jackwhitman40

A former columnist for Elle magazine, E. Jean Carroll, testified in a New York civil rape and defamation trial against former President Donald Trump. The trial concerns allegations that Trump raped Carroll nearly 30 years ago in a Manhattan department store. Carroll claims that the assault took place in the mid-1990s after Trump approached her at the Bergdorf Goodman store and asked if she would help him buy a gift for a friend. Carroll testified that Trump had accosted her and raped her in a dressing room. During the trial, Carroll stated that she had launched the case "to try and get my life back," as she had been unable to have a romantic life since the alleged assault. She went on to say that she was there "because Donald Trump raped me, and when I wrote about it, he lied and said it didn't happen," and that "He lied and shattered my reputation, and I'm here to try and get my life back." Carroll's allegations against Trump were first made public in a 2019 book by Carroll called "What Do We Need Men For? A Modest Proposal." In response to the allegations, Trump denied that the assault ever took place and accused Carroll of lying for political reasons. Carroll has said that she told two friends about the attack, who gave conflicting advice about whether she should go public with her story. During her testimony, Carroll described how the encounter with Trump began with flirtatious banter, but quickly turned into an assault. She said that Trump had followed her into the dressing room and closed the door behind them, after which he held her against the wall and raped her. She tried to push him off, but the encounter was over within minutes, and she quickly left the department store. Carroll's lawyer appeared to anticipate questions she may face from Trump's team, including whether she was motivated to sue the former president for political reasons. Carroll, who has voted only for Democratic candidates, said she was not. Subscribe for more content like this. The trial is expected to last two weeks, and Carroll is seeking unspecified damages from Trump. In 2022, New York passed the Adult Survivors Act, which allowed a one-year period for victims to file sexual assault lawsuits in the state over claims that would have otherwise exceeded statute limitations. Trump, who is running in the 2024 presidential election, has repeatedly denied the allegations made by Carroll and has called her account a "fraudulent and false story." On Wednesday, he took to his social media website to call her account into question, writing "She didn't scream? There are no witnesses? Nobody saw this?" US District Judge Lewis Kaplan admonished Trump's legal team for their client's behavior and said the post was "a public statement that, on the face of it, seems entirely inappropriate." Trump's lawyer, Joe Tacopina, told the judge he would ask his client to "refrain from any further posts on this case." The trial has drawn widespread attention as it comes at a time when sexual assault allegations against high-profile individuals are being taken more seriously than ever before. It remains to be seen what the outcome of the trial will be, but it is clear that the case has put the issue of sexual assault back in the public eye and sparked an important conversation about accountability and justice for survivors. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

Trump's legal team has been highly critical of the investigation into the classified documents, which they claim is politically motivated. They have also argued that the handling of classified documents was not limited to Trump's administration and that other officials, including Biden and Pence, had also mishandled sensitive information. However, legal experts say that the fact that classified documents were found in Trump's possession after he left office is highly concerning and could lead to serious legal consequences. "It's highly unusual and highly disturbing to find classified documents in the possession of someone who is no longer in office," said David Priess, a former CIA intelligence officer and the author of "The President's Book of Secrets." "The fact that Trump had these documents raises serious questions about his judgment and his commitment to protecting national security," Priess added. Subscribe for more content like this. The investigation into the classified documents is being led by special counsel Jack Smith, who was appointed by the Justice Department to look into the matter. Smith has been working on the case for several months and has reportedly made significant progress. It is not yet clear what charges, if any, will be brought against Trump or his associates in connection with the classified documents. However, legal experts say that the mere fact that the investigation is ongoing is a cause for concern. "The fact that there is an investigation into classified documents in the possession of a former president is highly unusual and highly concerning," said Priess. "It suggests that there are serious questions about the way in which the Trump administration handled sensitive information." For now, it remains to be seen what will come of the investigation into the classified documents. Trump's legal team is calling for the Justice Department to stand down and for the intelligence community to take over the investigation. However, legal experts say that it is unlikely that Congress or anyone else will be able to interfere with the ongoing investigation. "The fact that Trump's lawyers are calling for the investigation to be stopped is not surprising, but it is unlikely to have any impact on the investigation itself," said Priess. "The Justice Department will continue to investigate this matter until it reaches a conclusion, regardless of what Trump's lawyers or anyone else says." Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

Being rich is better than you even imagine it to be The idea that rich people are unhappy is NONSENSE propagated to prevent revolts of the poor. How can MORE options and fewer concerns about how you survive make you LESS happy? Absolute LOGIC fail. Poor people like to believe the rich are mysteriously unhappy to feel better about being poor. Subscribe for more content like this. It’s simply false. "Oh yes but I have a great family and real love" So does he? He also gets to spend more time with them if he chooses. He can fly with them around the world. You are busy paying rent. Do not be a fool. Cash is amazing. And you should be hungry for as much as possible. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

A new national poll conducted by President Biden’s approval rating at 38%, with 48% of adults holding a negative view of his performance as president. While these numbers may not be where the Biden administration would like them to be, they still represent a higher level of public support than former President Trump received during his time in office. The poll also sheds light on Americans’ views on abortion, with 58% of adults saying it should be legal. The poll was conducted in mid-April of 2023 and surveyed 1,000 adults across the country, including 861 reached by cell phone. The overall margin of error is plus-minus 3.1 percentage points, with a larger margin of error for specific subgroups. While Biden’s approval rating may not be ideal, it is worth noting that his negative rating of 48% is still better than Trump’s negative rating of 53%, according to the same poll. It’s important to remember that polls are a snapshot in time, and approval ratings can fluctuate depending on current events and the political climate. That being said, these numbers may be a cause for concern for the Biden administration, particularly among independent voters. Subscribe for more content like this. The poll also asked respondents about their views on abortion. Nearly 6 in 10 adults, or 58%, said that abortion should be legal either always (38%) or most of the time (20%). This is consistent with the results of a similar poll conducted by May 2022, which found that 60% of respondents believed that abortion should be always or mostly legal. On the other hand, a combined 38% of respondents in the latest poll believe that abortion should be illegal, either with exceptions (32%) or without exceptions (6%). This is a relatively small shift from the May 2022 poll, which found that 37% of respondents believed that abortion should be illegal with or without exceptions. These findings suggest that the public’s views on abortion have remained relatively consistent over the past year. While there may be some minor shifts in opinion over time, it appears that the majority of Americans continue to support legal access to abortion. It’s worth noting that these poll results are just one piece of the puzzle when it comes to understanding public opinion on these issues. Polls can provide valuable insights into public opinion, but they should always be viewed with some degree of caution. Respondents may not always answer questions truthfully, and the wording of the questions themselves can influence how people respond. Overall, the latest poll provides some interesting insights into the public’s views on President Biden’s performance and abortion. While the numbers may not be ideal for the Biden administration, they do show that he remains more popular than his predecessor. Additionally, the poll suggests that the majority of Americans continue to support legal access to abortion. As with any poll, it’s important to view these results in context and to keep in mind that public opinion can shift over time. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

former President Donald Trump, who has been promoting his new book of letters that he has received over the years the book during his show and pointed out some of the strange contents, including a letter from Hillary Clinton thanking Trump for a donation. Kimmel also brought attention to the fact that Trump had donated to several Democrats, including Gov. Cuomo, Chuck Schumer, and Hillary Clinton. Additionally, Trump invited George W. Bush to the Miss Teen USA pageant, which Bush declined due to prior engagements. Trump also expressed his disapproval of Alec Baldwin, who famously portrayed Trump on "Saturday Night Live." also discussed the NFL and how the contract that Patrick Mahomes, the quarterback for the Kansas City Chiefs, signed was team-friendly and did not pay him as much money as some of the other top quarterbacks in the league. Despite being a generational player, Mahomes received only $63 million in his first three years, compared to Aaron Rodgers, who received $150.8 million in his first three years. The article concludes that the Chiefs should address the situation before Mahomes starts to feel resentful, as he deserves to be the player getting more money than anyone else in the league. ...even after the Super Bowl. Mahomes is undoubtedly one of the most talented quarterbacks in the league, and his impact on the Chiefs cannot be overstated. He is a transformative player who has already achieved so much in his young career. However, as the current numbers show, Mahomes' contract is not reflective of his value to the team. The fact that he is currently ranked last in terms of cash flow in the first three years of his deal is concerning, especially considering the other quarterbacks on the list. The Chiefs need to address this issue and make sure that Mahomes is appropriately compensated for his contributions to the team. Subscribe for more content like this. One potential solution could be to restructure Mahomes' contract to provide him with more upfront cash flow. This would not only recognize his value to the team, but it would also make it less likely that he would become resentful or feel undervalued. Mahomes has shown time and time again that he is a team player who is willing to put the needs of the team above his own personal gain, but the team also needs to recognize that they have a responsibility to compensate him fairly for his efforts. In conclusion, while Mahomes' contract may have been team-friendly when it was first signed, the current numbers show that he is not receiving the compensation that he deserves. The Chiefs need to address this issue sooner rather than later to avoid potential resentment and to ensure that they retain one of the most valuable players in the league. Mahomes is a transformative player who has already achieved so much, and he deserves to be compensated accordingly. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

I don’t have food in the mornings. I don’t like the idea of breakfast. Wake up from sleep with instantly available food that you didn’t have to hunt and kill. Breakfast breeds arrogance and laziness. I will not eat until work has been done. Instead, I start my day with hunger and memories. My path to the top wasn’t a straight line. Subscribe for more content like this. There have been bumps in the road. Tears, Blood. I sit and remember the worst times of my life. The pain and the heartache. Some mornings, if I really try, I can almost cry. I take all that anguish and pain then add a little nicotine and caffeine to set my blood on fire - and I enter the world ready to win life or die while I’m trying. Angry men siege nations. I don’t have time for cheerios. The universe will pay me what she owes me. All of the money and power I deserve. I am owed superiority over other men. God owes me this. And he has given it to me. But I want more. I will use my bare hands to strangle space-time itself. I will squeeze success from the very fabric of the cosmos BY FORCE. Do you understand me? - Tate Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

President Joe Biden announced on Tuesday that he will be seeking re-election in 2024. Biden, who would be 86 at the end of a second term, is betting that his first-term legislative achievements and more than 50 years of experience in Washington will count for more than concerns over his age. He faces a smooth path to winning his party’s nomination, with no serious Democratic challengers. However, he is still set for a hard-fought struggle to retain the presidency in a bitterly divided nation. In his first public appearance since the announcement, Biden offered a preview of how he plans to navigate the dual roles of president and presidential candidate. He used a speech to building trades union members to highlight his accomplishments and undercut his GOP rivals while showing voters he remained focused on his day job. Greeted with chants of “Let’s Go Joe” from a raucous crowd of building trades union members – a key base of Democratic support – Biden showcased the tens of thousands of construction jobs being created since he took office that are supported by legislation he signed into law. “We – you and I – together we’re turning things around and we’re doing it in a big way,” Biden said. “It’s time to finish the job. Finish the job.” Subscribe for more content like this. Biden’s campaign announcement, in a three-minute video, comes on the four-year anniversary of when he declared for the White House in 2019, promising to heal the “soul of the nation” amid the turbulent presidency of Donald Trump – a goal that has remained elusive. “I said we are in a battle for the soul of America, and we still are,” Biden said. “The question we are facing is whether in the years ahead we have more freedom or less freedom. More rights or fewer.” While the prospect of seeking reelection has been a given for most modern presidents, that’s not always been the case for Biden. A notable swath of Democratic voters has indicated they would prefer he not run, in part because of his age. Biden has called those concerns “totally legitimate” but he did not address the issue head-on in his launch video. Yet few things have unified Democratic voters like the prospect of Trump returning to power. And Biden’s political standing within his party stabilized after Democrats notched a stronger-than-expected performance in last year’s midterm elections. The president is set to run again on the same themes that buoyed his party last fall, particularly on preserving access to abortion. “Freedom. Personal freedom is fundamental to who we are as Americans. There’s nothing more important. Nothing more sacred,” Biden said in the launch video, depicting Republican extremists as trying to roll back access to abortion, cut Social Security, limit voting rights and ban books they disagree with. “Around the country, MAGA extremists are lining up to take those bedrock freedoms away.” As the contours of the campaign begin to take shape, Biden plans to run on his record. He spent his first two years as president combating the coronavirus pandemic and pushing through major bills such as the bipartisan infrastructure package and legislation to promote high-tech manufacturing and climate measures. The president also has multiple policy goals and unmet promises from his first campaign that he’s asking voters to give him another chance to fulfill. “Let’s finish this job. I know we can,” Biden said in the video, repeating a mantra he said a dozen times during his State of the Union address in February. Vice President Kamala Harris, who was featured prominently alongside Biden in the video, held a political rally at Howard University in Washington on Tuesday evening in support of abortion access, kicking off her own efforts to support the reelection effort. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

The lawsuit by E. Jean Carroll against former President Donald Trump is a high-profile case that has garnered significant media attention. Carroll alleges that Trump raped her in a New York City department store in the 1990s and defamed her when she publicly accused him of the assault. In her opening statements, Carroll's attorney Shawn Crowley argued that the lawsuit is about getting Carroll's life back, rather than seeking money, political gain, or status. Crowley described the alleged attack, in which Trump allegedly pinned Carroll against a dressing room wall and raped her, as a "dark turn" in what had previously been "playful banter." He emphasized that Carroll did not initially see Trump as a threat, but was wrong. In response, Trump's lawyer Joe Tacopina argued that the case comes down to whether the jury believes the "unbelievable" story told by Carroll. Tacopina accused Carroll of pursuing the lawsuit for financial gain and political motives, and of minimizing the pain of true rape victims. Subscribe for more content like this. Trump has denied Carroll's allegations, calling them a "con job" and a "hoax," and has also denied defaming her. The trial will determine whether Trump's comments about Carroll constitute defamation. Jury selection began on Tuesday and resulted in a panel of six men and three women. The judge has ordered an anonymous jury due to concerns about potential harassment or influence attempts by supporters of Trump. The trial is expected to last five to ten days, and it is unclear whether Trump will testify in person or rely on his videotaped deposition from October. The case has drawn attention to the issue of sexual assault and harassment, particularly in the context of high-profile individuals and power dynamics. It also highlights the difficulty of proving such allegations, particularly when there are no witnesses or physical evidence. The outcome of the trial could have significant implications for both Carroll and Trump, as well as for the broader conversation around sexual misconduct. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

If you’ve ever actually researched human behavior at a high level, you’d understand the importance of environment. When you are surrounded by the ruthless, you become more ruthless. The sad, sad. The average, average. Every trait and thought of the things you read, the people you are around, it all naturally rubs off on you, it’s gravity. It’s a well-studied fact. What you do with this fact, is the difference between the stupid and the intelligent. Stupid people do not abuse this universal law. They don’t use it to their advantage. They don’t ruthlessly cut out the shit influences of their life. They don’t relentlessly search to add positive ones. They actively resist a gravitational pull toward loserdom their entire life... When it takes a FRACTION of that effort to change the direction gravity pulls them. You’re subscribed to my mailing list, You most likely follow me on Twitter, You have set a good influence within your life. Apply the lessons and watch yourself be pulled towards success naturally. - Tate

The Biden administration has publicly released a 12-page summary of the results of the "hotwash" of US policies surrounding the end of the Afghanistan war, and has placed the blame on the withdrawal's deadly and chaotic events on former President Donald Trump. The report asserts that President Biden was "severely constrained" by Trump's decisions when he entered office, and while it does acknowledge that the evacuation of Americans and allies from Afghanistan should have begun sooner, it blames the delays on the Afghan government and military, as well as on US military and intelligence community assessments. Subscribe for more content like this. The report also faulted overly optimistic intelligence community assessments about the Afghan army's willingness to fight and stated that Biden followed military commanders' recommendations for the pace of the drawdown of US forces. Republicans in Congress have sharply criticized the withdrawal, focusing on the deaths of 13 service members in a suicide bombing at Kabul's airport, which also killed over 100 Afghans. The Biden administration also notes that it released pre-war warnings over "strong objections from senior officials in the Ukrainian government" in an apparent attempt to defend its national security decision-making. The administration says the errors in Afghanistan have informed its handling of Ukraine, where the Biden administration has been credited for supporting Kyiv's defence against Russia's invasion. The report appears to shift any blame in the Aug. 26, 2021, suicide bombing at Hamid Karzai International Airport to the US military, as it confirmed that it had sufficient resources and authorities to mitigate the threats. The Biden administration has blamed the February 2020 agreement Trump reached with the Taliban in Doha, Qatar, for boxing the US into leaving the country. The US carried out a successful operation to kill al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahri since the withdrawal, which the White House has argued is proof that it can still deter terrorist groups in Afghanistan. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

CNN host Don Lemon has been the subject of criticism from former President Donald Trump, who referred to him as "the dumbest man on television." The insult was just the latest in an ongoing feud between the two, which included clashes over the years. In 2017, Trump first coined the nickname for Lemon, and in 2020, he called the CNN host "not a smart person" after a segment where Lemon mocked the former president and his supporters. Lemon faced increased scrutiny in recent months after he made controversial comments in February about former GOP presidential candidate and former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley. He claimed that Haley was past her "prime" as she advocated for politicians over 75 to take a mandatory cognitive test. Following the comments, Lemon was forced to undergo "training" and apologize to CNN's staff in a morning editorial call. Subscribe for more content like this. Despite Lemon urging the media to stop covering Trump and claiming that he and the audience were ready to "move on" from the presence of Trump in political discussions, he continued to launch rants against the former president. Even every installment of Lemon's then-show, "Don Lemon Tonight," opened with the former anchor attacking Trump, whether in his monologue or during his hand-off with his then-primetime colleague Chris Cuomo. The ongoing feud between Lemon and Trump highlights the contentious relationship between the media and the former president. While Trump has frequently criticized CNN and other news outlets as "fake news," the media has also been quick to call out Trump's controversial statements and actions. As the political landscape continues to shift, it remains to be seen how the relationship between the media and politicians will evolve in the coming years. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

Former collegiate swimmer Riley Gaines is leading a charge against transgender athletes competing in women's sports. Gaines, who had competed against transgender swimmer Lia Thomas in the NCAA, is now fighting to bar trans athletes from participating in women's sports. Gaines has expressed her gratitude for House Republicans' efforts after the passing of the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, which aims to amend Title IX to prohibit schools that receive federal funding from allowing "a person whose sex is male" from participating in women's sports. The bill, if passed by the Senate, would accomplish Gaines' goal. Gaines, who was tied down to the one-hundredth of a second with Thomas, claimed that an official gave Thomas the trophy because she was a "biological" male, and officials wanted a "photo op." This moment led Gaines to realize that she had had enough and that she was done waiting for someone else to speak out on behalf of female athletes. Gaines' fight against transgender athletes' ability to participate in women's sports has led her to "totally change" her life plan. She has decided not to attend dental school in order to continue pressing forward in her fight. She warns Democrats that they will "pay" for their stance in 2024, as they accuse Republicans of "bullying" transgender student-athletes. The bill has passed with zero votes from Democrats, despite the party once being one that embraced women and fought for women's rights. Gaines claims that the war on women is underway, and the Democrats will pay for their stance in 2024. The bill's passage is now headed to the Democrat-controlled Senate, where it is expected to fail. However, Gaines' fight for female athletes' rights continues, and she hopes that the Senate will take notice of the importance behind this issue. Gaines' dedication to this cause highlights the passion and determination that female athletes possess when it comes to fighting for fairness in their respective sports. The issue of transgender athletes participating in women's sports has been a controversial topic for years, with many arguing that it's unfair to cisgender female athletes. Gaines, who has become the face of the movement to protect women's sports, believes that it's not about being anti-trans, but rather about ensuring a level playing field for all athletes. Despite the passage of the bill by the House of Representatives, many Democrats have criticized it, claiming that it discriminates against transgender students. However, Gaines believes that this is not the case and that the bill is simply about fairness in sports. "It's not about being anti-trans, it's not about being against anyone," she said. "It's just about fairness in sports, and that's what we're trying to achieve here." Gaines' experience competing against Lia Thomas, a transgender swimmer, has fueled her passion for this cause. She has spoken openly about the frustration she felt when she was denied a trophy after tying with Thomas in a race. "When this NCAA official reduced everything that I had worked my entire life for – every girl at that meet had worked their entire life for – down to a photo op for a [biological] male, that's when I knew I had had enough. And I was done waiting for someone else to speak out on behalf of female athletes," Gaines said. Subscribe for more content like this. Gaines' fight to protect women's sports has not come without sacrifice. She has put her plans for dental school on hold to continue advocating for this cause. However, she believes that it's a small price to pay to ensure that female athletes have a fair chance to compete. "Dental school will always be there. But the relevance and the importance behind this issue, seeing firsthand what's at stake if someone doesn't fight for this, I realize that that opportunity might not always be there," Gaines said. As the bill heads to the Senate, it remains to be seen whether it will pass or not. But one thing is clear: Gaines and other supporters of the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act will not give up until they have achieved their goal of ensuring fairness in women's sports. The passage of the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act has ignited a fierce debate over the participation of transgender athletes in women's sports. The bill, championed by former collegiate swimmer Riley Gaines and House Republicans, seeks to prohibit schools that receive federal funding from allowing "a person whose sex is male" from participating in women's sports. Gaines, who competed against transgender swimmer Lia Thomas in college, has been at the forefront of the movement to keep women's sports fair. She has argued that allowing biological males to compete in women's sports is inherently unfair and threatens to erode the gains made by female athletes over the years. The bill has been lauded by Republicans as a necessary step to protect the integrity of women's sports. But Democrats have decried the legislation as discriminatory and an attack on the rights of transgender student-athletes. Despite the deep partisan divide, Gaines expressed gratitude to House Republicans for their support and their efforts to pass the bill. However, she also issued a stern warning to Democrats, predicting that they will "pay" for their stance in the 2024 elections. "It just shows the war on women is underway, and the Democrats will pay for this in 2024," Gaines said in an interview with host Harris Faulkner on "The Faulkner Focus." Gaines' warning comes at a time when the issue of transgender rights is becoming increasingly contentious in American politics. The issue has become a flashpoint for the culture wars, with conservatives arguing that transgender rights threaten traditional values and liberals arguing that transgender individuals have the right to live their lives without discrimination. The bill's passage in the House is a significant victory for Gaines and other advocates of women's sports. But the fight is far from over, as the bill now heads to the Senate, where it is expected to face significant opposition from Democrats. For Gaines, the fight is personal. Her experience competing against Lia Thomas and the subsequent denial of a trophy she felt she rightfully deserved has fueled her passion for the cause. She has even put her life plans on hold to focus on the fight against transgender athletes' ability to participate in women's sports. "Dental school will always be there. But the relevance and the importance behind this issue, seeing firsthand what's at stake if someone doesn't fight for this, I realize that that opportunity might not always be there," Gaines said. The debate over transgender rights and women's sports is complex and emotionally charged. But with the passage of the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, the issue has reached a critical juncture. It remains to be seen what the future holds for the bill, and for the millions of female athletes across the country who are watching and waiting. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

The House of Representatives passed a bill on Thursday aimed at preventing biological males from competing as transgender athletes in girls' and women's sports at schools across the country. The Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act passed in a 219-203 vote, with all "yes" votes coming from Republicans and all "no" votes coming from Democrats. Republicans defended the bill as a means of sparing women and girls from having to compete against transgender women and girls who are biological males and can dominate these sports, preventing some female athletes from making the team. However, several Democrats accused Republicans of bullying transgender students by calling up the bill. Representative Greg Landsman of Ohio argued that "This bill is about bullying children. Stop bullying children." Representative Robert Garcia of California claimed that "House Republicans are choosing to bully and belittle trans children" and that "This is about attacking a small group of children, and it is shameful." Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington suggested renaming the bill the "cancel kids trans hate" bill, saying that "This bill fuels a virulent hate campaign against kids who just want to play with their friends." Representative Mark Takano of California argued that the bill would make school sports "less safe for women and girls" and that even discussing the legislation on the House floor was doing harm to transgender students. Republicans rejected these arguments and said they are trying to protect girls' and women's sports from being taken over by biological males. Representative Virginia Foxx of North Carolina said Democrats are ignoring the "physical advantages" that men have over women and rejected Jayapal's argument that the GOP is waging a "hate" campaign against transgender students. "It is ridiculous that we have had to stand here today to defend the rights of women and girls to participate in sports against other women and girls and they not being taken advantage of by biological males,". The Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act sponsored by Representative Greg Steube of Florida, states that educational institutions that receive Title IX funding from the federal government would not be allowed to "permit a person whose sex is male to participate in an athletic program or activity that is designed for women or girls." The bill adds that the sex of an athlete is defined only by their "reproductive biology and genetics at birth." Representative Bob Good of Virginia noted the case of Lia Thomas, a biological male who competed against women and won an NCAA swimming title last year. Good said, "Lia Thomas, whose given name at birth is William Thomas, ranks 65th among men in the 500-yard men's freestyle; however, he could beat all the biological women. A female student athlete at nearby Virginia Tech lost her opportunity to compete in the finals because a man took her place." NCAA champion swimmer Riley Gaines, who competed against Thomas and is now an activist looking to defend women's sports from trans athletes, said she supported Steube's bill when he introduced it. Gaines wrote, "As an athlete who has experienced the injustice of competing against a male firsthand, I'm grateful for the leadership of Representative Steube. He has made it clear that he will fight for fairness, privacy, and safety for girls and women in sports." Subscribe for more content like this. Steube has said he introduced his bill in order to "save women’s sports" from transgender women and girls who are denying biological women and girls spots on the team's roster and sometimes dominate these sports. He said a dangerous shift in U.S. culture requires a defense from Congress. The Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act has now passed the House of Representatives, but it is unclear if it will make it through the Senate. The debate surrounding this issue has become highly politicized, with each side accusing the other of bullying and discrimination. The debate over transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s sports has been a hot topic of discussion in recent years, with opinions on both sides of the issue. On Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, aimed at preventing biological males from competing as transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s sports at schools across the country. The bill passed in a 219-203 vote, with all the "yes" votes coming from Republicans, and all the "no" votes from Democrats. The Republican lawmakers behind the bill have defended it as a necessary step to ensure that girls and women are not forced to compete against transgender athletes, who they argue, have inherent physical advantages due to their male biology. The bill is seen as a response to the growing number of transgender women and girls who are competing in women’s sports, sparking controversy and debate across the country. However, several Democratic lawmakers have accused Republicans of "bullying" transgender students and argued that the bill is an extension of the bullying that transgender students already face at school. "This bill is about bullying children," said Rep. Greg Landsman, D-Ohio. "Stop bullying children." Other Democratic lawmakers echoed Landsman’s sentiments, stating that the bill is an attack on transgender children and that it would make school sports "less safe for women and girls." Rep. Mark Takano, D-Calif., even went so far as to argue that even discussing the legislation on the House floor was doing harm to transgender students. "This debate itself has been traumatizing," he asserted. The debate over transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s sports is not a new one, with similar bills being introduced and passed in several states across the country. Advocates of these bills argue that allowing transgender women and girls to compete in women’s sports gives them an unfair advantage due to their male biology. However, opponents of the bills argue that such laws are discriminatory and violate the rights of transgender athletes. They point out that transgender women and girls have undergone hormonal treatments to suppress their testosterone levels, making it more difficult for them to maintain their physical advantage. They also argue that preventing transgender athletes from competing in their chosen gender is harmful to their mental health and well-being. The issue has become particularly contentious in the world of college sports, with several high-profile cases of transgender athletes competing in women’s sports and winning championships. For example, Lia Thomas, a transgender woman who competed in women's swimming at the NCAA level, won a championship last year, sparking controversy and debate among athletes, coaches, and fans alike. Despite the opposition from Democratic lawmakers, the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act is now heading to the Senate for consideration. It remains to be seen whether it will gain enough support to become law, but one thing is clear: the debate over transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s sports is far from over, and it will continue to be a contentious issue for years to come. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

"The Dangerous Consequences of Right-Wing Conspiracy Theories" The shooting of 16-year-old Ralph Yarl in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 13 has sparked widespread outrage and renewed discussions about the dangers of right-wing conspiracy theories. Yarl was shot twice by 84-year-old Andrew Lester, who has been charged with first-degree assault and armed criminal action. Lester's grandson, Klint Ludwig, revealed that his grandfather had embraced right-wing conspiracy theories, including a "crazy" one involving US infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci. He also shared that Lester had a history of making racist comments and disparaging remarks about black people, gay people, and immigrants. Ludwig attributed his grandfather's actions to the 24-hour news cycle of fear and paranoia perpetuated by right-wing networks. He believes that such news reinforces negative views of minority groups and galvanizes racist people in their beliefs. The shooting of Ralph Yarl is just one example of how conspiracy theories can fuel dangerous and even deadly behavior. Throughout the past few years, there have been numerous instances of right-wing conspiracy theories leading to violence and hate crimes. For instance, the "Pizzagate" conspiracy theory, which alleged that high-ranking Democratic officials were running a child sex trafficking ring out of a pizza restaurant in Washington D.C., led to a man opening fire inside the restaurant. Similarly, the "QAnon" conspiracy theory, which claims that a global network of Satan-worshipping pedophiles controls the world, has been linked to multiple acts of violence, including the January 6 Capitol insurrection in Washington D.C. Conspiracy theories can have dangerous real-world consequences, and it's essential to recognize their potential impact. As Klint Ludwig stated, people need to speak out and not make excuses for this kind of behavior and violence. It's crucial to hold those who spread dangerous conspiracy theories accountable and to ensure that individuals who commit hate crimes and acts of violence are brought to justice. We must also work towards promoting critical thinking and media literacy to prevent the spread of false information and conspiracy theories. The shooting of Ralph Yarl is a tragic reminder of the dangers of right-wing conspiracy theories. It's time to take a stand against such ideologies and work towards a society that is free from fear and hatred. Despite the grandson's distancing from his grandfather's beliefs and behavior, the impact of the elder Lester's conspiratorial mindset was evident in his violent and senseless act of shooting an innocent teenager. The incident underscores the dangers of extremist beliefs and hate speech, particularly in the current climate of political polarization and misinformation. It is important to note that hate crimes and racially motivated violence have been on the rise in recent years, and it is essential to hold those responsible accountable. The Yarl family, their lawyers, and supporters have called for justice to be served, and the Justice Department is reportedly investigating the shooting as a hate crime. Subscribe for more content like this. As a society, we must confront the reality that extremism, racism, and bigotry have no place in our communities. We must actively work towards eradicating these beliefs and creating a more inclusive and just society for all. The fight for justice and equality is ongoing, and it requires the collective effort of every member of our society. Klint Ludwig, the grandson of 84-year-old Andrew Lester, who has been charged with opening fire on a Black teenager, has spoken out about his grandfather's racist beliefs and right-wing conspiracy theories. Ralph Yarl, a 16-year-old high school junior, was shot twice by Mr Lester when he went to pick up his younger twin brothers from a friend's house in Kansas City, Missouri, on April 13. According to Kansas City police, Yarl got the address mixed up and accidentally rang the doorbell of a home on 115th Street, where he was shot by Mr Lester. Yarl's injuries were extensive, and he spent days in the hospital before returning home to continue his recovery. In an interview with CNN, Ludwig revealed that his grandfather used to make disparaging comments about Black people, gay people, and immigrants. He also shared that Mr Lester kept a large number of firearms in his home, including rifles and handguns. Ludwig stated that his grandfather believed in various right-wing conspiracy theories, including one against US infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci. He said that during the Covid pandemic, his grandfather had shared the conspiracy theory against Mr Fauci, which he found "crazy." Ludwig said that the two had become distant from each other since then, and he believes his grandfather holds racist tendencies and beliefs. Ludwig stated that he believes his grandfather's actions were motivated by fear, perpetuated by right-wing news networks that reinforce negative views of minority groups, which can lead to the galvanization of racist people in their beliefs. Ludwig spoke out against his relative's behavior and condemned the shooting of Ralph Yarl, stating that he and his family stand with Yarl and seek justice. Mr Lester has pleaded not guilty to first-degree assault and armed criminal action, and the case is now being probed by the Justice Department as a hate crime. The shooting of Ralph Yarl has sparked outrage from celebrities, civil rights attorneys, and the victim's family, with many calling for justice for the teenager. The case highlights the ongoing issue of racism and violence against Black individuals in America and the need for change in the justice system. In conclusion, the tragic shooting of Ralph Yarl and the subsequent revelation of his shooter's racist beliefs and right-wing conspiracy theories serve as a stark reminder of the ongoing issue of racism in America. While progress has been made in recent years, there is still much work to be done to ensure equality and justice for all individuals, regardless of their race or background. Thanks for watching, subscribe to our channel for authenticity.

The tragic shooting of Ralph Yarl by Andrew Lester has caused a ripple effect across the nation, highlighting the dangerous consequences of mistaken identity and the importance of addressing racial biases. While many have called for justice for Yarl, including Black celebrities, activists, and politicians, one of Lester's own grandsons is now speaking out, calling for accountability and blaming the Kansas City Police Department for failing to act sooner. Klint Ludwig, a former public safety officer who grew up knowing his grandfather as a "great" man, now believes that Lester has been overtaken by conspiracy theories and right-wing news outlets, leading to a state of fear and paranoia. Ludwig blames this for his grandfather's actions on the night of April 13th when Yarl mistakenly rang the doorbell of Lester's home. Ludwig states that his grandfather's actions were his responsibility, but falling prey to misinformation only worsened his mental state. Lester, 84, claimed that he fired his weapon in self-defense when he saw a Black male pulling on his exterior storm door handle, thinking his home was being broken into. However, Yarl, an honors student at Staley High School, claimed that he was waiting after ringing the doorbell when Lester opened the door and shot him in the head and then in the arm. Yarl's injuries included a cracked skull, loss of brain tissue, and scarring. While Lester pleaded not guilty to felony counts of assault in the first degree and armed criminal action, he could face a maximum sentence of life in prison. The racial component of the case is clear, and the fact that Lester was initially released within two hours of being questioned caused widespread outrage. Clay County Prosecuting Attorney Zachary Thompson emphasized that the charging documents did not specify whether the shooting was racially motivated, but the fact that Yarl was a Black teenager who was shot by a white homeowner raises questions of bias and racism. In the wake of this tragedy, it is clear that more needs to be done to address the root causes of racial bias and misinformation that can lead to dangerous consequences. While Lester's family members have stated that they do not believe he is racist and that he shot Yarl only because he thought his home was being broken into, the fact remains that Yarl's life was put in danger due to a mistake that could have happened to anyone. It is up to us as a society to hold individuals accountable for their actions and work towards a more just and equitable future for all. The tragic shooting of Ralph Yarl has sparked a nationwide conversation about race, gun violence, and the responsibility of law enforcement to protect the public. While many have rallied behind Yarl and his family, others have questioned the motives of the shooter and the police department that failed to act quickly enough to bring him to justice. Subscribe for more content like this. One of the most striking voices to emerge in this debate is that of Klint Ludwig, a former public safety officer and the grandson of Andrew Lester, the man who shot Yarl. Ludwig has come forward to denounce his grandfather's actions and to call for justice for Yarl, even as he acknowledges the pain of watching a loved one be held accountable for such a terrible mistake. Ludwig's words carry a powerful message about the dangers of falling prey to misinformation and conspiracy theories, particularly in a time when the 24-hour news cycle can be overwhelming and divisive. He has called on his grandfather and others like him to take responsibility for their actions and to reject fear and paranoia as a way of life. At the same time, Ludwig has shown great compassion for Yarl and his family, acknowledging the injustice of a young man being shot simply for ringing the wrong doorbell. He has emphasized the importance of holding his grandfather accountable for his actions, regardless of their relationship, and has spoken out in support of the Black Lives Matter movement. The shooting of Ralph Yarl has been a tragic reminder of the ways in which racism and gun violence continue to impact our society, but it has also shown the power of individual voices to speak out against injustice and demand change. As the case moves forward, it is clear that Klint Ludwig will continue to play an important role in this ongoing conversation, challenging his grandfather and others to confront the harm that can be caused by hate, fear, and misinformation. The tragic incident that occurred on the night of April 13 has raised several questions about the state of race relations in America. The shooting of Ralph Yarl, an innocent Black teenager who made a simple mistake of going to the wrong house, has brought attention to other similar incidents in recent times. It highlights the need for a society that values human life and is willing to take accountability for its actions. The fact that Andrew Lester, the shooter, had become consumed with watching conservative news outlets and following conspiracy theories built on misinformation is a stark reminder of the dangerous effects of misinformation and fake news. In recent years, there has been an increase in the spread of misinformation on social media and conservative news outlets that has fueled racial tensions and led to tragic incidents such as this. Klint Ludwig, the grandson of Andrew Lester, has spoken out against his grandfather's actions and has called for justice for Ralph Yarl. He has also criticized the Kansas City Police Department for failing to act on the day of the incident and has expressed his gratitude that the backlash to their inaction has led to charges being brought against his grandfather. The shooting of Ralph Yarl is a tragedy that has affected not just his family but also the wider community. It is a stark reminder of the importance of valuing human life and treating each other with respect and dignity. It highlights the need for us to come together as a society to address the underlying issues of racial tensions and work towards building a better future for all. As the trial of Andrew Lester continues, it is important to remember that justice must be served, not just for Ralph Yarl and his family, but for all those who have been victims of racial violence and injustice. We must work towards creating a society that is based on principles of equality, justice, and respect for all, regardless of race or ethnicity. In conclusion, the shooting of Ralph Yarl is a tragic incident that has highlighted the need for a society that values human life and is willing to take accountability for its actions. It is a stark reminder of the dangers of misinformation and the need to combat racism and racial tensions in our communities. As we continue to seek justice for Ralph Yarl, let us also work towards building a society that is based on principles of equality, justice, and respect for all. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

When I was broke, me and my brother would spend our entire net worth on amazing experiences. $7k gone in a weekend. Come back home with rent due in a month and no way to pay it. Cowardice is bred into poor people. It ensures poverty by dulling their appetite for risk. If I gave you 10k right now, and you put that in stocks or a mortgage, Do you think your life would actually change? Genuinely think and answer yourself. You’d still be at the same shit job, with the same shit friends and hold the same shit ideas. Even if you could spend the 10k on “business”. What business? How? You’d burn all the money learning harsh lessons about the realities of business. Lessons you would already know for free if you had any actual successful businessmen around you. You are exactly where you deserve to be. Poor? Then money isn’t your problem. Your brain is the problem. YOU are the reason for your own poverty. YOU are the reason you can’t make money. Money won’t fix you being a coward. Money won’t teach you how the world works. Money is a bandaid for a gashing wound which is who you are. This is why I’ve ALWAYS been a spender. I knew saving was garbage, traditional investing is garbage, everything society tells you is “the way out” is all garbage. You need a place to sleep, food to eat, KNOWLEDGE and PEOPLE. Just what you know isn’t important. Just who you know isn’t important. It’s WHO you know that makes WHAT you know important. How many ACTUALLY rich rich people are you speaking to daily? None? One? THAT is what will actually save you from a slave’s existence. Rewire your brain. Get important people to recognize your face. That’s your way out. YOU ARE EXACTLY WHERE YOU DESERVE TO BE. ‍ Change who YOU are and you will change how YOU live. Until then, have fun staying poor. - Tate

Democrats like to talk about “civility” and “unity,” but only after calling their enemies “Nazis” and “domestic terrorists.” Remember, they’re allowed to be the bigots they call everyone else, but you aren’t allowed to speak truths about the people living in glass houses. At a recent House Homeland Security Committee hearing, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) was interrupted multiple times during her time to speak because of accusations she made against both Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and fellow polarizing Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.). While Greene’s tactics may be polarizing, they raise important questions about the selective outrage and lack of civility in today’s political landscape. First, let’s address Swalwell’s interruption after Greene mocked the California congressman’s time accusing Republicans of wanting to “defund the FBI,” while ignoring that his party called to defund all police for at least a year in the not too distant past. While Swalwell may not like being called out for his hypocrisy, interrupting Greene’s time is a clear violation of the rules of the House. If we truly believe in the importance of civility and following the rules, then we must hold all members of Congress accountable, regardless of their political affiliations. Next, let’s examine Greene’s accusation that Mayorkas is lying about the Fentanyl crisis and its impact on American children and teenagers. While Mayorkas may have his own perspective on the issue, Greene’s concerns should be taken seriously and not dismissed out of hand. If we truly want to promote unity and work towards solutions, then we must be willing to listen to all perspectives, even those we may disagree with. Furthermore, the response from Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) to get Greene’s accusation of calling Mayorkas a liar taken down is another example of selective outrage from the left. While it is important to maintain decorum and respect in the House, if a witness is lying, then they should be called out on it. Disagreement and debate are healthy for democracy, but we must be willing to hold all members of Congress accountable for their words and actions. Finally, the issue of free speech and selective enforcement of the law must be addressed. While it is important to protect the Capitol and the safety of our elected officials, the government cannot selectively enforce the law and crackdown on peaceful protests while turning a blind eye to violent riots. Subscribe for more content like this. We must hold all individuals and groups accountable for their actions, regardless of their political affiliations. Understand the power of language: Throughout history, language has been used as a tool for persuasion, propaganda, and manipulation. Understanding the power of language can help us be more discerning when listening to politicians and media personalities, and it can also help us communicate more effectively when we want to express our own opinions. By being aware of how language can be used to divide people and spread misinformation, we can be more conscious of the messages we receive and the messages we put out into the world. Learn about the history of political discourse: Political discourse has been a part of human history for thousands of years, and studying its history can help us understand the evolution of political ideologies and the ways in which different groups have used rhetoric to gain power. From the ancient Greeks to the Enlightenment thinkers to modern political movements, there is a wealth of information to be gained from studying political discourse throughout history. Remember the importance of civil discourse: While it's easy to get caught up in heated political debates, it's important to remember that civil discourse is key to a healthy democracy. Civil discourse allows people with different perspectives to come together and engage in meaningful dialogue, rather than resorting to name-calling and personal attacks. By focusing on respectful communication and a willingness to listen to different viewpoints, we can create a more inclusive and effective political system. Recognize the danger of demonizing opponents: Throughout history, political opponents have been demonized as a way to discredit them and undermine their legitimacy. However, demonizing opponents can lead to a dangerous cycle of polarization and division, and it can also lead to violence and persecution. By recognizing the danger of demonizing opponents, we can work to promote a more inclusive and collaborative political culture. Study the role of propaganda in politics: Propaganda has been used throughout history to sway public opinion, and it continues to be a powerful tool in modern politics. By studying the techniques of propaganda and understanding how it works, we can be more critical of the messages we receive and better equipped to discern truth from falsehood. This can help us become more informed citizens and more effective advocates for our beliefs. In conclusion, the lack of civility and selective outrage in today’s political landscape is concerning and must be addressed if we want to work towards unity and solutions. While Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s tactics may be polarizing, her concerns should be taken seriously and not dismissed out of hand. We must be willing to listen to all perspectives, hold all members of Congress accountable, and uphold the rule of law in a fair and impartial manner. Only then can we truly work towards a better future for all Americans. The fact of the matter is that Democrats have a long history of advocating for "civility" and "unity" while simultaneously using derogatory and inflammatory language towards their political opponents. They label anyone who disagrees with them as "Nazis" or "domestic terrorists," yet they themselves engage in the same behavior they claim to condemn. At the hearing, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene was interrupted multiple times while she tried to bring attention to the Fentanyl crisis and how it is killing Americans every day. She was accused of calling Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas a liar and was ultimately prevented from speaking for the rest of her time. This is just another example of the left's selective outrage and attempts to stifle free speech. They claim to be the party of civility and tolerance, yet they are quick to silence anyone who dares to speak out against their agenda. And let's not forget about the violent riots that swept across America during the summer of 2020. Democrats were quick to condemn the storming of the Capitol on January 6th, yet they turned a blind eye to the destruction and chaos that occurred in cities across the country. They even went so far as to encourage and condone these riots, which resulted in the loss of innocent lives and the destruction of countless businesses and homes. It's clear that the left's calls for "civility" and "unity" are nothing more than empty rhetoric. They are only interested in pushing their own agenda and silencing anyone who dares to disagree with them. It's time for Americans to wake up and realize that the left is not interested in working together to solve the problems facing our country. They are only interested in power and control. In conclusion, Democrats like to talk a big game about "civility" and "unity," but their actions tell a different story. They are quick to demonize their political opponents and silence anyone who dares to speak out against them. It's time for Americans to hold the left accountable for their hypocrisy and demand real change from our elected officials. Only then can we truly come together as a nation and work towards a brighter future for all. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

Republican Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy has voiced his concerns about President Biden’s judicial nominees, accusing them of being radical and unqualified for the job. Speaking on Fox News’ “America’s Newsroom” on Wednesday morning, Kennedy criticized Biden’s nominees, stating that they either obtained their law license at Costco or were not attentive during their classes. According to Kennedy, they lack an understanding of the Constitution and have demonstrated records as activists who want to rewrite the Constitution for their social and economic agendas, which have not been accepted by voters. Kennedy, a UVA and Oxford-educated attorney, is known for frequently asking judicial nominees basic legal questions at confirmation hearings to test their knowledge. He has previously stumped a Biden nominee in a January confirmation hearing about basic constitutional articles, and also asked another nominee in March about Brady motions during a confirmation hearing. The absence of Democratic California Sen. Dianne Feinstein from the Senate Judiciary Committee due to a shingles infection has caused controversy. With Feinstein unable to attend proceedings, Democrats are unable to advance President Biden’s judicial nominees through the committee. Republicans blocked a request from Democrats on Tuesday to temporarily replace Feinstein on the committee, requiring 60 votes or unanimous consent to pass. Feinstein announced in February that she would not be running for reelection in 2024, and multiple Democrats have called for her resignation due to her extended absence from the Senate. Kennedy’s criticisms of President Biden’s judicial nominees come at a time of increasing polarization between Democrats and Republicans over judicial appointments. With the Senate currently split 50-50 between Democrats and Republicans, the balance of power in the judiciary is at stake. Republicans have been keen to block President Biden’s nominees, accusing them of being too liberal and activist in their approach. However, Democrats have accused Republicans of being hypocritical, given their support for former President Trump’s judicial nominees, many of whom were also criticized for their lack of qualifications and ideological biases. Democrats argue that the judicial appointments process should be based on merit, rather than partisan politics. Subscribe for more content like this. As the battle over judicial nominations continues to escalate, it remains to be seen whether President Biden’s nominees will be able to overcome the opposition and be confirmed. With Kennedy and other Republicans strongly opposing them, it may be an uphill battle for the nominees to be appointed to the bench. This isn't the first time Kennedy has been critical of Biden's judicial nominees. In a January tweet, he described the president's picks as "just not that bright." But Kennedy's remarks on Wednesday drew strong reactions from Democrats and legal experts who accused him of engaging in "anti-intellectualism" and "partisan hackery." Some also pointed out that Kennedy's own legal knowledge has been called into question in the past. Kennedy's comments also come at a time when the Senate Judiciary Committee is considering several high-profile nominees, including Ketanji Brown Jackson, who has been nominated to replace Attorney General Merrick Garland on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Jackson, a former clerk for Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer and a current federal district judge, has been widely praised for her legal expertise and judicial temperament. She is seen as a potential future Supreme Court nominee and has already won the support of some Republicans, including Utah Sen. Mike Lee. But Kennedy is not among her fans. In his interview with Fox News, he described Jackson as a "hard-left activist" and criticized her for supporting criminal justice reform and voting rights. Kennedy's comments are likely to further inflame partisan tensions over judicial nominations, which have been a major point of contention between Democrats and Republicans in recent years. With the Senate evenly divided between the two parties, each new judicial appointment is viewed as a potential tipping point that could shift the balance of power on key issues like abortion, gun rights, and environmental regulation. As the battle over judicial nominations continues to heat up, Kennedy's harsh words are likely to reverberate across the political landscape, further fueling the already intense debate over the future of the federal judiciary. Senator Kennedy has expressed concerns about President Biden's judicial nominees, claiming they lack the qualifications and understanding of the Constitution necessary to serve on the bench. He accused them of being activists who want to rewrite the Constitution to fit their own agendas. Kennedy's criticism has been directed at nominees for federal judgeships, including Charnelle Bjelkengren and S. Kato Crews, both of whom struggled to answer basic legal questions during confirmation hearings. Bjelkengren was unable to recall what Article 5 of the Constitution does, while Crews could not define what a Brady motion is. Kennedy's comments come at a time when Democrats are struggling to advance President Biden's judicial nominees through the Senate Judiciary Committee. With Dianne Feinstein absent due to a shingles infection, Democrats are unable to secure the necessary votes to move the nominations forward. Republicans blocked a request to temporarily replace Feinstein on the committee, leaving the confirmation process in limbo. Some Democrats have called for Feinstein's resignation, citing her extended absence from the Senate. The California senator announced earlier this year that she would not be seeking reelection in 2024, and several candidates have already launched campaigns for her seat. Kennedy's critique of Biden's nominees reflects broader concerns among conservatives about the direction of the judiciary under the current administration. Republicans have accused Democrats of politicizing the courts by nominating individuals who are more focused on advancing progressive policies than upholding the Constitution. The debate over the future of the judiciary is likely to intensify in the coming months, as Democrats continue to push for confirmation of their nominees and Republicans work to block them. With control of the Senate likely to be up for grabs in the 2022 midterm elections, the stakes for both parties are high, and the outcome could have long-lasting implications for the country's legal system. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.

In a major win for Dominion Voting Systems, Fox News and its parent company, Fox Corp., have reached a settlement in the defamation suit filed by Dominion over spurious claims of fraud in the 2020 presidential election. The trial was set to begin in Delaware Superior Court, but the two parties settled for $787.5 million, about half of Dominion's original ask of $1.6 billion. The settlement represents a significant victory for Dominion, which accused Fox stars, executives, journalists, and guests of defaming the company by promoting false conspiracies about it switching votes for then-President Donald Trump to Democratic challenger Joe Biden. Dominion pursued a "to the pain" strategy, hoping to secure a large payout and public apology from Fox News. Fox News released a statement acknowledging the court's rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false, and the settlement reflects their continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards. They expressed hope that resolving the dispute with Dominion amicably, instead of a divisive trial, would allow the country to move forward from these issues. However, the settlement also highlights the damage Fox's defamatory statements caused to Dominion's reputation, employees, and customers. Dominion CEO John Poulos stated that Fox had admitted to telling lies about Dominion, causing enormous damage to his company. Poulos emphasized that truthful reporting in the media is essential to democracy. The settlement also raises questions about what other evidence has yet to be made public. Dominion's legal team argued that Fox's defamatory statements had severely damaged its reputation, and the settlement is a significant step toward restoring its good name. However, by mostly trying its case in the court of public opinion, Dominion has undermined Fox's reputation, which could have serious consequences. Throughout the legal clash, Fox and its proprietors, Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, were willing to pay the cost to make the spectacle go away. However, evidence that dribbled out in court hearings and documents continued to pile embarrassment upon embarrassment upon disgrace for the network. Fox News Chief Executive Suzanne Scott warned colleagues against running fact-checking segments by the network's reporters debunking lies about election fraud. Fox founder Rupert Murdoch advocated going slow in confronting Fox's pro-Trump viewers with unwelcome news to protect the franchise. Subscribe for more content like this. Hosts like Hannity and Maria Bartiromo also peddled false conspiracy theories and insinuated fraud by Dominion without evidence. Judge Eric Davis, known for his even-keeled demeanor on his bench, ruled in Dominion's favor on key points, finding that the statements on Fox's shows were false and had defamed the election tech company. He repeatedly lost his equanimity with Fox's blue-ribbon legal team as the trial neared, warning them that he felt misled and questioning whether Fox had withheld other material and information from Dominion's attorneys and the court. In the end, the settlement is a vindication for Dominion and a significant financial blow to Fox News. However, it remains to be seen what the long-term consequences will be for Fox's reputation and credibility in the media landscape. Truthful reporting and accountability are essential to democracy, and the settlement serves as a reminder of the consequences of spreading false information in the public sphere. The Dominion Voting Systems lawsuit against Fox News has been one of the most closely watched legal battles of the year, drawing attention from media outlets and legal experts alike. The lawsuit centered around spurious claims of election fraud in the 2020 presidential race, with Dominion accusing Fox News of defaming the company by spreading lies and conspiracies about its role in the election. On Tuesday, the case came to an unexpected end, with Fox News and its parent company Fox Corp. agreeing to a settlement of $787.5 million, about half of Dominion's original $1.6 billion ask. The settlement was announced by Judge Eric Davis of the Delaware Superior Court, who hailed it as a victory for accountability and vindication. Dominion CEO John Poulos also expressed satisfaction with the outcome, saying that Fox News had admitted to telling lies about Dominion that had caused "enormous damage" to the company, its employees, and its customers. He added that truthful reporting in the media is essential to our democracy, and that he hoped the settlement would help to restore trust in the media. Fox News also released a statement following the announcement of the settlement, acknowledging the court's rulings that certain claims about Dominion were false, and saying that the settlement reflected the network's continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards. The statement also expressed hope that the decision to resolve the dispute with Dominion amicably would allow the country to move forward from these issues. While the settlement may bring an end to the legal battle, it is unlikely to put an end to the controversy and debate over Fox News and its coverage of the 2020 election. As legal experts have noted, there is still much evidence that has not been made public, and a trial would have revealed documents and statements that could have constituted some of the most damning evidence against Fox. Despite the settlement, the reputation of both Fox News and its parent company may continue to suffer, as the public becomes increasingly aware of the network's role in spreading misinformation and propaganda. Throughout the legal battle, Dominion pursued a "to the pain" strategy, seeking to inflict maximum discomfort on Fox News and its proprietors in order to secure a big payout and a public apology. For Fox and its controlling owners, the settlement was worth the cost to make the spectacle go away. But for Dominion, the lawsuit was always about more than just money. It was about restoring the company's good name and holding Fox News accountable for the damage it had caused. As the legal battle comes to a close, it is clear that the Dominion lawsuit against Fox News will be remembered as one of the most consequential defamation cases in recent history. The settlement may bring closure to the parties involved, but the impact of the lawsuit will continue to reverberate throughout the media landscape for years to come. It serves as a reminder of the power and responsibility of the media, and the need for accountability when that power is abused. Ultimately, the settlement is a victory for truth and democracy, and a warning to those who would seek to manipulate and distort the facts for their own gain. Thanks for watching, subscribe our channel for authenticity.