wnd--2020-12-27--Steve Forbes calling for end to 'gaming' of trade rules

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Markets . ]
The U.S. International Trade Commission ( USITC ) is a self-described independent , nonpartisan , quasi-judicial federal agency , that investigates whether alleged unfair trade practices harm our domestic industries .
If a U.S. company requests an investigation , and the ITC , in cooperation with the International Trade Administration of the U.S. Department of Commerce , finds a triggering cause for the plaintiff , they can take punitive action in the form of new tariffs placed on the imported goods in question .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ action against Sidney Powell , other lawyers contesting election One big problem is that trade tariffs , which are taxes , and countervailing duties ( also taxes ) are not penalties or fees placed on countries exporting to the U.S. , but rather are taxes on specific goods coming into U.S. markets that ultimately are paid for by American consumers .
Likewise , these costs increase prices for goods and services for domestic end-users like our farmers and manufacturers who depend on imported materials to produce their final products .
The current review @ @ @ @ @ @ @ misuse by domestic commercial interests that seek undeserved market advantages through government power – crony capitalism , it ’ s called .
And this is further enabled by a technocratic bureaucracy that ignores critical cost impacts to consumers and affected end-user industries here at home .
One potential example is a recent case filed by the Mosaic Company , a global corporation based in Florida that is by far the dominant producer of potash and phosphate fertilizers in the U.S .
In June , the company filed petitions with the Department of Commerce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of fertilizers from Morocco and Russia .
Curiously , Mosaic omitted from its filings other phosphate-rich countries like Brazil , China , and Saudi Arabia , where the company has its own significant operations , investments or partnerships .
Claims that Mosaic has been injured by imports from these specific countries seems like a stretch when one considers that at that time 73 % of U.S. originated phosphate was already produced by Mosaic , and that domestic supply is normally insufficient to meet U.S. demand .
Costly new tariffs would be a sure-fire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needed imports , giving Mosaic not only a more dominant market position , but potentially monopoly-like power to increase its own prices .
And the impact of any government measures wouldn ’ t just arrive at the end of an investigation .
That ’ s because the ITC can impose retroactive duties and , if they vote to proceed with an initial investigation , markets take notice and prices usually rise in anticipation of punitive measures being fully applied past and present .
So , what happened after the ITC voted on August @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The global fertilizer market reacted as many in U.S. farm communities feared , and Mosaic even acknowledged later to shareholders .
Morocco , Russia and others curtailed exports of phosphate to the U.S. in favor of other markets .
In tandem , many U.S. agriculture stakeholders – those that could afford it – likely stockpiled products at then current prices to hedge against future price risks .
Accordingly , soon after this process began prices for phosphate in the U.S. not so mysteriously skyrocketed – more than 42 percent by the third quarter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complaint was filed in June .
Not a bad outcome for Mosaic considering it now controls upwards of 90 % of the current U.S. phosphate supply market .
The stock market also reacted .
Mosaic ’ s stock price first jumped by 8 % when the USITC published its notice of their petition and then subsequently soared ( 50 % ) .
when the Commission accepted their request to investigate .
All told , since the initial filing the company ’ s stock is now up over 80 % even though the relative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s food supply remained the same .
Considering the increased costs ( resulting duties of as much as 74 % ) would impose on U.S. farmers , it ’ s no wonder key agriculture leaders such as the American Farm Bureau Federation , the American Cotton Council and others urged the Department of Commerce to reject Mosaic ’ s petition .
Members of Congress also did the same with U.S .
Senators Joni Ernst ( R-IA ) , Jerry Moran ( R-KS ) and other farm state leaders requesting any proceedings be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American farm families and consumers .
Yet , unelected federal bureaucrats proved once again they are not accountable to anyone – including our elected officials , farmers , manufacturers , and consumers – by announcing last week that they plan to still pursue potential tariffs .
Whatever technical causes they may find , and whatever penalties they ultimately assess , they will come well after signals have been sent to the global market and U.S. farmers feel the brunt of sky-high cost increases .
Outside of needed political intervention in this particular situation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy reforms such as requiring cost-benefit analysis and inter-agency reviews to measure the impacts of such duties or tariffs on consumers and domestic end-users moving forward .
It ’ s more likely than not that if the U.S. Department of Agriculture ( USDA ) was consulted they would have provided the full context of the consequences and costs to American farmers .
Moreover , if there were a formal public review and comment period as required in other regulatory rulemaking procedures , farm and food groups would have been afforded the chance to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there should be penalties on those who file claims found to be frivolous or intended to gain unjustifiable government advantage in the marketplace .
Hopefully , that would deter bad actors from attempting to game the system in the future .
Beyond basic business ethics , some may question why not file a petition if you are almost certain to get 6 to 10 months of artificial price support above your competitors regardless of whether your case has merit or not if its legal to do so ?
At a minimum , regulators @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legitimate petitions due to wrongful foreign trade practices inflicting widespread harm with those that are based on self-interest and engineered through the misuse government bureaucracies .
Such safeguards certainly do exist at present .

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Markets.]
By Steve Forbes
Real Clear Markets
The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) is a self-described independent, nonpartisan, quasi-judicial federal agency, that investigates whether alleged unfair trade practices harm our domestic industries. If a U.S. company requests an investigation, and the ITC, in cooperation with the International Trade Administration of the U.S. Department of Commerce, finds a triggering cause for the plaintiff, they can take punitive action in the form of new tariffs placed on the imported goods in question.
Boring government stuff, right?
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
One big problem is that trade tariffs, which are taxes, and countervailing duties (also taxes) are not penalties or fees placed on countries exporting to the U.S., but rather are taxes on specific goods coming into U.S. markets that ultimately are paid for by American consumers. Likewise, these costs increase prices for goods and services for domestic end-users like our farmers and manufacturers who depend on imported materials to produce their final products.
The current review process also is becoming increasingly vulnerable to misuse by domestic commercial interests that seek undeserved market advantages through government power – crony capitalism, it’s called. And this is further enabled by a technocratic bureaucracy that ignores critical cost impacts to consumers and affected end-user industries here at home.
One potential example is a recent case filed by the Mosaic Company, a global corporation based in Florida that is by far the dominant producer of potash and phosphate fertilizers in the U.S. In June, the company filed petitions with the Department of Commerce the USITC requesting an investigation into imports of fertilizers from Morocco and Russia.
Curiously, Mosaic omitted from its filings other phosphate-rich countries like Brazil, China, and Saudi Arabia, where the company has its own significant operations, investments or partnerships.
Is crony capitalism affecting domestic commercial interests? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to WND news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 84% (21 Votes) 16% (4 Votes)
Claims that Mosaic has been injured by imports from these specific countries seems like a stretch when one considers that at that time 73% of U.S. originated phosphate was already produced by Mosaic, and that domestic supply is normally insufficient to meet U.S. demand. Costly new tariffs would be a sure-fire way to drive up the price of needed imports, giving Mosaic not only a more dominant market position, but potentially monopoly-like power to increase its own prices.
And the impact of any government measures wouldn’t just arrive at the end of an investigation. That’s because the ITC can impose retroactive duties and, if they vote to proceed with an initial investigation, markets take notice and prices usually rise in anticipation of punitive measures being fully applied past and present.
So, what happened after the ITC voted on August 7th to proceed with its investigation? The global fertilizer market reacted as many in U.S. farm communities feared, and Mosaic even acknowledged later to shareholders.
Morocco, Russia and others curtailed exports of phosphate to the U.S. in favor of other markets. In tandem, many U.S. agriculture stakeholders – those that could afford it – likely stockpiled products at then current prices to hedge against future price risks.
Accordingly, soon after this process began prices for phosphate in the U.S. not so mysteriously skyrocketed – more than 42 percent by the third quarter of this year after the original CVD complaint was filed in June. Not a bad outcome for Mosaic considering it now controls upwards of 90% of the current U.S. phosphate supply market.
The stock market also reacted. Mosaic’s stock price first jumped by 8% when the USITC published its notice of their petition and then subsequently soared (50%). when the Commission accepted their request to investigate. All told, since the initial filing the company’s stock is now up over 80% even though the relative demand for fertilizer needed to produce America’s food supply remained the same.
Considering the increased costs (resulting duties of as much as 74%) would impose on U.S. farmers, it’s no wonder key agriculture leaders such as the American Farm Bureau Federation, the American Cotton Council and others urged the Department of Commerce to reject Mosaic’s petition. Members of Congress also did the same with U.S. Senators Joni Ernst (R-IA), Jerry Moran (R-KS) and other farm state leaders requesting any proceedings be dropped before more harm was placed on American farm families and consumers.
Yet, unelected federal bureaucrats proved once again they are not accountable to anyone – including our elected officials, farmers, manufacturers, and consumers – by announcing last week that they plan to still pursue potential tariffs. Whatever technical causes they may find, and whatever penalties they ultimately assess, they will come well after signals have been sent to the global market and U.S. farmers feel the brunt of sky-high cost increases.
Outside of needed political intervention in this particular situation, Washington policymakers should really consider trade policy reforms such as requiring cost-benefit analysis and inter-agency reviews to measure the impacts of such duties or tariffs on consumers and domestic end-users moving forward.
It’s more likely than not that if the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) was consulted they would have provided the full context of the consequences and costs to American farmers. Moreover, if there were a formal public review and comment period as required in other regulatory rulemaking procedures, farm and food groups would have been afforded the chance to provide their critical input.
Furthermore, there should be penalties on those who file claims found to be frivolous or intended to gain unjustifiable government advantage in the marketplace. Hopefully, that would deter bad actors from attempting to game the system in the future. Beyond basic business ethics, some may question why not file a petition if you are almost certain to get 6 to 10 months of artificial price support above your competitors regardless of whether your case has merit or not if its legal to do so?
At a minimum, regulators must be able to clearly distinguish between legitimate petitions due to wrongful foreign trade practices inflicting widespread harm with those that are based on self-interest and engineered through the misuse government bureaucracies. Such safeguards certainly do exist at present.


wnd--2020-12-26--Japan issues complete ban on entry of non-nationals to battle 'super COVID' strain

( ZEROHEDGE ) – As anxiety over new , reportedly more contagious , strains of COVID builds around the world @ @ @ @ @ spread of travel blockades for British travelers – Japan just went to '11 ' on @ @ @ @ @ sorry '' scale by banning all new entries by non-Japanese nationals through the end of @ @ @ @ @ be in effect from Monday .
On Saturday , Nikkei report that , according to @ @ @ @ @ s capital reported a record 949 new cases , with reports saying two more people @ @ @ @ @ confirmed on Friday , were found to be infected with the new strain .
Since @ @ @ @ @ entry by those staying for at least three months on the condition that they quarantine @ @ @ @

(ZEROHEDGE) – As anxiety over new, reportedly more contagious, strains of COVID builds around the world – and with it the spread of travel blockades for British travelers – Japan just went to '11' on the "better safe than sorry" scale by banning all new entries by non-Japanese nationals through the end of January. The ban will be in effect from Monday.
On Saturday, Nikkei report that, according to the government, Japan’s capital reported a record 949 new cases, with reports saying two more people, in addition to five confirmed on Friday, were found to be infected with the new strain.
Since October, Japan has allowed entry by those staying for at least three months on the condition that they quarantine for 14 days.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-12-26--Biden expected to reverse Trump crackdown on public employees' 'release time'

Many government employees across the nation are getting paid on the taxpayers job not to do the job they were hired to do , notes a report by the Goldwater Institute .
Instead , they are working full-time for private labor unions , collecting full salaries and benefits from taxpayers and accruing seniority while not providing any public service .
In one of his less-publicized efforts to help Americans , President Trump issued an order in May 2018 curbing release time , but Joe Biden is expected to repeal the order soon after taking office in January .
Trump said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should pay for federal labor organizations ’ expenses , except where required by law .
Agencies should eliminate unrestricted grants of taxpayer-funded union time and instead require employees to obtain specific authorization before using such time .
Agencies should also monitor use of taxpayer-funded union time , ensure it is used only for authorized purposes , and make information regarding its use readily available to the public . ''
TRENDING : Battleground state to take legal action against Sidney Powell , other lawyers contesting election Goldwater said it seems hard to believe that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do the job they were hired to do , but to work full-time for private labor unions , all on taxpayers ' dime . ''
`` But not only is it happening — it 's incredibly common in cities and school districts across the country , '' said the institute , which has compiled a series of reports on the issue .
`` Under release time , which occurs on the local , state , and federal level , government employees are 'released ' from the jobs they were hired to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while still receiving their full salary and benefits paid for by taxpayers .
That means that a teacher on release time does not spend their time educating students , and a firefighter on release time doesn ’ t spend their time fighting fires .
Instead , they spend their time negotiating higher wages , participating in lobbying and political activities , recruiting new union members , attending union conferences and seminars , and other activities that advance the union ’ s interest instead of the public interest , '' the report said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 150 jurisdictions across America – three in every state – and found more than 400,000 hours of paid release time annually can be documented .
It also found that of the 150 agencies it contacted , only 82 could produce data on the number of hours they allowed in release time .
Among the worst cases is the city of Phoenix , which allowed 67,511 hours of paid union release time at a cost of about $ 3.7 million last fiscal year , the report said .
Miami-Dade County Public Schools in Florida @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 22,000 hours a year , were among the jurisdictions that failed to provide information .
`` The federal government allows about 3.6 million hours of release time ( known as 'official time ' on the federal level ) every year .
That adds up to a $ 177 million bill for taxpayers , '' the report said .
The institute says the fight `` must happen on two fronts – through litigation and legislation . ''
Goldwater is `` currently standing up for taxpayers through lawsuits challenging release time in Arizona , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The institute said lawmakers need to be urged to `` pursue policy reforms that prohibit public expenditures on activities that advance private , special interests , including those of private labor unions , '' the institute said .
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of our original content , please contact [ email protected ] .

Many government employees across the nation are getting paid on the taxpayers job not to do the job they were hired to do, notes a report by the Goldwater Institute.
Instead, they are working full-time for private labor unions, collecting full salaries and benefits from taxpayers and accruing seniority while not providing any public service.
In one of his less-publicized efforts to help Americans, President Trump issued an order in May 2018 curbing release time, but Joe Biden is expected to repeal the order soon after taking office in January.
Trump said in his order: "No agency should pay for federal labor organizations’ expenses, except where required by law. Agencies should eliminate unrestricted grants of taxpayer-funded union time and instead require employees to obtain specific authorization before using such time. Agencies should also monitor use of taxpayer-funded union time, ensure it is used only for authorized purposes, and make information regarding its use readily available to the public."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Goldwater said it seems hard to believe that government employees "are getting paid not to do the job they were hired to do, but to work full-time for private labor unions, all on taxpayers' dime."
"But not only is it happening — it's incredibly common in cities and school districts across the country," said the institute, which has compiled a series of reports on the issue.
"Under release time, which occurs on the local, state, and federal level, government employees are 'released' from the jobs they were hired to do and instead work full-time for labor unions, while still receiving their full salary and benefits paid for by taxpayers. That means that a teacher on release time does not spend their time educating students, and a firefighter on release time doesn’t spend their time fighting fires. Instead, they spend their time negotiating higher wages, participating in lobbying and political activities, recruiting new union members, attending union conferences and seminars, and other activities that advance the union’s interest instead of the public interest," the report said.
Goldwater investigative reporter Mark Flatten surveyed 150 jurisdictions across America – three in every state – and found more than 400,000 hours of paid release time annually can be documented.
Should public employees work for their pay? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to WND news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 98% (125 Votes) 2% (3 Votes)
It also found that of the 150 agencies it contacted, only 82 could produce data on the number of hours they allowed in release time.
Among the worst cases is the city of Phoenix, which allowed 67,511 hours of paid union release time at a cost of about $3.7 million last fiscal year, the report said.
Miami-Dade County Public Schools in Florida, which according to contracts allows more than 22,000 hours a year, were among the jurisdictions that failed to provide information.
"The federal government allows about 3.6 million hours of release time (known as 'official time' on the federal level) every year. That adds up to a $177 million bill for taxpayers," the report said.
The institute says the fight "must happen on two fronts – through litigation and legislation."
Goldwater is "currently standing up for taxpayers through lawsuits challenging release time in Arizona, Texas, and New Jersey."
The institute said lawmakers need to be urged to "pursue policy reforms that prohibit public expenditures on activities that advance private, special interests, including those of private labor unions," the institute said.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].


wnd--2020-12-26--Indian call center scams $14 million from Americans in elaborate scheme

( ZEROHEDGE ) – Sometimes we have to question the intelligence of Americans .
It 's no secret that unhealthy @ @ @ @ @ junk food can impair brain function .
With that being said , intelligence is lacking @ @ @ @ @ were recently swindled out of millions of dollars by a scammy Indian call center .
@ @ @ @ @ an Indian call center in Peera Garhi , west of Delhi , tricked victims into @ @ @ @ @ frozen as part of an elaborate drug investigation .
As many as 4,500 victims were @ @ @ @ @ transfer money to the scammers or risk serious jail time .
On Dec. 17 , @ @ @ @ @ from the call center were arrested .
Authorities alleged the employees learned American accents and @ @ @ @ @ various American law enforcement agencies .

(ZEROHEDGE) – Sometimes we have to question the intelligence of Americans. It's no secret that unhealthy lifestyles and eating mounds of junk food can impair brain function. With that being said, intelligence is lacking for some Americans as thousands were recently swindled out of millions of dollars by a scammy Indian call center.
According to the NYTimes, an Indian call center in Peera Garhi, west of Delhi, tricked victims into believing their bank accounts were frozen as part of an elaborate drug investigation. As many as 4,500 victims were told, they had to transfer money to the scammers or risk serious jail time.
On Dec. 17, as many as 50 people from the call center were arrested. Authorities alleged the employees learned American accents and pretended to be officials of various American law enforcement agencies.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-12-26--Girl challenges hate crime 'record' when no crime committed

A schoolgirl in the United Kingdom is challenging the practice of police creating a record of a `` hate crime '' even if there is no crime .
The 14-year-old girl , Miss B , explains , `` We ca n't live in fear that everything we say at school may be recorded somewhere on our records , simply because someone else did n't like what you said . ''
The College of Policing in the U.K. , according to the Christian Institute , now has a rule stating that when someone alleges a hate crime has taken place , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where no crime has occurred . ''
It creates a circumstance in which records are based on what someone feels or believes instead of the facts .
TRENDING : Battleground state to take legal action against Sidney Powell , other lawyers contesting election The records of `` non-crimes '' can end remain on children 's records for years and can be viewed by potential employers later .
Officially , the motivations attributed for such incidents are identified as `` ill-will , spite , contempt , prejudice , unfriendliness , antagonism , resentment and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ class have said that we shouldn ’ t have freedom of speech because it can upset people , '' said the teen .
`` Just recently , a student said 'Of Mice And Men ' shouldn ’ t be a class text because some of the words in the book are racist .
I said that it ’ s a book of its time and it ’ s important to look at the context .
I felt immediately ganged up on .
The teacher backed me up but it was scary . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is poised to launch a legal action over the rules , a judicial review of the standards .
Civil liberties groups say the non-crimes are without evidence and can injure someone later in life .
DailyMail.com report explained that in just five years , officers in England and Wales have put on official records some 120,000 non-crime `` hate '' incidents .
The College of Policing insists that police must `` record the incident , recording the police interactions and the results of those actions , '' for offenses such as `` repeated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Sinclairs Law and the case is being crowd-funded .
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of our original content , please contact [ email protected ] .

A schoolgirl in the United Kingdom is challenging the practice of police creating a record of a "hate crime" even if there is no crime.
The 14-year-old girl, Miss B, explains, "We can't live in fear that everything we say at school may be recorded somewhere on our records, simply because someone else didn't like what you said."
The College of Policing in the U.K., according to the Christian Institute, now has a rule stating that when someone alleges a hate crime has taken place, officers must keep a record "even where no crime has occurred."
It creates a circumstance in which records are based on what someone feels or believes instead of the facts.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The records of "non-crimes" can end remain on children's records for years and can be viewed by potential employers later.
Officially, the motivations attributed for such incidents are identified as "ill-will, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment and dislike."
"Children in my class have said that we shouldn’t have freedom of speech because it can upset people," said the teen. "Just recently, a student said 'Of Mice And Men' shouldn’t be a class text because some of the words in the book are racist. I said that it’s a book of its time and it’s important to look at the context. I felt immediately ganged up on. The teacher backed me up but it was scary."
The U.K.'s DailyMail.com reported the teen is poised to launch a legal action over the rules, a judicial review of the standards.
Is a "hate crime" a crime even if there is no crime? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to WND news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 3% (12 Votes) 97% (365 Votes)
Civil liberties groups say the non-crimes are without evidence and can injure someone later in life.
DailyMail.com report explained that in just five years, officers in England and Wales have put on official records some 120,000 non-crime "hate" incidents.
The College of Policing insists that police must "record the incident, recording the police interactions and the results of those actions," for offenses such as "repeated name-calling."
The teen is represented by Sinclairs Law and the case is being crowd-funded.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].


wnd--2020-12-28--Police at Nashville blast credit divine intervention

( NBC NEWS ) -- One of the officers on the scene during the explosion in Nashville , Tennessee , @ @ @ @ @ with his last-minute decision to walk away from the recreational vehicle just seconds before it @ @ @ @ @ which police called an `` intentional act , '' injured at least three people and @ @ @ @ @ buildings nearby .
Local and federal law enforcement agencies said they know of no motive @ @ @ @ @ occurred early Friday after the vehicle announced a warning for people to evacuate with a @ @ @ @ @ voice .
The RV also played the song `` Downtown '' by Petula Clark at @ @ @ @ @ , an officer said .

One Nashville police officer is crediting God with directing him away from the Christmas Day bomb blast that could have taken his life.
Officer James Wells recounted to reporters on Sunday that he was among the officers clearing people out of buildings, based on the bomb threats coming over a loudspeaker from an RV parked in downtown Nashville early Christmas morning.
When a three-minute warning was broadcast, Wells went back to his squad car to put on his "heavy plates" body armor, just in case.
Music continued to emanate from the RV as well, including Petula Clark's "Downtown," NBC News reported.
It was a surreal scene, according to officers' accounts.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
As Wells was getting ready to walk back in the direction of the RV and some of his fellow officers, he felt God spoke instructing him to change course and check on Officer Amanda Topping.
"This might not be politically correct, but this is my truth," Wells said. "I literally heard God tell me to turn around and go check on Topping, who was by herself down on Broadway."
"As I turned around," the officer continued with emotion now in his voice, "for me it felt like I only took three steps and then the music stopped. And as I’m walking back toward Topping now I just see orange and then I hear a loud boom.
"As I’m stumbling because it rocked me that hard. I started stumbling. I just told myself, ‘Stay on your feet, stay alive.’”
Wells explained why he will not cower from giving God credit for preserving his life.
"I'm not going to shy away from that, because that's what saved my life," the officer said, according to NBC. "That's what got me to see my kids and my wife on Christmas. And 'good to see you' has a completely different meaning for me now."
Topping had a similar experience, with something telling her she needed to change direction right before the bomb detonated.
"I don’t know what told me to do this. It was really weird, but I decided to change my direction and go on the other side of the road and start walking towards Wells. So as I started walking towards him, you know, he started walking towards me," she said.
Topping has no idea how she kept her footing after the bomb blast, as she witnessed a huge plume of orange ignite before her face and Wells stumbling.
"I couldn't see him for a second. I just lost it, and I just took off in a sprint towards him," she recalled. "And, like he said, I've never grabbed somebody so hard in my life. I grabbed him. He grabbed me and we just ducked into a doorway, because we didn’t know what was coming afterwards."
The Bible is replete with examples of God speaking directly to people in order to save them or their loved ones from physical harm, including to Jesus' father Joseph after the baby's birth.
"[A]n angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, 'Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and remain there till I tell you; for [King] Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him,' according to Matthew 2.
Herod in fact ordered the killing of male children under two years old in Bethlehem following Jesus' birth.
Of course in the famous 23rd Psalm, King David, who had faced death on many occasions in battle and otherwise, wrote, "Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; For You are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me."
Shepherds use their rods and staffs to guide and protect their flocks from danger.
David also related that God, in his divine providence, knows the number of our days on this earth even before we are born.
In other words, the Almighty is able to prevent anything from taking us out before our assigned time.
"Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they all were written, the days fashioned for me, when as yet there were none of them," he wrote.
The Apostle Paul also taught about God's Holy Spirit being able to speak to humans' spirits giving specific words of wisdom or knowledge to address various situations we face on earth.
Praise God for the Christmas miracle, that God preserved Wells' and Topping's lives and that no one but the bomber was killed.
It is reassuring to hear testimonies of God remaining active on the earth and more than able to save people from evil plots.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-12-28--Police identify Nashville bomber, say he died in explosion

( FOX NEWS ) -- The suspect behind the Christmas Day bombing in downtown Nashville has been identified as 63-year-old @ @ @ @ @ confirmed during a press conference Sunday .
Police said Warner owned the RV that exploded @ @ @ @ @ , and that he died in the blast .
Human tissue was found amongst the @ @ @ @ @ explosion , and DNA examinations of tissue samples by The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation and @ @ @ @ @ consistent with Warner .
In addition , the Tennessee Highway Patrol uncovered a vehicle identification @ @ @ @ @ the RV , which revealed it was registered to Warner .

(FOX NEWS) -- The suspect behind the Christmas Day bombing in downtown Nashville has been identified as 63-year-old Anthony Quinn Warner, authorities confirmed during a press conference Sunday.
Police said Warner owned the RV that exploded in downtown Nashville early Friday, and that he died in the blast.
Human tissue was found amongst the debris left behind by the explosion, and DNA examinations of tissue samples by The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation and FBI were found to be consistent with Warner. In addition, the Tennessee Highway Patrol uncovered a vehicle identification number from the remains of the RV, which revealed it was registered to Warner.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-12-28--Congress warned regulators killing crypto while China aims for dominance

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Policy . ]
Even casual viewers of cable news are familiar with commercials featuring actor William Devane – usually golfing or horseback riding – exhorting them to invest in precious metals .
Lately , Devane has been joined in this pursuit by financial educator Robert Kiyosaki , creator of the “ Rich Dad , Poor Dad ” series .
The prevalence of these ads should not be surprising .
In these volatile times , the Trump administration has spent big and printed money .
( The United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ printing its way out of this pandemic . )
There is no reason to expect different behavior under Joe Biden .
It ’ s no wonder that alternative stores of value are flourishing .
Days ago , the cryptocurrency Bitcoin reached yet another all-time high , just as it became clear that a Biden-Harris administration was a fait accompli .
But while Bitcoin is the best-known digital currency , it is only a small part of a technological shift that could satisfy our demand for safer , cheaper , and faster ways of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disruption .
Bitcoin ’ s underlying technology , blockchain – a sort of shared , secure ledger of transactions between networked computers – has applications ranging from supply-chain management to securing international payments .
It could be “ a game changer for the global economy , ” according to JPMorgan Chase .
In fact , the investment giant started using its own JPM Coin in October to move investor money across its global financial platforms .
Consulting firm Gartner forecasts that the business value-add from blockchain will blow past $ 3 trillion by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ TRENDING : Deafening silence from 'Defund Police ' crowd as police rush to Ground Zero in Nashville The industry powering all this change , however , is finding it harder to stay in the United States due to Washington ’ s dysfunction .
Silicon Valley start-ups are investing billions in research and development , but there is still no clear set of rules to help them bring products to market .
Congress has punted on writing a regulatory framework , and the country ’ s oversight agencies are – as usual – fighting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ regulatory chaos ” is suppressing American innovation while other market centers like Britain and Singapore have quickly updated their rules to lure American blockchain developers away , while Beijing scrambles to establish tech dominance .
Roslyn Layton of the American Enterprise Institute sent the Senate a blunt message this month : regulators , lacking guidance , are killing innovation .
China could soon overtake us , she warned , unless the Senate holds Biden to his promises of “ technocratic competence ” and firm economic competition with China .
At least eight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to play U.S. crypto cop .
Without any direction , regulators “ copy-paste their bureaucracy on anything that moves , ” Layton observed .
The Securities and Exchange Commission is applying archaic 1930s rules that “ never imagined blockchain solutions , ” comparing all digital assets to securities no matter how they are designed or used .
Critics like Layton point to China ’ s new “ digital yuan ” – the country ’ s sole legal cryptocurrency – as a disturbing signal that the Chinese are gaining on us .
The People @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it in October and has enticed 2 million Chinese to bid on U.S. $ 10 million worth of the official token , says Wayne Brough of the Innovation Defense Foundation .
Big American companies including Starbucks , McDonald ’ s , and Subway have embraced China ’ s new currency .
France , Sweden , Switzerland , and Japan are developing central bank digital currencies of their own .
Brough frets that through inaction , the U.S. will “ blunder our way out of winning a race that we were born to win.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Washington State , warned in The Hill that Washington ’ s neglect could create “ a needless trainwreck.
” China and Singapore are paving the way for their own blockchain industries , he wrote , “ while the U.S. is struggling with a coin shortage , stimulus check complications , and an obvious dearth of understanding on Capitol Hill about what a cryptocurrency even is.
” This is “ embarrassing ” for the most technologically developed country in the world , he lamented .
Layton and Nethercutt point the finger at outgoing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Layton said , made “ a deliberate lack of regulatory clarity ” the “ cornerstone of his crypto policy approach.
” Clayton demonstrated “ no understanding for the need for a regulatory framework ” with his “ notoriously guarded approach ” to blockchain solutions , Nethercutt added , “ significantly constraining American innovators.
” Clayton empowered the SEC by treating any digital asset as a “ security , ” justifying enforcement actions with a 1946 Supreme Court ruling .
Clayton ’ s SEC lowered the boom on “ utility tokens ” – a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – according to Layton , even if they “ had no resemblance to investment contracts.
” This treatment extended to utility token XRP , the third-highest-valued cryptocurrency in the world , used by American developers like Ripple and R3 to power the kind of payment systems that JPMorgan has already rolled out .
Just by putting this token under “ a bewilderingly persistent enforcement threat , ” the SEC hurt every developer on the XRP ledger .
Clayton preserved his own agency ’ s power “ but steadily eroded U.S. leadership as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remains to be seen what Biden thinks of Clayton ’ s view of unlimited power over digital assets , or whether Biden ’ s promise of bipartisan cooperation will extend to ending the regulatory chaos .
Republicans have spent the last four years slashing regulations and reining in the administrative state and should understand that China can ’ t be allowed to win the crypto race .
Senate Democrats on the Banking Committee like Elizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown should remember that a president of their party , Bill Clinton , enacted the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It created millions of American businesses , reaching tens of millions of customers , and spawned a long list of occupations that had never existed before .
Coming together to vet Biden ’ s SEC pick on crypto policy and move the country closer to a clear set of rules would be a win-win for both parties and for the U.S. economy .
Our competitors abroad can never beat us on innovation – unless we continue to shoot ourselves in the foot .
[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published @ @ @ @ @ @

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Policy.]
By Bill Zeiser
Real Clear Policy
Even casual viewers of cable news are familiar with commercials featuring actor William Devane – usually golfing or horseback riding – exhorting them to invest in precious metals. Lately, Devane has been joined in this pursuit by financial educator Robert Kiyosaki, creator of the “Rich Dad, Poor Dad” series. The prevalence of these ads should not be surprising. In these volatile times, the Trump administration has spent big and printed money. (The United States is not alone in borrowing and printing its way out of this pandemic.) There is no reason to expect different behavior under Joe Biden.
It’s no wonder that alternative stores of value are flourishing. Days ago, the cryptocurrency Bitcoin reached yet another all-time high, just as it became clear that a Biden-Harris administration was a fait accompli. But while Bitcoin is the best-known digital currency, it is only a small part of a technological shift that could satisfy our demand for safer, cheaper, and faster ways of doing business in times of crisis and disruption. Bitcoin’s underlying technology, blockchain – a sort of shared, secure ledger of transactions between networked computers – has applications ranging from supply-chain management to securing international payments. It could be “a game changer for the global economy,” according to JPMorgan Chase. In fact, the investment giant started using its own JPM Coin in October to move investor money across its global financial platforms. Consulting firm Gartner forecasts that the business value-add from blockchain will blow past $3 trillion by the end of this new decade.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The industry powering all this change, however, is finding it harder to stay in the United States due to Washington’s dysfunction. Silicon Valley start-ups are investing billions in research and development, but there is still no clear set of rules to help them bring products to market. Congress has punted on writing a regulatory framework, and the country’s oversight agencies are – as usual – fighting over turf. Experts say that this “regulatory chaos” is suppressing American innovation while other market centers like Britain and Singapore have quickly updated their rules to lure American blockchain developers away, while Beijing scrambles to establish tech dominance.
Roslyn Layton of the American Enterprise Institute sent the Senate a blunt message this month: regulators, lacking guidance, are killing innovation. China could soon overtake us, she warned, unless the Senate holds Biden to his promises of “technocratic competence” and firm economic competition with China.
At least eight regulatory agencies are fighting over who gets to play U.S. crypto cop. Without any direction, regulators “copy-paste their bureaucracy on anything that moves,” Layton observed. The Securities and Exchange Commission is applying archaic 1930s rules that “never imagined blockchain solutions,” comparing all digital assets to securities no matter how they are designed or used.
Critics like Layton point to China’s new “digital yuan” – the country’s sole legal cryptocurrency – as a disturbing signal that the Chinese are gaining on us. The People’s Bank of China formally issued it in October and has enticed 2 million Chinese to bid on U.S. $10 million worth of the official token, says Wayne Brough of the Innovation Defense Foundation. Big American companies including Starbucks, McDonald’s, and Subway have embraced China’s new currency. France, Sweden, Switzerland, and Japan are developing central bank digital currencies of their own. Brough frets that through inaction, the U.S. will “blunder our way out of winning a race that we were born to win.”
George Nethercutt, former Republican congressman from Washington State, warned in The Hill that Washington’s neglect could create “a needless trainwreck.” China and Singapore are paving the way for their own blockchain industries, he wrote, “while the U.S. is struggling with a coin shortage, stimulus check complications, and an obvious dearth of understanding on Capitol Hill about what a cryptocurrency even is.” This is “embarrassing” for the most technologically developed country in the world, he lamented.
Layton and Nethercutt point the finger at outgoing SEC Chairman Jay Clayton, who, Layton said, made “a deliberate lack of regulatory clarity” the “cornerstone of his crypto policy approach.” Clayton demonstrated “no understanding for the need for a regulatory framework” with his “notoriously guarded approach” to blockchain solutions, Nethercutt added, “significantly constraining American innovators.”
Clayton empowered the SEC by treating any digital asset as a “security,” justifying enforcement actions with a 1946 Supreme Court ruling. Clayton’s SEC lowered the boom on “utility tokens” – a core feature of business software using blockchain – according to Layton, even if they “had no resemblance to investment contracts.” This treatment extended to utility token XRP, the third-highest-valued cryptocurrency in the world, used by American developers like Ripple and R3 to power the kind of payment systems that JPMorgan has already rolled out. Just by putting this token under “a bewilderingly persistent enforcement threat,” the SEC hurt every developer on the XRP ledger. Clayton preserved his own agency’s power “but steadily eroded U.S. leadership as the best place to do business.”
It remains to be seen what Biden thinks of Clayton’s view of unlimited power over digital assets, or whether Biden’s promise of bipartisan cooperation will extend to ending the regulatory chaos. Republicans have spent the last four years slashing regulations and reining in the administrative state and should understand that China can’t be allowed to win the crypto race. Senate Democrats on the Banking Committee like Elizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown should remember that a president of their party, Bill Clinton, enacted the regulatory framework for e-commerce in 1997. It created millions of American businesses, reaching tens of millions of customers, and spawned a long list of occupations that had never existed before.
Coming together to vet Biden’s SEC pick on crypto policy and move the country closer to a clear set of rules would be a win-win for both parties and for the U.S. economy. Our competitors abroad can never beat us on innovation – unless we continue to shoot ourselves in the foot.
Bill Zeiser is editor of RealClearPolicy.
[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Policy.]


wnd--2020-12-28--Biden's green agenda facing big roadblock from states

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations . ]
Joe Biden needs to put the pedal to the metal as he races toward his goal of ridding America ’ s energy sources of carbon emissions by 2035 .
But the president-elect ’ s headlong rush toward a green future may be slowed by a snarl of political speed limits in the states .
One of Biden ’ s most ambitious aims is to completely clean up the electrical grid , which today is powered mostly by fossil fuels , in only 15 years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quixotic because it would require a breathtakingly fast transformation of the massive power industry -- from replacing hundreds of dirty power plants to upgrading thousands of miles transmission lines .
TRENDING : Deafening silence from 'Defund Police ' crowd as police rush to Ground Zero in Nashville To do that , Biden needs to engineer a major expansion of federal power over the regulatory authority of the states – a daunting political task .
States control energy policy and their mishmash of requirements to boost wind and solar power don ’ t go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2035 goal .
That is why he is expected to push for a federal clean electricity standard – a law forcing utilities to provide a lot more power from carbon-free sources .
A federal standard – perhaps the single most important piece of Biden ’ s sweeping climate plan – is likely to face stiff opposition in Congress .
Major utilities , even those voluntarily pursuing clean energy , don ’ t like to have their hands tied by government mandates and have successfully opposed them in the past .
Lawmakers from states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proposals for a federal standard , including one backed by the Obama administration , on concerns that their residents would see their bill rise to pay for clean power purchased from regions rich in wind and solar energy .
“ A federal standard is so important because it provides the incentive to investors and developers to scale up those renewable resources , which we need to do at a much faster clip to achieve a safe climate future , ” says Mike O ’ Boyle , director of electricity policy at Energy Innovation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ standard can be very difficult.
” Many items on Biden ’ s long climate to-do list are low-hanging fruit for his new team , led by former Michigan Gov .
Jennifer Granholm , nominated to be secretary of energy , ex-Secretary of State John Kerry , who will serve as climate czar , and New Mexico Rep. Deb Haaland , who is slated to head the Interior Department .
Biden will have the authority to mandate the federal purchase of zero-emission vehicles , rejoin the Paris Agreement , restrict energy drilling on public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ standards for cars and trucks .
But the truly transformational part of his agenda , greening the grid by 2035 , would require an almost fantastical acceleration of the rollout of wind and solar farms across the nation with buy-in from Congress and the states .
Last year developers installed 13 gigawatts of new solar capacity and 9 gigawatts of wind power – a pace that would have to more than triple starting immediately for Biden to come close to hitting his goal , according to a study by the Goldman School of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Berkeley .
As the coronavirus economic slump drags on , Biden is selling his climate agenda as a job creator .
It would require developers to build hundreds of additional massive wind and solar farms annually for the next 15 years .
Employment in the energy industry alone would increase by the equivalent of about 8.5 million jobs lasting a year as positions in the renewable sector more than replace those lost in retrenching coal and natural gas operations , the UC study says .
Biden ’ s ambition is roughly in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who say the U.S. economy needs to be carbon-free by 2050 as part of a global effort to stave off the worst effects of climate change .
To achieve that , the grid must be cleaned up first to enable the other big sources of carbon pollution – transportation and industry – to slash emissions too .
Plugging an electric car or “ green ” assembly line into a dirty grid amounts to running in place .
In a sign of how much the landscape has shifted in just the last decade , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ industry isn ’ t over whether it needs to end emitting carbon into the atmosphere .
The issue is how quickly it must act .
A growing number of power companies , including Arizona Public Service and Duke Energy of North Carolina , have announced voluntary goals to be carbon-free by 2050 , or 15 years after Biden ’ s target .
They consider the president-elect ’ s goal to be too aggressive .
Some utilities have recently invested billions in natural gas plants and pipelines that have a lifespan of several decades @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and solar energy potentially costly to consumers who pay for the infrastructure .
“ Some utilities have been receptive to federal and state standards , but on balance the industry has been a major force resisting them , ” says Matto Mildenberger , a political scientist at UC Santa Barbara who researches the politics of climate change .
“ They have power generating assets that are dependent on coal and gas and their business model has been threatened by wind and solar.
” Even companies that are rapidly expanding clean energy fear Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The head of Vistra Corp. , a Texas-based diversified power generator , recently told the media that the 2035 plan will lead to skyrocketing electricity costs and unreliable electricity because of the spotty performance of wind and solar farms .
California ’ s rolling blackouts in August , caused by extreme heat and poor planning by regulators , show how tricky the fast conversion to clean energy can be in such a large state .
But recent studies suggest that the industry may be overplaying its objections to the faster adoption of renewable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cost and reliability of a grid that is 90 % clean by 2035 , roughly in line with Biden ’ s goal .
With prices of wind and solar energy expected to continue to fall , wholesale electricity in 2035 would actually be cheaper over the long haul .
And recently improved battery storage , in combination with energy from the remaining natural gas and nuclear plants , would supply juice when the sun is n't shining and the wind is n't blowing , making the grid reliable , the study says .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ so fast that the utilities haven ’ t really taken this fully into account in their planning , ” says David Wooley , an author of the study who has worked in energy policy for three decades .
“ There is momentum in the system toward gas because that ’ s the way the utilities have done it for years.
” The greening of electricity has a long way to go .
Natural gas generates almost 40 % of America ’ s power , twice coal ’ s contribution .
Wind and solar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decade , but along with hydropower and biomass , provide only 18 % of the nation ’ s juice .
Add nuclear power and America ’ s grid is about 38 % clean today .
Without a federal standard , a haphazard mix of forces will continue to compel utilities to gradually go green .
Mandates in 30 states have been the biggest driver and federal tax credits , a market approach Republicans favor over a federal standard , have spurred renewable development too .
Lately , Big Tech firms like Apple and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demanding that states and utilities make commitments to green power to serve their data centers and other operations .
Even as some utilities embrace green power , they are running into roadblocks that a federal standard won ’ t resolve .
From New York to California , homeowners and county officials concerned about the noise , look and environmental impact of massive wind and solar farms are slowing construction and sometimes defeating the projects .
Ohio lawmakers set rules so strict that they effectively banned wind farms from the state .
All told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get Biden only about halfway to his 2035 goal , according to the UC report .
“ States have varied ambitions with clean energy standards , ” says O ’ Boyle of Energy Innovation .
“ Many are cautious or almost indifferent in their renewable energy policies .
That ’ s why there is a need for a federal standard.
” The strength of state mandates varies greatly , depending on a state ’ s political tilt , energy resources and willingness to pay about 2 % more on average for electricity in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fracking-focused Pennsylvania set low goals , seeking less than 20 % of their energy mix from renewable power .
Sunny California and liberal New York are among about 10 states plus the District of Columbia that plan to completely slash carbon emissions in the next few decades .
Many of the 20 states without requirements , like Florida , are home to powerful monopoly utilities that prefer to set their own voluntary clean energy goals .
A decade ago as Florida 's governor , Charlie Crist pushed for a standard only to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Charlie pled with the House leadership , but the Republicans are just not in favor of mandates and they are certainly not going to push the utilities around , ” says Stephen Smith , executive director at the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy .
Florida Power & Light , the state ’ s biggest utility , decided to finally join the green energy march after engaging in a fierce ballot battle with residents to limit the growth of rooftop solar power four years ago .
The utility projected last year that 40 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2030 .
FP & L did n't respond to a request for comment .
Ohio , which produces only 3 % of its electricity from renewable sources , has become exhibit A in the case for Biden ’ s federal standard .
Last year Ohio abolished its renewable energy standard , becoming one of the few states to backtrack on a mandate , as a result of the biggest political bribery scandal in its history .
Democrats who are trying to restore the state standard say it ’ s unlikely they can overcome @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , investors in renewables will have to determine if there is enough demand to make a profit without a standard , ” Democratic Rep. Kristin Boggs says .
Biden ’ s attempt to win a federal standard would likely run into the kind of political obstacles that defeated earlier initiatives .
The politics are divisive because utilities in different states don ’ t have the same ability to generate green power .
Utilities in the West , where solar and wind resources are typically stronger , have greater access to cheap clean power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Southeast that are dependent on fossil fuels .
These regional differences doomed a proposal for a standard in the Senate in 2007 that had passed the House .
The trade group Edison Electric Institute and state regulators in the Southeast warned that utilities in states that couldn ’ t meet the federal requirements would have to buy green power or credits from other regions rich in renewable energy , possibly costing consumers billions in extra charges .
Three years later , a similar political dynamic in the Senate led to the collapse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plan that contained a modest federal standard .
While details of Biden ’ s proposal haven ’ t been released , two Democrats – Sen. Tina Smith of Minnesota and Rep. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico – have introduced a bill calling for a federal standard .
The measure is designed to reduce the issue of regional differences in solar and wind resources that doomed earlier efforts by making most utilities gradually increase their supply of clean energy by about 3 % a year , starting at their current levels .
After @ @ @ @ @ @ @ annual increases taper down on the path to a clean grid by 2050 .
“ The cost of clean energy has declined dramatically since Congress considered a clean energy standard a decade ago , ” Smith told RealClearInvestigations .
“ The time is right for a federal standard because it will result in a cheaper , more reliable , and more efficient electric system than if we continue to rely solely on a hodgepodge of state and utility-level policies , This time , a federal standard may face less resistance in Congress as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Republicans can get behind mandates too .
In October , the Republican-led Arizona Corporation Commission approved a 100 % carbon-free mandate by 2050 because , it said , it was good for the economy as well as the environment .
Amid years of public acrimony between renewable advocates and Arizona Public Service , the plunge in the price of solar energy , making it cheaper than gas in that state , forced the commission to act .
“ It became a no-brainer , ” says Amanda Ormond , formerly the director of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clean power consultant .
“ If the clean stuff is less expensive , the argument shifts from ‘ solar is good for air quality ’ to ‘ what is your reason for not using the lowest cost resource ?
’ ” In another sign of the shifting economics of the grid , Arizona sees its new mandate as key to luring investment from companies -- including Amazon and Google -- that seek to run their businesses with clean energy .
Without an aggressive carbon-free energy plan , Arizona could lose out to neighboring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ It was certainly on my mind that other states are targeting 100 % clean energy and how attractive that makes them to certain industries versus other states , ” says Lea Marquez Peterson , one of the Republican commissioners who supported the standard .
Biden ’ s standard will be easier to sell in the Democratic-controlled House and should garner some Republican support in the Senate because of the competitive pricing of renewable power .
Sen. Chuck Grassley , a champion of wind power from Iowa , has been one of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ standard in the past .
“ I do n't think a federal standard is completely outside the realm of possibility because we have Republican supporters of renewables and that support is growing , ” says Wooley of UC Berkeley .
“ Senator Grassley is a good example of that.
” But the U.S. has enacted only a handful of environmental and energy laws in the last three decades , an indication of the difficulties that Biden ’ s plan would face no matter which party controls the Senate after the Georgia runoffs on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a steadfast fossil-fuel supporter from the coal state of Kentucky , continues as the majority leader , then a federal standard is likely dead on arrival in the chamber .
“ Even with a 50-50 split in the Senate , it would be unlikely that Biden could get a clean electricity standard approved , ” says Peter Van Doren , an expert on environmental and energy regulation at the Cato Institute .
“ Even the best designed bill would run into opposition in many states over the potential rise in energy prices.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ originally was published by Real Clear Investigations . ]

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations.]
By Vince Bielski
Real Clear Investigations
Joe Biden needs to put the pedal to the metal as he races toward his goal of ridding America’s energy sources of carbon emissions by 2035. But the president-elect’s headlong rush toward a green future may be slowed by a snarl of political speed limits in the states.
One of Biden’s most ambitious aims is to completely clean up the electrical grid, which today is powered mostly by fossil fuels, in only 15 years. Many energy executives consider that goal quixotic because it would require a breathtakingly fast transformation of the massive power industry -- from replacing hundreds of dirty power plants to upgrading thousands of miles transmission lines.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
To do that, Biden needs to engineer a major expansion of federal power over the regulatory authority of the states – a daunting political task. States control energy policy and their mishmash of requirements to boost wind and solar power don’t go far enough to achieve Biden’s 2035 goal. That is why he is expected to push for a federal clean electricity standard – a law forcing utilities to provide a lot more power from carbon-free sources.
A federal standard – perhaps the single most important piece of Biden’s sweeping climate plan – is likely to face stiff opposition in Congress. Major utilities, even those voluntarily pursuing clean energy, don’t like to have their hands tied by government mandates and have successfully opposed them in the past. Lawmakers from states dependent on fossil fuels have shot down proposals for a federal standard, including one backed by the Obama administration, on concerns that their residents would see their bill rise to pay for clean power purchased from regions rich in wind and solar energy.
“A federal standard is so important because it provides the incentive to investors and developers to scale up those renewable resources, which we need to do at a much faster clip to achieve a safe climate future,” says Mike O’Boyle, director of electricity policy at Energy Innovation. “But the politics around a standard can be very difficult.”
Many items on Biden’s long climate to-do list are low-hanging fruit for his new team, led by former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, nominated to be secretary of energy, ex-Secretary of State John Kerry, who will serve as climate czar, and New Mexico Rep. Deb Haaland, who is slated to head the Interior Department. Biden will have the authority to mandate the federal purchase of zero-emission vehicles, rejoin the Paris Agreement, restrict energy drilling on public lands, and restore stringent fuel economy standards for cars and trucks.
But the truly transformational part of his agenda, greening the grid by 2035, would require an almost fantastical acceleration of the rollout of wind and solar farms across the nation with buy-in from Congress and the states. Last year developers installed 13 gigawatts of new solar capacity and 9 gigawatts of wind power – a pace that would have to more than triple starting immediately for Biden to come close to hitting his goal, according to a study by the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley.
As the coronavirus economic slump drags on, Biden is selling his climate agenda as a job creator. It would require developers to build hundreds of additional massive wind and solar farms annually for the next 15 years. Employment in the energy industry alone would increase by the equivalent of about 8.5 million jobs lasting a year as positions in the renewable sector more than replace those lost in retrenching coal and natural gas operations, the UC study says.
Biden’s ambition is roughly in keeping with the findings of climate scientists who say the U.S. economy needs to be carbon-free by 2050 as part of a global effort to stave off the worst effects of climate change. To achieve that, the grid must be cleaned up first to enable the other big sources of carbon pollution – transportation and industry – to slash emissions too. Plugging an electric car or “green” assembly line into a dirty grid amounts to running in place.
In a sign of how much the landscape has shifted in just the last decade, the struggle between Biden and the power industry isn’t over whether it needs to end emitting carbon into the atmosphere. The issue is how quickly it must act.
A growing number of power companies, including Arizona Public Service and Duke Energy of North Carolina, have announced voluntary goals to be carbon-free by 2050, or 15 years after Biden’s target. They consider the president-elect’s goal to be too aggressive. Some utilities have recently invested billions in natural gas plants and pipelines that have a lifespan of several decades, making a quick shift to wind and solar energy potentially costly to consumers who pay for the infrastructure.
“Some utilities have been receptive to federal and state standards, but on balance the industry has been a major force resisting them,” says Matto Mildenberger, a political scientist at UC Santa Barbara who researches the politics of climate change. “They have power generating assets that are dependent on coal and gas and their business model has been threatened by wind and solar.”
Even companies that are rapidly expanding clean energy fear Biden’s goal is too ambitious. The head of Vistra Corp., a Texas-based diversified power generator, recently told the media that the 2035 plan will lead to skyrocketing electricity costs and unreliable electricity because of the spotty performance of wind and solar farms. California’s rolling blackouts in August, caused by extreme heat and poor planning by regulators, show how tricky the fast conversion to clean energy can be in such a large state.
But recent studies suggest that the industry may be overplaying its objections to the faster adoption of renewable power. The UC study examined the cost and reliability of a grid that is 90% clean by 2035, roughly in line with Biden’s goal. With prices of wind and solar energy expected to continue to fall, wholesale electricity in 2035 would actually be cheaper over the long haul. And recently improved battery storage, in combination with energy from the remaining natural gas and nuclear plants, would supply juice when the sun isn't shining and the wind isn't blowing, making the grid reliable, the study says.
“Prices for renewables have come down so fast that the utilities haven’t really taken this fully into account in their planning,” says David Wooley, an author of the study who has worked in energy policy for three decades. “There is momentum in the system toward gas because that’s the way the utilities have done it for years.”
The greening of electricity has a long way to go. Natural gas generates almost 40% of America’s power, twice coal’s contribution. Wind and solar energy have been expanding rapidly for a decade, but along with hydropower and biomass, provide only 18% of the nation’s juice. Add nuclear power and America’s grid is about 38% clean today.
Without a federal standard, a haphazard mix of forces will continue to compel utilities to gradually go green. Mandates in 30 states have been the biggest driver and federal tax credits, a market approach Republicans favor over a federal standard, have spurred renewable development too. Lately, Big Tech firms like Apple and Microsoft have added to the pressure, demanding that states and utilities make commitments to green power to serve their data centers and other operations.
Even as some utilities embrace green power, they are running into roadblocks that a federal standard won’t resolve. From New York to California, homeowners and county officials concerned about the noise, look and environmental impact of massive wind and solar farms are slowing construction and sometimes defeating the projects. Ohio lawmakers set rules so strict that they effectively banned wind farms from the state.
All told, today’s government policies will get Biden only about halfway to his 2035 goal, according to the UC report. “States have varied ambitions with clean energy standards,” says O’Boyle of Energy Innovation. “Many are cautious or almost indifferent in their renewable energy policies. That’s why there is a need for a federal standard.”
The strength of state mandates varies greatly, depending on a state’s political tilt, energy resources and willingness to pay about 2% more on average for electricity in the short term. Conservative-leaning Montana and fracking-focused Pennsylvania set low goals, seeking less than 20% of their energy mix from renewable power. Sunny California and liberal New York are among about 10 states plus the District of Columbia that plan to completely slash carbon emissions in the next few decades.
Many of the 20 states without requirements, like Florida, are home to powerful monopoly utilities that prefer to set their own voluntary clean energy goals. A decade ago as Florida's governor, Charlie Crist pushed for a standard only to be rebuffed by the state legislature. “Charlie pled with the House leadership, but the Republicans are just not in favor of mandates and they are certainly not going to push the utilities around,” says Stephen Smith, executive director at the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy.
Florida Power & Light, the state’s biggest utility, decided to finally join the green energy march after engaging in a fierce ballot battle with residents to limit the growth of rooftop solar power four years ago. The utility projected last year that 40% of its electricity will be carbon-free by 2030. FP&L didn't respond to a request for comment.
Ohio, which produces only 3% of its electricity from renewable sources, has become exhibit A in the case for Biden’s federal standard. Last year Ohio abolished its renewable energy standard, becoming one of the few states to backtrack on a mandate, as a result of the biggest political bribery scandal in its history. Democrats who are trying to restore the state standard say it’s unlikely they can overcome Republican opposition.
“At this point, investors in renewables will have to determine if there is enough demand to make a profit without a standard,” Democratic Rep. Kristin Boggs says.
Biden’s attempt to win a federal standard would likely run into the kind of political obstacles that defeated earlier initiatives. The politics are divisive because utilities in different states don’t have the same ability to generate green power. Utilities in the West, where solar and wind resources are typically stronger, have greater access to cheap clean power than companies in parts of the Midwest and Southeast that are dependent on fossil fuels.
These regional differences doomed a proposal for a standard in the Senate in 2007 that had passed the House. The trade group Edison Electric Institute and state regulators in the Southeast warned that utilities in states that couldn’t meet the federal requirements would have to buy green power or credits from other regions rich in renewable energy, possibly costing consumers billions in extra charges. Three years later, a similar political dynamic in the Senate led to the collapse of President Obama’s cap-and-trade climate plan that contained a modest federal standard.
While details of Biden’s proposal haven’t been released, two Democrats – Sen. Tina Smith of Minnesota and Rep. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico – have introduced a bill calling for a federal standard. The measure is designed to reduce the issue of regional differences in solar and wind resources that doomed earlier efforts by making most utilities gradually increase their supply of clean energy by about 3% a year, starting at their current levels. After reaching 60% carbon-free power, the annual increases taper down on the path to a clean grid by 2050.
“The cost of clean energy has declined dramatically since Congress considered a clean energy standard a decade ago,” Smith told RealClearInvestigations. “The time is right for a federal standard because it will result in a cheaper, more reliable, and more efficient electric system than if we continue to rely solely on a hodgepodge of state and utility-level policies,
This time, a federal standard may face less resistance in Congress as states like Arizona jump onboard, showing that Republicans can get behind mandates too. In October, the Republican-led Arizona Corporation Commission approved a 100% carbon-free mandate by 2050 because, it said, it was good for the economy as well as the environment.
Amid years of public acrimony between renewable advocates and Arizona Public Service, the plunge in the price of solar energy, making it cheaper than gas in that state, forced the commission to act. “It became a no-brainer,” says Amanda Ormond, formerly the director of the Arizona Energy Office and now a clean power consultant. “If the clean stuff is less expensive, the argument shifts from ‘solar is good for air quality’ to ‘what is your reason for not using the lowest cost resource?’”
In another sign of the shifting economics of the grid, Arizona sees its new mandate as key to luring investment from companies -- including Amazon and Google -- that seek to run their businesses with clean energy. Without an aggressive carbon-free energy plan, Arizona could lose out to neighboring states like Nevada and New Mexico. “It was certainly on my mind that other states are targeting 100% clean energy and how attractive that makes them to certain industries versus other states,” says Lea Marquez Peterson, one of the Republican commissioners who supported the standard.
Biden’s standard will be easier to sell in the Democratic-controlled House and should garner some Republican support in the Senate because of the competitive pricing of renewable power. Sen. Chuck Grassley, a champion of wind power from Iowa, has been one of a handful of Republicans to support a federal standard in the past.
“I don't think a federal standard is completely outside the realm of possibility because we have Republican supporters of renewables and that support is growing,” says Wooley of UC Berkeley. “Senator Grassley is a good example of that.”
But the U.S. has enacted only a handful of environmental and energy laws in the last three decades, an indication of the difficulties that Biden’s plan would face no matter which party controls the Senate after the Georgia runoffs on Jan. 5. If Mitch McConnell, a steadfast fossil-fuel supporter from the coal state of Kentucky, continues as the majority leader, then a federal standard is likely dead on arrival in the chamber.
“Even with a 50-50 split in the Senate, it would be unlikely that Biden could get a clean electricity standard approved,” says Peter Van Doren, an expert on environmental and energy regulation at the Cato Institute. “Even the best designed bill would run into opposition in many states over the potential rise in energy prices.”
[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations.]


wnd--2020-12-28--Court considering redefinition of copyright 'fair use'

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Health . ]
This article was made possible in part by my ability to cite , with attribution , the ideas of others as expressed in original phrases .
If I had copied these statements without crediting the authors , I would have submitted the entirety of the article as my own .
That would be plagiarism .
And if I had used the phrase , “ I think of all the education that I 've missed .
But then my homework was never quite like this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this article without citing Van Halen , that would be copyright infringement .
Arguing that the lyrics for “ Hot for Teacher ” was necessary to my writing this piece would not have change that fact .
In October this year , the Supreme Court of the United States ( SCOTUS ) heard oral arguments in the copyright case Google LLC v. Oracle America Inc. about whether such plagiarism is legal as long as the key phrases are lines of computer code .
Google is seeking to overturn a Federal Appellate court ruling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any other copyrighted software ) because it was necessary for creating its Android platform is not “ fair use ” of someone else ’ s writing .
Judge Kathleen O ’ Malley of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit wrote : “ There is nothing fair about taking a copyrighted work verbatim and using it for the same purpose and function as the original in a competing platform.
” TRENDING : Deafening silence from 'Defund Police ' crowd as police rush to Ground Zero in Nashville The Court of Appeals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Java as part of a licensing scheme to attract programmers while simultaneously commercializing the platform .
As the court noted : “ Google elected to “ [ d ] o Java anyway and defend [ its ] decision , perhaps making enemies along the way.
” Reversing this decision would cause actual and potential harm to the emerging market for health care data analysis , and be detrimental to digital health innovation ( e.g.
, biosensors , new imaging tools , mobile device laboratory capabilities , end-to-end digital clinical trials , telemedicine , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ technologies ) .
Nothing would prevent Google – or any company – from copying as much code as needed from any number of health care software developers and tacking it on .
Oracle was the first target because it was ubiquitous and allowed Google to substantially reduce the transaction costs associated of signing up third-party developers .
Rather than defend its infringement on the merits of the case , Google is now using the argument that the Supreme Court should overturn the Appellate Court decision because the 7th Amendment .
The SCOTUSBLOG noted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( several months after the original briefs were filed ) called for short additional briefs from the parties discussing the standard of review for the fair-use verdict , including how the Seventh Amendment might apply to this case .
The Seventh Amendment generally requires that a jury resolve factual questions in civil litigation and precludes courts from stepping in to overturn factual determinations that fall within the appropriate province of the jury.
” In other words ( mine ) , Google wants the Supreme Court to rule that the Appellate Court was wrong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trial in Federal District Court that decided Google ’ s appropriation of code was fair use .
If the Supreme Court reverses the fair use standard applied by the Appeals Court , it will make it easier to simply appropriate and reuse ideas that others have invested time and money to create .
A decision that will be devastating to health care innovation at a time when telehealth technologies are critical to combating the COVID-19 pandemic .
If SCOTUS decides to overturn the Appeals Court , it will redefine fair use .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I can copy anything I think necessary to my work and to the extent possible that I deem it necessary .
I am not a legal scholar but I don ’ t have to be one to know that such a standard would make plagiarism commonplace and make ownership – the foundation upon which sharing of ideas rests — more difficult and costly to secure .
But until the Court rules otherwise , please cite my article with attribution !
Robert Goldberg is Vice President at the Center for Medicine in the Public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ podcast .
[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Health . ]

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Health.]
By Robert Goldberg
Real Clear Health
This article was made possible in part by my ability to cite, with attribution, the ideas of others as expressed in original phrases. If I had copied these statements without crediting the authors, I would have submitted the entirety of the article as my own. That would be plagiarism. And if I had used the phrase, “I think of all the education that I've missed. But then my homework was never quite like this!” to anchor the rest of this article without citing Van Halen, that would be copyright infringement. Arguing that the lyrics for “Hot for Teacher” was necessary to my writing this piece would not have change that fact.
In October this year, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) heard oral arguments in the copyright case Google LLC v. Oracle America Inc. about whether such plagiarism is legal as long as the key phrases are lines of computer code. Google is seeking to overturn a Federal Appellate court ruling that copying Oracle API code (or any other copyrighted software) because it was necessary for creating its Android platform is not “fair use” of someone else’s writing. Judge Kathleen O’Malley of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit wrote: “There is nothing fair about taking a copyrighted work verbatim and using it for the same purpose and function as the original in a competing platform.”
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The Court of Appeals determined that Google used its copying of Java as part of a licensing scheme to attract programmers while simultaneously commercializing the platform. As the court noted: “Google elected to “[d]o Java anyway and defend [its] decision, perhaps making enemies along the way.”
Reversing this decision would cause actual and potential harm to the emerging market for health care data analysis, and be detrimental to digital health innovation (e.g., biosensors, new imaging tools, mobile device laboratory capabilities, end-to-end digital clinical trials, telemedicine, video game prescriptions, and other developing technologies). Nothing would prevent Google – or any company – from copying as much code as needed from any number of health care software developers and tacking it on. Oracle was the first target because it was ubiquitous and allowed Google to substantially reduce the transaction costs associated of signing up third-party developers.
Rather than defend its infringement on the merits of the case, Google is now using the argument that the Supreme Court should overturn the Appellate Court decision because the 7th Amendment.
The SCOTUSBLOG noted that “the Supreme Court in May (several months after the original briefs were filed) called for short additional briefs from the parties discussing the standard of review for the fair-use verdict, including how the Seventh Amendment might apply to this case. The Seventh Amendment generally requires that a jury resolve factual questions in civil litigation and precludes courts from stepping in to overturn factual determinations that fall within the appropriate province of the jury.”
In other words (mine), Google wants the Supreme Court to rule that the Appellate Court was wrong in overturning the decision of a jury trial in Federal District Court that decided Google’s appropriation of code was fair use.
If the Supreme Court reverses the fair use standard applied by the Appeals Court, it will make it easier to simply appropriate and reuse ideas that others have invested time and money to create. A decision that will be devastating to health care innovation at a time when telehealth technologies are critical to combating the COVID-19 pandemic.
If SCOTUS decides to overturn the Appeals Court, it will redefine fair use. The new-found fair use standard will be: I can copy anything I think necessary to my work and to the extent possible that I deem it necessary. I am not a legal scholar but I don’t have to be one to know that such a standard would make plagiarism commonplace and make ownership – the foundation upon which sharing of ideas rests — more difficult and costly to secure. But until the Court rules otherwise, please cite my article with attribution!
Robert Goldberg is Vice President at the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest and co-cost of the Patients Rising podcast.
[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Health.]


wnd--2020-12-28--Dominion lawyers send blistering 'cease and desist' letter to Trump campaign 'star witness'

Attorneys for Dominion Voting Systems have sent a `` cease and desist '' letter to whistleblower Mellissa Carone , who earlier this month testified about Dominion 's voting machines in a hearing before Michigan legislators and was called the `` star witness '' in the case against Michigan 's conduct of the Wolverine State 's election .
In an affidavit , Carone said there was widespread fraud at the TCF Center in Detroit where election results were tallied and that she saw ballots counted multiple times .
Carone is an information technology professional who was hired by Dominion as an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ You gained international infamy earlier this month as Rudy Giuliani ’ s so-called ‘ star witness ’ who could supposedly corroborate outlandish accusations that Dominion has somehow rigged or otherwise improperly influenced the outcome of the Nov. 2020 U.S. presidential election , ” the company stated in a letter from attorneys Thomas Clare and Megan Meier , who are representing Dominion .
“ Without a shred of corroborating evidence , you have claimed that you witnessed several different versions of voter fraud — ranging from one story involving a van , to other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' the letter said .
TRENDING : Deafening silence from 'Defund Police ' crowd as police rush to Ground Zero in Nashville '' You published these statements even though you knew all along that your attacks on Dominion have no basis in reality , '' the letter said .
Dominion mocked Carone ’ s claims that her work for Dominion gave her expertise to know how the company 's machines operated .
“ We write to you now because you have positioned yourself as a prominent leader of the ongoing misinformation campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ insider ’ s knowledge ’ regarding Dominion ’ s business activities , when in reality you were hired through a staffing agency for one day to clean glass on machines and complete other menial tasks , ” the letter said .
The letter demanded that Carone stop making what it called “ defamatory claims against Dominion ” and preserve all documents relating to any of her claims .
The website Law and Crime said Dominion has sent `` cease and desist '' letters to letters to multiple people and entities including attorney @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bartiromo of the Fox Business Network , attorney Lin Wood , Sean Hannity of Fox News , Rush Limbaugh , cybersecurity expert Russell Ramsland , attorney Rudy Giuliani and Greg Kelly of Newsmax as well as Fox News , One America News , Newsmax , The Epoch Times , and the White House .
“ I am a mother , I have two children , I have two degrees , ” Carone said , according to The Washington Post .
“ I don ’ t know any woman in the world that would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ write it .
You can go to prison for this.
” In an interview with The Epoch Times , Carone pushed back against comments from Dominion CEO John Poulos , who also appeared before Michigan legislators .
She disputed a comment from Poulos about whether the machines can connect to the Internet .
Although Poulos said they could not , Carone said she disagreed .
“ What they would do is they would go off the internet and then reconnect , go off and reconnect , ” she said .
Dominion responded to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ Dominion stands behind Mr. Poulos ’ s testimony under oath before the Michigan State Senate , and we welcome those who differ to take the same steps to ensure truth , trust , and accountability in their own public statements.
” Although Democratic nominee Joe Biden has secured sufficient Electoral College votes to win the presidency , the Trump campaign continues to contest the election , insisting that there has been voter fraud in states that include Arizona , Nevada , Georgia , Michigan and Wisconsin , as well as Pennsylvania @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Western Journal .

Attorneys for Dominion Voting Systems have sent a "cease and desist" letter to whistleblower Mellissa Carone, who earlier this month testified about Dominion's voting machines in a hearing before Michigan legislators and was called the "star witness" in the case against Michigan's conduct of the Wolverine State's election.
In an affidavit, Carone said there was widespread fraud at the TCF Center in Detroit where election results were tallied and that she saw ballots counted multiple times. Carone is an information technology professional who was hired by Dominion as an independent contractor to provide support.
Dominion attacked her testimony.
“You gained international infamy earlier this month as Rudy Giuliani’s so-called ‘star witness’ who could supposedly corroborate outlandish accusations that Dominion has somehow rigged or otherwise improperly influenced the outcome of the Nov. 2020 U.S. presidential election,” the company stated in a letter from attorneys Thomas Clare and Megan Meier, who are representing Dominion.
“Without a shred of corroborating evidence, you have claimed that you witnessed several different versions of voter fraud — ranging from one story involving a van, to other accusations that votes were counted multiple times," the letter said.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
"You published these statements even though you knew all along that your attacks on Dominion have no basis in reality," the letter said.
Dominion mocked Carone’s claims that her work for Dominion gave her expertise to know how the company's machines operated.
“We write to you now because you have positioned yourself as a prominent leader of the ongoing misinformation campaign by pretending to have some sort of ‘insider’s knowledge’ regarding Dominion’s business activities, when in reality you were hired through a staffing agency for one day to clean glass on machines and complete other menial tasks,” the letter said.
The letter demanded that Carone stop making what it called “defamatory claims against Dominion” and preserve all documents relating to any of her claims.
The website Law and Crime said Dominion has sent "cease and desist" letters to letters to multiple people and entities including attorney Sidney Powell, Lou Dobbs and Maria Bartiromo of the Fox Business Network, attorney Lin Wood, Sean Hannity of Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, cybersecurity expert Russell Ramsland, attorney Rudy Giuliani and Greg Kelly of Newsmax as well as Fox News, One America News, Newsmax, The Epoch Times, and the White House.
Carone has defended her testimony.
“I am a mother, I have two children, I have two degrees,” Carone said, according to The Washington Post.
“I don’t know any woman in the world that would write an affidavit under oath just to write it. You can go to prison for this.”
In an interview with The Epoch Times, Carone pushed back against comments from Dominion CEO John Poulos, who also appeared before Michigan legislators.
She disputed a comment from Poulos about whether the machines can connect to the Internet. Although Poulos said they could not, Carone said she disagreed.
“What they would do is they would go off the internet and then reconnect, go off and reconnect,” she said.
Dominion responded to her comments with a statement that said, “Dominion stands behind Mr. Poulos’s testimony under oath before the Michigan State Senate, and we welcome those who differ to take the same steps to ensure truth, trust, and accountability in their own public statements.”
Although Democratic nominee Joe Biden has secured sufficient Electoral College votes to win the presidency, the Trump campaign continues to contest the election, insisting that there has been voter fraud in states that include Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, Michigan and Wisconsin, as well as Pennsylvania.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.