus heavily on national security, the economy, and the candidates’ records in office.
Walz, known for his calm demeanor and emphasis on policy, will need to highlight his experience governing Minnesota, while Vance, a political newcomer, will likely leverage his populist appeal to Trump’s base. Both candidates face the challenge of engaging undecided voters without alienating their core supporters.
Indicators of a Successful Debate
For voters, a successful debate is one that fosters clarity, civility, and substantive policy discussion. The September 10 debate will be judged by its ability to inform the electorate about the candidates’ positions and leadership styles. Key indicators of success include adherence to debate rules, a balance between policy and personality, and a fair and controlled exchange of ideas.
The debates are an opportunity for candidates to communicate directly with the public, especially undecided voters. As Trump, Harris, Walz, and Vance prepare for their respective debates, they will need to balance appeals to their base with messages that resonate more broadly. Ultimately, the impact of these debates on the election will depend on how well the candidates communicate their vision for the country’s future.
Engagement Resources:
- Commission on Presidential Debates: The official body responsible for organizing and overseeing presidential debates in the United States.
- The Brookings Institution: Research and insights on the history and impact of presidential debates.
- Presidential Campaigns, Debates, and Endorsements Archive: A resource offering historical documents and information on past presidential campaigns and debates.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.
The Olympic Controversies Reviewed
The Olympic Controversies Reviewed
Foreign Policy | By: Reilly Fitzgerald | August 30, 2024
Featured Photo: www.nbcnews.com
__________________________________
The Paris 2024 Olympic Games, as noted in our previous Brief, had plenty of controversies as the games unfolded. The major storylines were dealing with France’s high degree of secularism that has taken form in their hijab ban for their national team athletes. The first “post-pandemic” Games were rife with Covid infections as the Games continued into the second and third weeks of competition. Gender politics played a significant role in women’s boxing with an Algerian boxer Imane Khelif winning gold.
Analysis
French society is known for its secularism. Perhaps infamously, France has instituted laws that forbid the public display of head-scarves and other items that are used quite regularly by Muslims. France banned their Olympic team Muslim athletes from wearing the hijab at the Olympic Games. Interestingly enough, this could be in violation of one of the main tenets of the Olympic Games, that is to respect religious practices around the world. Ironically enough, even with the treatment that Muslims have endured by the French government, and the ban on French athletes wearing the hijab. In the final medal ceremony of the games, for the Women’s Marathon, Dutch runner Sifan Hassan proudly stood atop the podium to receive the gold medal during the Closing Ceremonies.
Paris 2024 was the first true post-pandemic Olympic Games. Obviously, the virus is still being transmitted and will never be gone; however, many viewers were surprised to see athletes coming down with the illness. It should be noted that the Tour de France, which ended two weeks before the Olympics, was rife with Covid. At the Games, over 40 athletes, according to the TODAY Show, came down with Covid – including American Track Sprinter Noah Lyles. However, Lyles was able to recover and win gold in the 100m and bronze in the 200m.
Gender politics took hold regarding the eligibility of Algerian boxer Imane Khelif. The International Boxing Association (with Russian links, according to NPR) claimed that Algerian boxer Imane Khelif and Lin Yu-Ting from Taiwan both failed a “gender eligibility test.” in the last two years and as such, should not be eligible to compete in the women’s boxing tournament. However, Khelif went on to win gold; and defended herself by stating “I’m a woman like any other woman. I was born a woman. I lived [as] a woman. I competed as a woman.”
Team USA gymnast Jordan Chiles was the centerpiece in what was a heart-breaking moment for her after finishing fifth, initially, but receiving a bronze medal after her Team USA coaches appealed one aspect of the scoring on her floor routine. However, the promotion to third place for Chiles meant that she had displaced two Romanian athletes who had, initially, finished third and fourth. Romanian coaches appealed Team USA’s appeal, and stated that Chile’s coaches took four seconds longer than the one minute time limit for appeals to occur after scoring. The International Gymnastics Federation concurred, after a ruling by the Court of Arbitration of Sport determined that Team USA was late in their appeal. The bromze medal was then awarded to the Romanian gymnast and Chiles was awrded her original fifth place score.
On a lighter note, Paris 2024 was the start, and end PLEASSE EXPLAIN), of breakdancing (called break) as an Olympic event. Bizarrely, the gold medalist by Japanese competitor B-Girl, was overshadowed by a competitor whose routine scored a zero. Australian competitor Raygun, or Rachel Gunn, went viral after her routine. Raygun, an Australian academic, performed her routine which attempted to highlight its originality but in the end led to not scoring any points whatsoever. Raygun has since defended her routine choice, and the attention that it brought to the competition.
The Closing Ceremonies unveiled the next setting for the summer Olympics in Los Angeles for 2028. It featured Tom Cruise rappelling into the Closing Ceremonies to transport the Olympic flame to Los Angeles. Los Angeles is setting the bar-high for 2028 as they have announced a goal of having the Olympics go car-free. The total budget, so far, seems to be in the tens-of-billions of dollars. It is still unclear who will foot the bill, the US Government or tax-payers in California. It will be an interesting story to follow over the next four years!
Engagement Resources
- Los Angeles 2028 – https://la28.org/en.html
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
What does Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Announcement Mean?
What does Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Announcement Mean?
Elections & Politics | By: Arvind Salem| August 30, 2024
Featured Photo: www.latimes.com
__________________________________
With just over two months from Election Day, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the son of Senator Robert Kennedy and nephew of President John F. Kennedy, withdrew his independent candidacy for president. Kennedy, one of the most successful recent independent candidates, had hit double-digit vote shares amid record dissatisfaction with a Biden and Trump matchup. However, that dissatisfaction was largely alleviated by the replacement of Biden. Democrats sympathetic to Kennedy have largely left for the Harris camp: as Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s poll number dipped to under 5% after Harris became the nominee.
In his speech, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. endorsed Trump, citing “ free speech, the war in Ukraine and “a war on our children”” as reasons for leaving the Democratic party and endorsing Trump. However, RFK Jr. did not completely end his candidacy: he urged his supporters to vote for Trump in battleground states (and said he would try to remove his name from those ballots), while showing their support for him in states where they won’t sway the outcome. RFK’s endorsement, and essential withdrawal, helps Trump since most polls found that Trump gets a bigger boost in support compared to Harris when Kennedy is excluded. This is deeply ironic, given that Kennedy comes from the most storied lineage in Democratic politics and initially appeared positioned to be a spoiler for the eventual Democratic nominee. However, his campaign took a deeply rightward term and there is speculation that Kennedy would use this withdrawal to gain a position in Trump’s cabinet as Secretary of Health and Human Services: a troubling pick given his staunch anti-vaccine record and complete lack of any medical experience.
Policy Analysis:
Kennedy’s endorsement of Trump was met with much criticism from his own family. Max Kennedy, Bobby’s brother, wrote an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times, criticizing his brother and pointing out the incongruence of their father’s values with those of Trump. He describes how the positions of Trump on issues such as immigration, civil rights, and the rule of law are utterly incompatible with those of his father. Five of Kennedy’s family members issued a statement denouncing Kennedy’s support for Trump and reiterating their support for Harris.
Additionally, Kennedy’s “withdrawal” timing is complicated due to the various state deadlines to withdraw from the ballot. His greatest act of helping Trump would undoubtedly be removing his name from many swing states but it is unclear if he is able to do that for certain states. For key states like Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas, Kennedy was able to ensure his name would not appear on the ballot. However, for Michigan, North Carolina, and Wisconsin, Kennedy was unable to remove his name from the ballot. The continued presence of RFK Jr. on the ballot in these states, especially Michigan, mean that he will likely still have influence on the outcome of the election, even if he has stated his intention to no longer be considered for the presidency.
Engagement Resources:
- Harris for President: Readers who do not want Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to have any influence in the government may wish to donate to this campaign to prevent his endorsed candidate from winning.
- Voices for Vaccines: Readers who wish to elevate organizations to counter Kennedy’s anti-vaccination stances may wish to support this organization.
- Green Party: People who want to support another independent candidate after this withdrawal may wish to explore the Green Party to find candidates that align with their values.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Ukraine’s Surprise Offensive: What it Means for the War Ahead
Ukraine’s Surprise Offensive: What it Means for the War Ahead
Foreign Policy | By: Damian DeSola | August 28, 2024
Featured Photo: www.medium.com
__________________________________
On August 6th, the Ukrainian military entered Russia in force with approximately 1,000 troops. The risky crossing of the Russo-Ukrainian border became the first invasion of Russian land since World War II. This incursion was planned entirely in secret, with Kyiv strategically relocating battalions from the frontlines in the east, towards the concealing foliage of northern Ukraine. In mid-July, Russian military intelligence observed these troop movements, but were ordered not to raise alarm.
Armed with Western weaponry, from American HIMARS launchers to Polish PT-91 tanks, the Ukrainians quickly overran the Russian defenses, which were manned by conscripts with minimal training or experience. Little stood in the way of Ukraine’s movement further into the Kursk region. As word reached the Kremlin, it became a scramble to move in domestic units to slow and halt the Ukrainian advance.
By President Zelenskyy’s admission, the Ukrainian incursion has slowed after meeting firmer resistance. A state of reinforcement of the captured territory has taken hold.
However, there is a remaining development that could result in a final defeat for Russia in this initial push. As of writing, the only three bridges crossing the river Seym have been damaged or destroyed. This river extends east out of Ukraine’s northern border and passes through Kursk. Without full functionality of these bridges, remaining Russian forces are trapped south of the river, wedged between the advancing Ukrainian military from the east and the Ukrainian border, leading to a potentially devastating encirclement.
The President of Russia, Vladimir Putin, visited the Kursk region after the front had mostly stabilized. To the people affected by the invasion, which he refers to as a “situation,” he offered 15,000 rubles (approx. $163) to the fleeing people of Kursk, of which there are nearly 200,000. Over 90 Russian settlements are claimed to have been captured by Ukraine, along with hundreds Russian soldiers.
In an apparent retaliatory strike, Russia has sent multiple waves of drones and missiles targeting Ukrainian cities. The wave on Monday the 26th has been labeled as one of the largest strikes of the war. From an analysis of where the strikes occurred, it appears the Russians were focused on Ukraine’s power grids, which caused blackouts in Kyiv and other affected cities.
Analysis
This invasion shocked nearly every major player in this conflict. Even the United States, whose intelligence agencies have closely collaborated with the Ukrainian military, expressed surprise. This astonishment comes with praise and apprehension by Western governments. While impressed by the dramatically improved capabilities of Ukrainian mechanized units, trepidation about whether this strategy will ultimately succeed arises.
Defending their actions, the Ukrainians claim they can hold this land for the purpose of having a bargaining chip when the Russians come to the negotiating table, and to aid the overall war effort by redirecting Russian battalions. Kyiv also notes that, even as Western equipment was used for an invasion of Russian soil, a ‘redline’ set by the Kremlin, the promised harsh response has not yet occurred.
Zelenskyy has seized upon the lack of a Russian reaction as a sign for Western forces to drop their restrictions on Ukrainian use of their weapons on Russian land. While it is still early to say, these results could convince Western militaries to allow for more aggressive strategies regarding their weapons usage against Russian targets.
Another goal, which has not been explicitly stated by Kyiv, is the disruption of the normalcy for the Russian people. Residents of Kursk flee in shock and fear, with many who once supported the war finding it difficult to maintain their hawkish rationale. However, if Ukraine wants to succeed in this gambit of striking the hearts of the Russian people, another operation with similar shock value must take place soon, lest the Russian propaganda machine quickly erase memories about their recent losses.
These short-term gains, however, may be coming at a steeper cost than expected. A redirection of Russian troops has occurred, but danger still looms in the Ukrainian east. The outskirt towns of a vital transport hub, the eastern city of Pokrovsk, are under heavy Russian attack. These attacks have not let up, even after the Kursk offensive. Telegraphing Russia’s resolve to take the strategically important city. If the gains of the Ukrainian military in its northern offensive are reversed, and this major city falls, it would be a massive dent in the confidence of both Kyiv and its Western allies. For now, every nation holds their breath to see who the victor of this bold invasion will be.
Engagement Resources
- Official Ukrainian website where you can support Ukraine and its people.
- A Financial Times page where detailed and updates to maps and other infographics are posted.
- An open-source live map of the war that is frequently updated with movements of the frontline and related events occurring both on and off the battlefield.
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Navigating Ethics in a Digital Age
Navigating Ethics in a Digital Age
Technology Policy | By: Inijah Quadri | August 26, 2024
Featured Photo: www.linkedin.com
__________________________________
The 21st century has ushered in a digital revolution that has transformed nearly every aspect of human life. From social interactions to economic transactions, digital technologies now pervade our existence, offering unprecedented opportunities for innovation, connectivity, and efficiency. However, these advancements also present profound ethical challenges that demand careful consideration and action. Navigating ethics in the digital age involves addressing issues such as data privacy, cybersecurity, digital rights, algorithmic bias, and the equitable use of technology.
Digital technologies have enabled the mass collection and analysis of personal data, leading to concerns about how this data is used, who controls it, and how it can be protected. High-profile data breaches, such as the 2017 Equifax breach that exposed the personal information of over 147 million Americans, highlight the vulnerabilities in current data protection practices and the need for stronger regulatory frameworks.
Moreover, the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning has introduced new ethical dilemmas, particularly regarding algorithmic bias and the fairness of automated decision-making systems. For example, Amazon’s AI recruiting tool, which was discontinued in 2018, was found to discriminate against female candidates because it was trained on resumes submitted predominantly by men. This case underscores the potential for AI to perpetuate and even exacerbate existing social inequalities if not properly designed and monitored.
In addition to these challenges, the digital divide—the gap between those who have access to digital technologies and those who do not—remains a significant ethical concern. As more services, including education, healthcare, and legal assistance, move online, individuals without reliable internet access or digital literacy skills are increasingly marginalized. This divide exacerbates existing inequalities and raises questions about how to ensure that the benefits of digital technologies are equitably distributed.
Analysis
One of the central ethical challenges of the digital age is the tension between innovation and privacy. The vast amounts of data generated by online activities provide valuable insights that can drive innovation in fields such as healthcare, marketing, and public policy. However, the collection and use of this data often occur without individuals’ informed consent, leading to potential violations of privacy. The Cambridge Analytica scandal, where the personal data of millions of Facebook users was harvested without consent for political advertising purposes, is a stark example of how data misuse can undermine public trust and democracy.
Furthermore, the use of AI and machine learning in decision-making processes raises significant ethical concerns about bias, transparency, and accountability. Algorithms are often seen as objective, but they can reflect and amplify the biases present in the data they are trained on. The case of COMPAS, a risk assessment tool used in the U.S. criminal justice system, illustrates this problem. Studies have shown that COMPAS is more likely to falsely predict that Black defendants will re-offend compared to white defendants, highlighting the need for greater scrutiny of the algorithms used in sensitive areas such as criminal justice.
In addition to concerns about algorithmic bias, AI and other digital technologies are increasingly being exploited to spread misinformation, particularly in political contexts. For example, recent elections in countries such as Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Indonesia have seen the use of AI-generated deepfakes and disinformation campaigns aimed at manipulating public opinion and undermining electoral integrity. These technologies allow for the creation of highly convincing false information that can be rapidly disseminated across digital platforms, posing a significant threat to democratic processes.
In the legal profession, the integration of digital technologies has transformed the practice of law, creating both opportunities and challenges. Lawyers must now navigate complex ethical issues related to client confidentiality, data security, and the use of AI in legal research and decision-making. For instance, the use of cloud-based services for storing and sharing sensitive client information requires robust cybersecurity measures to protect against data breaches and unauthorized access. Additionally, legal professionals must be vigilant about the potential for AI to introduce bias into legal processes and ensure that their use of technology aligns with ethical standards.
The digital divide is another critical issue that requires urgent attention. As society becomes increasingly digital, those without access to technology are at risk of being left behind. This is particularly concerning in areas such as education, where students without access to the internet or digital devices are disadvantaged compared to their peers.
Efforts to regulate digital media and address the spread of misinformation have varied significantly across regions. The European Union has been at the forefront of these efforts, implementing robust regulations such as the Digital Services Act and the AI Act, which mandate transparency in AI applications and the labeling of manipulated content like deepfakes. These regulations are designed to mitigate the risks associated with misinformation and protect electoral integrity. In contrast, the United States has been less aggressive in its regulatory approach, raising concerns about its ability to effectively combat the challenges posed by digital misinformation.
Addressing these ethical challenges requires a multifaceted approach that involves all stakeholders—governments, technology companies, civil society, and individuals. Policymakers must implement stronger data protection laws and regulations that ensure transparency and accountability in the use of digital technologies. Technology companies must adopt ethical design principles that prioritize privacy, fairness, and inclusivity. Meanwhile, individuals must be empowered with the knowledge and tools to protect their digital rights and make informed decisions about their online activities.
Navigating ethics in the digital age is a complex and ongoing challenge that requires collaboration across sectors and disciplines. But by addressing issues of data privacy, AI ethics, and the digital divide, we can work towards a more equitable and ethical digital future that respects individual rights and promotes social justice.
Engagement Resources
- World Ethics Organization (https://worldethicsorganization.org/): Provides resources and guidelines for navigating ethical challenges in the digital age, with a focus on privacy, security, and digital rights.
- Electronic Frontier Foundation (https://www.eff.org/): A leading organization that defends civil liberties in the digital world, offering comprehensive resources on digital privacy, online security, and freedom of speech.
- Center for Democracy & Technology (https://cdt.org/): Focuses on advancing democratic values in the digital age, providing policy analysis and advocacy on issues such as data protection, AI ethics, and online rights.
- Data Ethics Repository (https://dataethicsrepository.iaa.ncsu.edu/): A platform that explores the ethical implications of data use and AI, offering research, guidelines, and best practices for ethical digital engagement.
- Stanford Internet Observatory (https://cyber.fsi.stanford.edu/io): Conducts research on the ethical use of digital technologies, particularly in the context of AI, social media, and cybersecurity.
Stay in-the-know with the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter. We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism, so please consider donating to keep democracy alive today!
Takeaways from Harris’s CNN Interview
Takeaways from Harris’s CNN Interview
Elections & Politics #135| By: Arvind Salem| August 30, 2024
Featured Photo: www.cnn.com
__________________________________
With President Biden’s withdrawal and Vice President Harris’ nomination as the democrat’s presidential candidate at the DNC, supporters and political observers were waiting for Harris’s first interview as a 2024 Presidential Candidate. On August 29, 2024, over a month after Biden dropped out, Harris sat down for an interview with CNN’s Danna Bash. Before the interview there were multiple unanswered questions about Harris’s policies: to what extent would she mirror Biden, how would she answer Trump attacks on race, and how would she defend her changing policy positions?
During the interview Harris answered these questions and more all in 27 minutes. She was measured and didn’t take any big risks that would open her up to new attacks from Trump during the upcoming September 10th debate. For Harris, she showed throughout this interview she was trying to be a continuation of Biden’s policies, but a different messenger. She mirrored nearly all of Biden’s positions on the economy, Israel and Gaza, the border, and fracking.
Additionally, during the interview, Bash pressed her on why she changed her positions now compared to when she was campaigning in 2019. Now, her positions are more moderate and could court disaffected Republicans, whereas in 2019 her policies found favor with the Progressive wing of the Democratic party. For example, on fracking, an issue of supreme importance in swing states like Pennsylvania, Harris responded to her changing positions by arguing that her values were what was important and the underlying value behind those positions ( climate change is a real and present danger.) has remained consistent. Harris changed this position from 2019 to 2020 but not from 2020 to 2024, meaning her current supporters likely already know this switch and support her regardless. However, a switch that may be more harmful to her candidacy is immigration. During the 2020 primary, Harris argued that unauthorized border crossings should not be criminalized. Given her power over the border as Vice President and the resulting border crisis, this issue represents one of Harris’s key vulnerabilities and her current position that there should be consequences for unauthorized crossings may be viewed as a switch made more for political and electoral gain rather than a genuine policy shift she intends to follow. Harris attempted to boost her credentials on the border and security by citing her experience prosecuting criminal organizations as Attorney General of California.
This was a joint interview with Governor Walz, who gave a lukewarm performance. He addressed concerns about fabricating military service (claiming he carried weapons in war when he never served in combat) and about claiming his wife used IVF when she actually used a slightly different form of treatment known as IUI. Walz’s defense on both of these issues were undergirded by a contention that he tries to speak candidly and people “know where my heart is”. These are not hugely damaging to Walz’s reputation yet, but they are unnecessary mistakes for a candidate with rock solid credentials.
Policy Analysis:
This debate did very little to sway the election as Harris did not lean into anything overly controversial more than she absolutely had to. President Trump observed this as he posted “BORING!!!” on Truth Social. However, for Harris, when she has the momentum of renewed Democratic optimism and a convention, along with a slight lead in most polls, boring is good. In 2016, Trump proved that in a sharp, negative, attacking race, he can win by a large electoral college margin. Harris keeping things boring was likely the best thing she could’ve done. For example, she refused to provocatively address Trump’s comments on her “race switching” from Indian to Black.
For Harris, this interview was also obviously an attempt to gain support from moderates, which is why most of her policy shifts were rightward and the positions she abandoned were mostly progressive ones. During the interview, she even committed to having a member of the opposing party in her cabinet: a convention that Presidents Obama and George W. Bush followed (both of their Transportation Secretaries were part of the opposing parties).
Engagement Resources:
- Harris for President: Readers who want to support the Harris campaign for President should explore this website to find ways to contribute.
- ActBlue: ActBlue allows people to donate to a host of Democratic organizations, candidates, and causes. Readers are likely to find organizations that are supporting the Harris-Walz ticket on this site and may wish to donate money to further that cause.
- DCCC: The DCC is an organization that helps Democrats win Congressional seats. If readers want to help the potential Harris presidency’s ability to enact their legislative agenda, they may wish to support this organization.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist News Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to help protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Vote Blue This Election—A One Time Only Action to Resist Fascism and Renew Democracy
Vote Blue This Election—A One Time Only Action to Resist Fascism and Renew Democracy
AUGUST OP ED | By: Ron Israel & the U.S. Resist News Staff | August 2024
Featured Photo: www.insidehighered.com
__________________________________
We at U.S. RESIST NEWS believe in the two party system. We think that having an election with multiple parties is a good thing. But not this time around. In 2024 we have a high stakes election that doesn’t have two legitimate political parties. On one side there’s what formally was a conservative-minded principled Republican Party that has turned into the party of Trump, determined to turn the U.S. into an authoritarian country. . On the other side, the Democratic Party stands as the last line of defense for democracy, equality, and the protection of our fundamental rights.
In the past decade, our democracy has been under relentless attack. Trump, a regressive Supreme Court, and a MAGA-fueled Congress have inflicted deep wounds on our institutions and freedoms. The right to abortion has been fragmented, dark money has drowned out the voices of ordinary citizens, voting rights have been systematically dismantled, and the outdated Electoral College continues to distort the true will of the people.
The Democratic Party is putting forward a strong Presidential ticket of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz to take on the backward looking Donald Trump and JD Vance. It goes without saying that electing Harris and Walz is a must goal for the survival of our democratic values. It also is a necessary but not entirely sufficient goal for the renewal of our democratic system of governance. Harris and Walz need to be supported by a Congress with the votes that are needed to put in place long-overdue democratic system reforms.
That is why we at U.S. RESIST NEWS encourage all voters to vote blue wherever possible and/or for those candidates who will uphold our rights and overturn the laws and regulations that are eroding our democracy. We realize this is an unusual request, but it is not intended to make everyone become a member of the Democratic Party. It is just a one-time ask, that you put country over party, the welfare of America over the welfare of one person.
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.