Month: September 2020

Home / Month: September 2020

The next edition of Impact Wrestling will get a reprieve from two straight weeks of going head-to-head with NXT with six matches in addition to a new talk show segment.

In an eight-man tag match, former Impact Tag Team Champions The North will team with Ace Austin and Madman Fulton to take on current Tag Team Champions Motor City Machine Guns and The Rascalz. This was made after The North and Austin/Fulton jumped both the MCMG and Rascalz after their tag title match Tuesday before the Good Brothers ran out to make the save.

In another featured match, Knockouts Champion Deonna Purrazzo will team with Kimber Lee against Kylie Rae and Susie. The match was made during Madison Rayne’s Locker Room Talk segment when Purrazzo and Lee interrupted and issued a challenge.

Finally, Tenille Dashwood will make her Impact in-ring return, accompanied by her new personal photographer Caleb Konley.

Other matches and segments announced:

Brian Myers vs. Willie Mack III
Taya Valkyrie vs. Kiera Hogan
XXXL (Ace Romero/Larry D) vs. The Deaners (Cody/Jake)
A new talk show segment called The Whole F’n Talk Show featuring Rob Van Dam and Katie Forbes

Read More

A new study exposes serious gaps in the U.S. government’s commitment to fighting the effects of the climate crisis on endangered species, which federal agencies are required by law to protect.

“While climate change is a pressing threat to imperiled species, agencies that manage federally protected species have not given enough attention to this threat,” said Aimee Delach, study co-author and a researcher at Defenders of Wildlife.

Researchers at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and Defenders of Wildlife examined the sensitivities of the country’s 459 endangered species to a number of global changes brought about by the climate crisis, and found all but one of them—the Hawaiian goose—have traits that make it challenging for them to adapt to those effects.

“The biggest roadblock is likely the repeated denial of the latest science by the current administration, members of Congress, and those who stand to gain from the continued use of damaging fossil fuels. Since 2016, agencies have given scant attention to the climate crisis more broadly.”
—Astrid Caldas, Union of Concerned Scientists

While the authors of the study, which was published in Nature Climate Change on Monday, found that 99.8 percent of the country’s endangered species are threatened by the climate crisis, government agencies consider the rapidly changing climate to be a risk for only 64 percent of them. Just 18 percent of the species are currently protected under specific plans, but the federal government is bound to protect all of them under the Endangered Species Act.

“The current administration produced only one species’ document in 2017-18 that included management actions to address climate impacts,” said Delach.

Dr. Gretchen Goldman, a research director at UCS, tweeted that the report identified “a big gap in our endangered species protections.”

Astrid Caldas, a climate scientist at UCS who co-authored the report, suggested that the Trump administration has in less than three years greatly reduced the government’s efforts to protect endangered species from melting ice, habitat destruction, and other climate changes.

“While underfunding and the lack of tools to plan and implement needed actions could be partially to blame for the lack of action, the biggest roadblock is likely the repeated denial of the latest science by the current administration, members of Congress, and those who stand to gain from the continued use of damaging fossil fuels,” Caldas said in a statement. “Since 2016, agencies have given scant attention to the climate crisis more broadly.”

The report comes days after documents revealed that President Donald Trump’s Interior Secretary, David Bernhardt, is gutting endangered species protections to help the same companies Bernhardt was a lobbyist for before entering government.

Nearly three-quarters of the species were shown to be sensitive to three or more factors of the changing climate, increasing the danger of extinction. 

A number of amphibians, mollusks, and arthropods were the most sensitive to climate changes, including the Sonoran tiger salamander and the Florida leafwing butterfly.

“We still have time to safeguard many of the endangered species we treasure, but the window to act is narrowing,” Caldas said.

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

Click Here: collingwood magpies 2019 training guernsey

Read More

Corporations’ quest for profits is what “is driving up drug prices and nothing more.”

That’s according to Dennis Bourdette, M.D., chair of neurology in the Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU) School of Medicine, who co-authored a study published Monday that sought to find out companies’ rationale for the escalating prices on medications for patients with multiple sclerosis.

Prices for those drugs, an accompanying press release notes, have jumped up by 10% to 15% every year for the past decade.

Click Here: Cardiff Blues Store

The study by a team of researchers at OHSU and the OHSU/Oregon State University College of Pharmacy, which appears in the journal Neurology this month, was based on interviews with four current and former pharmaceutical industry executives who had direct involvement in the pricing or marketing of MS drugs.

The executives, who were not named, laid bare the motivating factor for the surges.

“I would say the rationales for the price increases are purely what can maximize profit,” sad one executive. “There’s no other rationale for it, because costs [of producing the drug] have not gone up by 10% or 15%; you know, the costs have probably gone down.”

Such statements, said the researchers, counter the industry’s narrative that the high drug prices are an effort to recoup their research and development costs.

“The industry executive said the quiet part out loud,” said Zain Rizvi, law and policy researcher with Public Citizen’s Access to Medicines project, in a statement to Common Dreams. “Price-gouging is central to the industry business model.”

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

One executive inteviewed for the study pointed out that the U.S. is a global outlier when it comes to the price hikes. They said that “it is only in the United States, really, that you can take price increases. You can’t do it in the rest of the world. In the rest of the world, prices decline with duration in the marketplace.”

Maintaining or lowering the prices would give a negative impression about the medication, said one executive. “We can’t come in at less,” they said. “That would mean we’re less effective, we think less of our product, so we have to go more.”

The responses, said Bourdette, who also directs the OHSU Multiple Sclerosis Center, speak volumes.

“The frank information provided by these executives pulls back the curtain of secrecy on how drug price decisions are made,” he said.

While the new study focused on MS medications, the issue of skyrocketing prices is more widespread. As economist Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research noted last year: “The government gives drug companies patent monopolies that make it illegal for competitors to sell the same drug. These patent monopolies allow companies to charge prices that are a hundred or even a thousand times the free market price.”

And other recent research backs up the case that drugmakers are relying on price hikes to drive their growth.

Thus, the need for fundamental change is clear, said Rizvi.

“This is not the case of just one bad actor. This is the case of an entirely bad system,” he added. “The study underscores that we need a sea change in our drug pricing system to put public health over private wealth.”

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

Read More

Climate campaigners bemoaned a judge’s ruling in New York on Tuesday which sided with ExxonMobil in a lawsuit that charged the oil giant defrauded investors by concealing for decades what it understood about how carbon pollution was contributing to global warming.

The lawsuit, stated Judge Barry Ostrager of the trial-level state Supreme Court in his ruling, “failed to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that ExxonMobil made any material misstatements or omissions about its practices and procedures that misled any reasonable investor.”

The judge further noted that New York State Attorney General Letitia James, in presenting the state’s case, “produced no testimony from any investor who claimed to have been misled by any disclosure, even though the Office of the Attorney General had previously represented it would call such individuals as trial witnesses.”

The lawsuit, People of New York v. ExxonMobil, attracted national and international media attention for being the most high-profile effort yet to hold the fossil fuel industry to account for misleading the global public about what—and crucially when—it knew about the destructive results of digging up and burning billions and billions of tons of coal, oil, and gas.

In response to the court’s decision, Dominique Thomas, a New York organizer with 350.org, said that while the ruling was a disappointment it would do nothing to dampen the demands for Exxon to be held accountable for its behavior.

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

“Despite this ruling, the crucial work to hold the likes of Exxon accountable for climate crimes goes on. This is just the tip of the accountability iceberg,” said Thomas. “We thank Attorney General Tish James for her diligence in fighting to protect New Yorkers from rogue and reckless polluters.”

Thomas’ colleague at 350.org, North America director Tamara Toles O’Laughlin, said that even with the ruling in New York there are numerous other lawsuits now in process also seeking to hold the oil giant accountable for its climate crimes. In a statement, O’Laughlin said:

In response to Tuesday’s defeat in court, the Attorney General James said that despite the ruling her office “will continue to fight to ensure companies are held responsible for actions that undermine and jeopardize the financial health and safety of Americans across our country, and we will continue to fight to end climate change.”

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

Read More

President TrumpDonald John TrumpSenate advances public lands bill in late-night vote Warren, Democrats urge Trump to back down from veto threat over changing Confederate-named bases Esper orders ‘After Action Review’ of National Guard’s role in protests MORE on Wednesday cast doubt on Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth WarrenWarren, Democrats urge Trump to back down from veto threat over changing Confederate-named bases OVERNIGHT DEFENSE: Joint Chiefs chairman says he regrets participating in Trump photo-op | GOP senators back Joint Chiefs chairman who voiced regret over Trump photo-op | Senate panel approves 0B defense policy bill Trump on collision course with Congress over bases with Confederate names MORE’s (D-Mass.) 2020 presidential campaign, saying that he hit her “too hard, too early.”

“I hit her too hard, too early. And now it looks like she’s finished,” Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity.

Click Here: los jaguares argentinaADVERTISEMENT

Trump and Warren have long maintained a fraught relationship.

Trump’s campaign went after Warren shortly before she formally announced her intentions to run for the White House, attacking the Democratic senator for her claims to Native American heritage and saying that she would be rejected by the American people for “her dishonest campaign and socialist ideas, like the Green New Deal, that will raise taxes, kill jobs and crush America’s middle class.”

Trump early on latched on to Warren’s previous claims of Native American ancestry, often questioning them and disparagingly referring to her as “Pocahontas.” 

Warren, a vocal Trump critic, sought in October to get out in front of criticism originating from those claims by publicizing the results of a DNA test. The results purported “strong evidence” that she had Native American ancestry, likely from a distant ancestor, but the move drew sharp criticism from many Native Americans and advocates, prompting her to issue multiple apologies.

“This is our family’s story, and it’s all consistent from that point in time. But as I said, it’s important to note I’m not a tribal citizen, and I should have been more mindful of the distinction,” Warren told reporters last month.

Democratic presidential candidate Pete ButtigiegPete ButtigiegScaled-back Pride Month poses challenges for fundraising, outreach Biden hopes to pick VP by Aug. 1 It’s as if a Trump operative infiltrated the Democratic primary process MORE said in a recent interview that Vice President Pence’s reported belief that God wants him to be vice president and Donald TrumpDonald John TrumpSenate advances public lands bill in late-night vote Warren, Democrats urge Trump to back down from veto threat over changing Confederate-named bases Esper orders ‘After Action Review’ of National Guard’s role in protests MORE to be president seems to give God “very little credit.”

The South Bend, Ind., mayor was pressed on the issue during a discussion Father Edward Beck, a Roman Catholic priest and on-air faith and religion commentator for CNN.

ADVERTISEMENT

Buttigieg said in response that “the idea that God wants somebody like Mike PenceMichael (Mike) Richard PencePence posts, deletes photo of Trump campaign staff without face masks, not social distancing Pence threatens to deploy military if Pennsylvania governor doesn’t quell looting Pence on Floyd: ‘No tolerance for racism’ in US MORE to be the cheerleader for a president largely known for his association with hush money to adult-film actresses seems to me to give God very little credit.” 

During the pair’s discussion on religious faith and public life, which was released on Tuesday, Buttigieg also took aim at Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which Pence signed into law in 2015, when he was governor of the state.

Buttigieg said he viewed the legislation, which allows businesses in Indiana to cite their religious freedom as a defense in lawsuits, as a “license to harm others in the name of religion.”

“It was to me a trashing not just of our sense of freedom and our sense of rights, but also, in some way, a trashing of religion,” he continued. “Like is this really the biggest thing we should be doing to accommodate religion right now? Making it easier to harm people in its name?”

Beck also asked Buttigieg about his experience coming out as gay while he was in his 30s and in the middle of a reelection campaign.

“You could rewind to when I’m 12 or 13 and say it was obvious — but not to me,” Buttigieg said. “I desperately didn’t want to be. I would have given anything. Professionally I had gravitated toward two things, political life and military service, both of which, at the time, it seemed to me were completely incompatible with being gay or, at least, with being out.”

Buttigieg also talked during the interview about why he believes religion finds same-sex marriage to be divisive.

“It saddens me because when I think about the blessings of marriage, first of all it’s one of the most conservative things about my life, very conventional,” the Indiana Democrat said on the topic. “It is morally one of the best things in my life. Being married to Chasten makes me a better person. I would even say it moves me closer to God.”

“And so the idea that this of all things is what people are attacking each other over and excluding each other over, when God is love, we are taught,” he continued. “Of all the things to beat people up over on theological grounds, it just seems to me that loving shouldn’t be one of them. So it’s a painful thing to watch.”

“If you believe marriage has to do with love, if also, by the way, at the risk of sounding a bit conservative, you believe that sex has to do with love, or ought to, then I think it takes you to a pretty specific place,” he said. “I’ve learned that it’s an expression of love, at least it can be. And I guess I believe it ought to be.”

Click Here: cheap sydney roosters jersey

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (D), who is running for president, on Wednesday called for eliminating the Senate filibuster, saying Democrats won’t be able to pass health care reform or other legislation without doing so.

Click Here: camiseta rosario central

“We are not going to be able to get health care done or anything else for that matter, unless we get rid of the filibuster,” Inslee said during a CNN town hall. “I was the first candidate in this race running for president to be very unequivocal about this.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Some progressives have pushed for Democrats to eliminate the filibuster, which requires 60 votes to pass legislation, if the party takes back control of the Senate in 2020. 

Democratic presidential candidates, however, are split on the issue. Inslee and Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth WarrenWarren, Democrats urge Trump to back down from veto threat over changing Confederate-named bases OVERNIGHT DEFENSE: Joint Chiefs chairman says he regrets participating in Trump photo-op | GOP senators back Joint Chiefs chairman who voiced regret over Trump photo-op | Senate panel approves 0B defense policy bill Trump on collision course with Congress over bases with Confederate names MORE (D-Mass.) have voiced their support for the idea, while Sens. Bernie SandersBernie SandersThe Hill’s 12:30 Report: Milley apologizes for church photo-op Harris grapples with defund the police movement amid veep talk Biden courts younger voters — who have been a weakness MORE (I-Vt.) and Cory BookerCory Anthony BookerRand Paul introduces bill to end no-knock warrants Black lawmakers unveil bill to remove Confederate statues from Capitol Harris grapples with defund the police movement amid veep talk MORE (D-N.J.) are among those who have indicated their opposition.

Inslee added Wednesday that “all hope is sort of down the tubes” if the filibuster still exists in 2021. 

“If the filibuster is still in [Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellSenate advances public lands bill in late-night vote GOP senator to try to reverse requirement that Pentagon remove Confederate names from bases No, ‘blue states’ do not bail out ‘red states’ MORE’s hand come 2021, all hope is sort of down the tubes to be able to do real, significant reform,” Inslee said.

“So I’m telling you, if I’m given this highest honor, I will lead the charge to end this senatorial privilege, which is an ancient artifact of a bygone in time. And let’s get some health care reform and climate change legislation and reform the United States of America,” he continued. 

The Memo: Sanders becomes Dem front-runner

September 9, 2020 | News | No Comments

Bernie SandersBernie SandersThe Hill’s 12:30 Report: Milley apologizes for church photo-op Harris grapples with defund the police movement amid veep talk Biden courts younger voters — who have been a weakness MORE is emerging as the front-runner to win the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.

Sanders, the Independent senator from Vermont, has surged to an early lead in fundraising.

His poll numbers are better than any other candidate in the race — and are rivaled only by former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenHillicon Valley: Biden calls on Facebook to change political speech rules | Dems demand hearings after Georgia election chaos | Microsoft stops selling facial recognition tech to police Trump finalizing executive order calling on police to use ‘force with compassion’ The Hill’s Campaign Report: Biden campaign goes on offensive against Facebook MORE, who has yet to enter the contest and who has been beset by concerns over his behavior toward women.

ADVERTISEMENT

Even Sanders’s gambles are paying off for now. A town hall-style event broadcast by Fox News on Monday garnered an audience of more than 2.5 million. The Vermont senator’s assured performance drowned out criticism from some Democrats who were dubious about the left-wing senator appearing on the network.

Overall, the message is clear. Sanders is the one to beat.

“Right now, he is the front-runner,” said Karine Jean-Pierre, the chief public affairs officer for MoveOn, a progressive group. “He is leading in the fundraising. He is leading in the polling — except for Biden, who has not jumped in yet. … Bernie’s start has been impressive. Clearly his base is still with him and still excited.”

The fervency of Sanders’s base will be especially important given the size of the Democratic field. 

He came up short against Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonWhite House accuses Biden of pushing ‘conspiracy theories’ with Trump election claim Biden courts younger voters — who have been a weakness Trayvon Martin’s mother Sybrina Fulton qualifies to run for county commissioner in Florida MORE in 2016, but that was, in essence, a two-person race. This time around, there are about a half-dozen serious contenders for the nomination and plenty of other candidates who will claim smaller slices of the pie. Those dynamics make the apparently unshakeable loyalty of Sanders’s backers very potent.

Months ago, some in the media speculated that Sanders would have a tough time in this cycle because of competition from other left-leaning candidates — notably Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth WarrenWarren, Democrats urge Trump to back down from veto threat over changing Confederate-named bases OVERNIGHT DEFENSE: Joint Chiefs chairman says he regrets participating in Trump photo-op | GOP senators back Joint Chiefs chairman who voiced regret over Trump photo-op | Senate panel approves 0B defense policy bill Trump on collision course with Congress over bases with Confederate names MORE (D-Mass.). Other contenders such as Sen. Kamala HarrisKamala Devi HarrisRand Paul introduces bill to end no-knock warrants The Hill’s Campaign Report: Biden campaign goes on offensive against Facebook McEnany says Juneteenth is a very ‘meaningful’ day to Trump MORE (D-Calif.) have sought to appeal to more centrist voters even while backing trademark Sanders proposals such as “Medicare for All.”

But so far, there is little sign that those candidates have eroded Sanders’s popularity.

“He was there first, and he has been there for a long time,” said Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist who has worked for Sanders in the past — including the 2016 campaign — but is not doing so this cycle. 

Citing issues such as tuition-free college and an increased minimum wage as well as Medicare for All, Devine added, “I think the fact that others have come over to his side has only put those issues much more into the mainstream.”

Still, the skeptics remain. 

The Sanders doubters question whether a self-described democratic socialist who would be 79 on Inauguration Day 2021 is really the best candidate to defeat President TrumpDonald John TrumpSenate advances public lands bill in late-night vote Warren, Democrats urge Trump to back down from veto threat over changing Confederate-named bases Esper orders ‘After Action Review’ of National Guard’s role in protests MORE next November.

Some people who hold this view acknowledge that Trump is relatively weak — but they argue this makes it vital that Democrats choose a standard-bearer who does not give the president extra ammunition.

“A typical president with an economy this strong would probably be in the 50s or 60s” in terms of their approval rating, said one Democratic strategist who requested anonymity to speak candidly. 

“Trump has difficulty breaking 45. But the fundamental problem with Sanders’s candidacy is that it is based on the assumption that the country is ready to go in a fundamentally more radical direction. That is a significant jump in logic,” the strategist added.

Others are even clearer in their distaste for the idea of a Sanders nomination. David Brock, a Democratic activist and Clinton loyalist, told The New York Times in a story published Tuesday that an anti-Sanders campaign among Democrats should begin “sooner rather than later.”

The imperative for such a move, Brock told the Times, is that “there’s a growing realization that Sanders could end up winning this thing, or certainly that he stays in so long that he damages the actual winner.”

The idea of a Democratic establishment effort to hobble Sanders is fraught with difficulty, however — not least because of the enmity dating back to 2016, when Sanders backers were adamant that the party apparatus, including the Democratic National Committee, sought to aid Clinton at their candidate’s expense.

Even the Democratic strategist who requested anonymity was dubious about any such move.

“You are not going to be able to stop Bernie Sanders if he has the support. It’s as simple as that,” this source said. “The idea of stopping him is eerily similar to the language Republicans used about Donald Trump. Either you get a more viable alternative or you don’t. You are not going to beat Bernie Sanders with establishment shenanigans.”

Devine, the former Sanders aide, argued that any such effort was almost sure to backfire.

“It seems like some people … feel they need to stop his momentum. But if they do that, they are going to help his momentum. He is going to feed off it and they are going to exploit that in terms of fundraising tremendously,” he said.

The president has continued to attack Sanders, suggesting that he is far outside the American mainstream. “So weird to watch Crazy Bernie on @FoxNews,” Trump tweeted on Tuesday, referring to Sanders’s town hall the previous night.

But whether a Democratic Party whose base seems enamored of Sanders and other progressive figures such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-CortezAlexandria Ocasio-CortezAttorney says 75-year-old man shoved by Buffalo police suffered brain injury How language is bringing down Donald Trump Highest-circulation Kentucky newspaper endorses Charles Booker in Senate race MORE (D-N.Y) is willing to back away from the Vermont Independent is very much in doubt.

Even Sanders skeptics insist that his rivals for the nomination need to rid themselves of complacency — and fast.

“These other campaigns better wake up and realize that Bernie Sanders is a formidable candidate,” said the Democratic strategist. “He is not going to lose by some whim of the gods. He is going to lose if you beat him. And right now, there is no one beating him.”

The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage, primarily focused on Donald Trump’s presidency.

Click Here: cheap Cowboys jersey

Over 500 groups on Monday rolled out an an action plan for the next president’s first days of office to address the climate emergency and set the nation on a transformative path towards zero emissions and a just transition in their first days in office.

“Swift action to confront the climate emergency has to start the moment the next president enters the Oval Office,” said attorney Kassie Siegel, director of the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute.

The set of 10 actions, which together “form the necessary foundation for the country’s true transformation to a safer, healthier, and more equitable world for everyone,” are featured on the new Climate President website.  The actions—which “touch the lives of every person living in America and those beyond who are harmed by the climate crisis”—can all be taken by the president without Congressional, thus can, and should, happen immediately, the document argues. 

The new effort is convened by advocacy groups representing a range of issues, including the Center for Biological Diversity, Climate Justice Alliance, Democracy Collaborative, and Labor Network for Sustainability. Other backers include Physicians for Social Responsibility, the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, and Dēmos.

The groups’ roadmap kicks off with a demand for the next president to declare a national climate emergency under the National Emergencies Act. It includes a demand to direct “relevant federal agencies to reverse all Trump administration executive climate rollbacks and replace with sufficiently strong action.”

Asserting authority the National Emergencies Act, Siegel and Center for Biological Diversity energy director Jean Su wrote in a legal analysis supporting the action plan, is necessary in order for the next president to reinstate the crude oil export ban and redirect “military spending towards the construction of clean renewable energy projects and infrastructure.”

Declaring a climate emergency, the analysis adds, would also “set the appropriate tone of urgency for climate action.”

The other nine steps for the nation’s next leader to take within their first 10 days of office are, as noted in the document:

  • Keep fossil fuels in the ground.
  • Stop fossil fuel exports and infrastructure approval.
  • Shift financial flows from fossil fuels to climate solutions.
  • Use the Clean Air Act to set a science- based national pollution cap for greenhouse pollutants.
  • Power the electricity sector with 100% clean and renew-able energy by 2030 and promote energy democracy.
  • Launch a just transition to protect our communities, workers, and economy.
  • Advance Climate Justice: Direct federal agencies to assess and mitigate environmental harms to disproportionately impacted Indigenous Peoples, People and Communities of Color, and low-wealth communities.
  • Make polluters pay: Investigate and prosecute fossil fuel polluters for the damages they have caused. Commit to veto all legislation that grants legal immunity for polluters, undermines existing environmental laws, or advances false solutions.
  • Rejoin the Paris Agreement and lead with science-based commitments that ensure that the United States, as the world’s largest cumulative historical emitter, contributes its fair share and advances climate justice.

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

As part of this overall undertaking, groups say,

“We’re also putting the next Congress on notice to get serious about dismantling this crisis, or the people will circumvent you with all available means.”
—Anthony Rogers-Wright, Climate Justice AllianceAccording to Anthony Rogers-Wright, policy coordinator for Climate Justice Alliance, “This set of executive actions puts the fossil fuel, and other iniquitous industries that treat our communities like sacrifice zones, on notice, while offering a suite of actions the next president can promulgate on day one to address systemic and institutionalized injustices. At the same time, we’re also putting the next Congress on notice to get serious about dismantling this crisis, or the people will circumvent you with all available means.”

In addition to executing the 10 steps, the Climate President action plan urges the next president to further tackle the crisis by working with Congress as well as state and local governments on appropriate plans. Those efforts must include working to pass the Green New Deal.

While the Trump administration has taken a sledgehammer to environmental protections, previous administrations also hold blame for failing to sufficiently act on the climate, said Sriram Madhusoodanan, climate campaign director of Corporate Accountability.

“The United States government has long acted to advance the interests of corporations over people, and under Trump the government has lowered the bar even further,” he said. “The U.S. continues to act at the behest of big polluters like the fossil fuel industry by ignoring science, blocking climate policy, and putting big polluter profit over the needs and demands of people.”

“The next administration,” added Madhusoodanan, “must start a new chapter in U.S. history, kick polluters out of climate policy-making, make them pay for the damage they’ve knowingly caused, and take every action possible to advance urgently needed, internationally just climate action.”

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

Read More

As debate over two articles of impeachment for President Donald Trump continued in advance of a full House vote Wednesday, rhetoric from the Republican Party became more extreme, with GOP representatives calling the process reminiscent of the trial of Jesus Christ before the Crucifixion. 

The latter claim was made by Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), who took to the House floor to deliver a speech in which he likened the president to the holiest figure in Christianity and implied that Trump was being treated more poorly than the Son of God, whose death by crucifixion, Christians believe, wiped away the sins of the world. 

“When Jesus was falsely accused of treason, Pontius Pilate gave Jesus the opportunity to face his accusers,” said Loudermilk, referring to the New Testament description of Christ’s treatment by the fifth Roman governor of Judea. “During that sham trial, Pontius Pilate afforded more rights to Jesus than the Democrats have afforded this president in this process.”

Progressives noted the over-the-top nature of the comparison. 

“Yeah, when Jesus’ name is evoked, I immediately think of Trump,” said Utah Democratic Party activist Dr. Kathie Allen. “What an idiotic false equivalency.”

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

Journalist Shabtai Gold recalled Trump’s letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) from Tuesday in which the president compared the impeachment process to the Salem Witch Trials, the 17th century event in which 19 people were executed. 

“If you thought the comparisons to Salem were perhaps misguided,” said Gold, “we now have the Crucifixion itself.”

Carolyn Bourdeaux, who is running against Rep. Rob Woodall (R-Ga.) in 2020, took issue with the substance of Loudermilk’s comments.

“Georgia Republicans are sounding increasingly hysterical, and frankly, a little offensive,” said Bourdeaux.

Earlier in the day, Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) compared the president’s impeachment to the Pearl Harbor attacks, in which 2,403 people died. 

The House is expected to vote on the articles Wednesday evening.

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

Read More