#free judiciary past year papers

[anaverna]

Ecarden: Machinery of the Heavens

Ecarden is a very advanced and high-tech world, populated by a single biological sentient species self-named the engrath. Technically, there is also a bunch of sentient AI which was made in spite of the ban, but we will talk about those later. Despite a clear sci-fi focus, Ecarden has an unexpectedly vintage and even art deco look, with a great balance of urbanization and the preservation of nature as it is.

The entire Ecarden is divided into 22 autonomous cities called Districts, which in action are full-fledged states, forming together a strong alliance ruled by Ecardian Council. The common language, which was created at the beginning of the Era of Watchmaker, left all of the older languages in the past. However, each District possesses its own culture, laws, and general appearance. Power (except for the judiciary) belongs to the parliament and the Governor (aka the head of state), each elected for a five-year term.

And, perhaps the most important thing…

Ecarden is a world, where there is a rightful God!

*** Main characters

The main events take place in the 4th District in the backdrop of a few sudden serious problems, hence the main characters: the God themself, the Clergyman of the 4th District, his assistant AI in a body of an android, as well as the Governor of the 4th District.

As a deity, Watchmaker can shapeshift to any form, however, they rarely use this ability, dwelling on the images familiar and tested by time.

Watchmaker is the creator of the universe, but not the origin of the life existing in it (appearance of which, by the way, had become a real surprise for them). Being a demiurge, they are not a "God" in the sense in which we are accustomed to using this word, and for this reason, they call themself Watchmaker by analogy to the profession of a master-creator of the time mechanisms. In Ecarden Watchmaker acts like a full-fledged patron of arts and sciences, who with their own free will is ready to help with the development of the world and provide assistance with technology. They're considered the "Blind God", which means that they aren't a deity reigning over the world and watching over everything and everyone, but rather simple architect who knows about what is happening from the interactions with the Clergymen, who are mediators and representatives of each District, the most outstanding engineers who create the most advanced technology under Watchmaker's guidance. As a patron, Watchmaker presents the most important discoveries and innovations to the public, participates in ceremonies (such as Governor's inauguration, for example), and leads the main holiday of Ecarden named Thanksgiving Day, giving parting words and wishes for the next year, while maintaining a festive atmosphere.

***

Even though Eve and the other employees of the Complex have their uniforms, mostly it isn't forbidden to wear casual clothes, which he does quite often.

Zhaneeve Hezenlight is a Clergyman of the 4th District, a talented engineer in several fields, and a little bit practicing bionic. Most call Zhaneeve simply Eve, including employees of the Complex themselves (not to mention his close social circle).

His duties, like any other Clergyman, include:

Application in the development technologies which already exist and solving current problems with their help;

Development of completely new technologies (optional);

Periodic reports to the Watchmaker about what is happening in the headed District.

In addition, as one of the most competent bionics, he is also responsible for carrying out the most serious and urgent prosthetic operations and, in fact, mechanization in these cases.

On paper, each Clergyman is the head of the Complex of their District, the research center in which most of all development is carried out. In reality, Clergymen are very busy people, and each Complex is led by its deputy, leaving only the most important issues to the Clergyman.

Positive and kindhearted, always young in his soul (and a bit like a fashionista) Eve does plastic surgeries twice as frequently as any other engrath, he’s nonetheless quite a responsible person and tries to lead Complex and all the work going on there in the best way possible. 

***

Helper uses his small size and funny robotic look as an advantage. To display his emotions, he uses emoji or emoticons, sometimes reaching a completely absurd look.

Helper is an AI in а body of an android. He was created by Zhaneeve and originally was planned as a simple robot for small assignments, but Eve's creative approach (and his reluctance to do everything "according to a template") led to an unexpected result — AI gained consciousness and an edgy personality.

Possessing highly doubtful morals and being an obvious nihilist, the outwardly sarcastic and unfriendly assistant is the complete opposite of his creator. Barely recognizing any kind of authority, he doesn't perceive Eve as his creator, and even less as his boss, and works with him in a cooperative on a basis more similar to that of a friend, which doesn’t bother either of them as of yet.

Basically, Helper is something in between an omnipotent intelligence and a 7-year-old child (his real age), has his own Vlog, likes rap, and is quite good at it. 

***

Dark clothes are quite rare for a visually light Eсarden, and yet Nahash approves only two colours in his clothes which are black and burgundy.

Nahash Сerdes is a Governor of the 4th District. In general, he’s a rather serious and domineering man, one might even say harsh but he does an excellent job, for which he is very much loved by the townspeople. As the head of an almost full-fledged state, he bears a huge share of responsibility, and in practice also the entire executive power, which, however, doesn't bother him that much. He had changed his name and hides any true information about his past, had some traumatic experiences throughout his life that caused PTSD nightmares which make Nahash suffer from insomnia.

Officially, Eve is Nahash's personal bionic, who solves all issues regarding his mechanization, but in reality, these two are connected by a love affair something… more.

***

Character's voice canons

Saint Motel — Eat Your Heart Out

This song perfectly reflects cheerfulness, love for playing the guitar, and, to some extent, even Eve's philosophy.

Slide — See Thru Blue

Nahash's voice is usually a little bit more bassy, but he almost always talks to Eve in exactly this way.

Son Lux, Mitski, David Byrne - This Is A Life (male)

Watchmaker has an exceptionally polite manner of communication, as well as calm, measured speech. However, their voice changes slightly from time to time, similar to their appearance.

***

And finally…

Small typing of characters according to the lyric heroes from the song The Oh Hellos - Soldier, Poet, King, which isn't a canonical display of their professions, remains very indicative for understanding what all three of them are.

[edzorblaw]

Edzorb Law is a Self-study Companion for Judicial aspirants from all across India. It is an App-based one-stop solution providing multiple smart study plans to enable aspirants to secure their seats very early within their 1st year of preparation. Get free judiciary past year papers through Edzorb Law app. For more details visit us: www.edzorblaw.com

[drearytweddiafawnx]

A letter to myself from 2030.

Hey Rim ! Wanna hug ?

It's me ......actually it's you from 2030.l know you've been dreaming of me . So i thought i should write you a letter. I was reading through all my old letters and braindump journals .It made me rethink about my past thoughts and write to you about them

The time you are in and the time I'm writing to you are both important moments of our life .

The year 2030 is the time when we are leading the world and 2020 is the time when we just started our journey. After the covid crisis days were not so good as you've already imagined. But your 'silly "plans helped the people who needed help . Heres a note from one of your writings.

10.06.20

To all the teens who'll be leading the world in upcoming days .look at our future main concerns 

*stoping global warming 

*giving freedom toall (everyone who has a life ,freedom of speech, lifestyle and everything )

*completing the necessary needs 

*fighting future disasters sensebly 

*solving problems unitedly .

*empowering huminity and human knowledge 

*being a good global citizen .

We have to be the hero of the next 

generation. 

Our ideas are the root of our life . Trying to understand the future problems and living in your future is

not bad . You like to do things keeping their future in mind . You wanted to build an education system where you create open minded people . 

I would love to talk about your ideas 

during the covid crisis like street farming ,street education and practical learning . I hope you remember this journal pages ....

16.04.20 

Practical learning - giving assignments and research topics during the covid crisis and after the crisis showing the research and assessments .Exams will be taken through activities and practicaly while kids learn something new while giving exams .

And this will be area based .

Like to a remote village maybe clean water is a big issue .

Childrens from that village will work on it .

8.05.20

Street education - using street billboards and ad boards to teach street children and passerby .

Using fun animation and video we can teach them general knowledge and make people aware of certain topics like childmarriege and dowry .

11.06.20

Street farming - using the footover bridges and street dividers to produce free and safe food for the poor ,begger and street people .

So that they can freely eat and cook .

It will also be beneficial for all the natives living there .

Most of your ideas were based on underdeveloped coutries . And I'm really looking forward to your both websites that you are working on . learning and asking questions about anything in their mother tongue gives kids an opportunity to write and ask with freedom and you wanted to make begging a respectful profession .giving a home and shelter . While volunteers will help them and take care of them.

People will be able to donate to their personal account using your website .

Some can get employed too. Nice ideas Rim .

I know its the first pride month you are celebrating and currently you are saving money for building an free open school for poor ,street children and everyone who is curious to learn 

But the best thing you learned these days was respecting everyone and trying to keep your feet on their shoes to understand their pain and sufferings . 

But the thing you were thinking about on those days was global warming . All of my life I wanted freedom and you wanted to free all animals giving all plants a chance to grow freely even if they were not helpful . Humans are soo selfish that they only spare those lives which benefit them somehow .

To you the new normal was not mask, gloves and social distancing ,you wanted the new normal to let everyone live ,everyone who has a life , give mother nature a chance to heal herself . 

One day you wrote that "The covid crisis has taught all of us equally at a time that how we all are connected even if we are separated and how we depend on each other and we should 

admire everyone and everything.

If nature is infected nature will cure herself too. Everything is important and being here to teach us something . Even the poisons from the earth has a healing power to save lifes .

Mother nature is teaching us to be humble , respectful to every element of the earth and give equal importance as we have over here .

Just give them the chance to be , to live , breath freely , to learn and seek and teach us . I don't think humans has the right to make laws and specialy making their own " natures law ".

So many wonders got lost before finding them and will never return only because of our foolishness .

Only because they are not helpful they should die , who are we to set this cruel rule ? 

Even humans are cruel to other humans . We are treating like enemies more than mother natures childrens . because we are unaware and selfish. Peoples are different because their mindsets and that's the beauty of our nature .There is no one like us and everyone is unique and connecting different perspectives can bring us a change . Physical boundries will be nothing in front of our inner connection . We should build huminity towards humans and all living matters and let everyone bloom in their own light , energy and power to prove everyones inner beauty is in their heart .Knowledge is our power the future is in our hand and we will surely make a change !"

Well dear Rim ,

In your imaginary world you knew that one day the earth will be healed and mother earth didnt let you go. Our c mkther earth is niow healed and healing herself everyday .

On 2030 some fun things happened like reuseable straws and paper clothes became trend people were buying them . We don't cut trees to make furnitures . We are doing upcycling and using alternative options .All animals are freed now only reliable universities has the right to research on animals without keeping them caged.There are some animals getting internet famouse everyday . We have equality and balance in our education any one can learn from anywhere anytime. Education is costfree now and age is just a number . All cuntries are united. There is no fight or war .No one breaks the rule ordoes crime intentionally.

Everyone is respected here no matter what their gender ,age or status is .We are building sustainable houses for everyone using alternative ways and on this process nature is not pollouted. Everyone is earning and

no one is staying unemployed. All professions are equally admired .Self employed people are increasing day by day . Over here we don't have bad people and they are being actually educated . Teaching us life skills while making our minds open and creative . Education is costfree and we are learning to get mastery on them.

In some countries overpopulation was a massive problem but now its not and we also controling our population by supporting one child . What ever that child might be , a life is always special. We have wonderful botanical gardens and reserved seed banks which has so many rare seeds . Internet is now the most safe place and resourcefull place 

All the waste is recycled and used as energy .

Spacewaste and e waste are sorted too. 

Big countries are helping small countries and now we all are equal and same no big or small.

Mills and factories use green energy to produce theur work and they dont throw waste in the water or soil .

All professions are equally admired and learning and education is free 

Now we have a no meat day in every month of the year and it is celebrated the whole world wide.

People now do their chores by themselves and donate their belongings which they no longer need ,no one extra stuff to clutter their home .

Everyone has a place to live a sweet home and a shelter and we dont need fill rivers or cut mountains or clean 

forests to build home . Refugees are loved and cared too ,many countries are helping them to survive .

We all truely have a home to live.

There is no cage no zoo but we have virtual zoo and world tour .

Many aninals got mentally sick staying in cage for a long time ,now they allare under good treatment .

keeping pets in cage is also agnist law .You will see " No entry" billboaard in front of many forests and importaant places. Government is helping people when they need . The quantity of doing crime is very less now 

There is no injustice . laws are very strict and mandatory. We have reliable snd trustworthy judiciary. I should say there is very less pending cases .

Everyone is working hard to spread positivity .

Government is really concerned about the happinesss of their citizens . People give mental health a big priority. Government encourages to take selftime and selfcare .

We can get safe and healthy food in a very cheap price .

We understand others feelings and respect them .

We use green energies now .

Other energy sources which we used before is now where they belong ,

to the nature . We are researching very hard on various topics nowdays to seek in the beauty and mystery of mother nature .

Our biodiversity is now very increased .

Our homes can now deal with earthquakes and other disasters .

We've build durable dams to stop getting fload and bush fires are also controlled.

We no more make cigarettes or tobacco products. 

No one smokes not even vehicles ,mills and factories. No human trafficking and less fishing .

Our youth is so positive nowdays . Youth exchange programmes are increased too . We understand how important staying globally connected is .

Each of the countries has a special bugdet and plan to deal with future diseases and disasters .

We are now shareing our love .working hand in hand .

There us no negetivity and no hatred agnist anyone .

Everyone gets to drink clean water and eat fresh safe food.

We don't 

have sewage problems nowdays .

Everything is by design and mother natures order . We dont want to harm our nature and so do our mother nature . 

Earth has now chaged a lot we have wonderful seasons and climate .

Whereever I look I see greenery and beauty ,love and peace .

Everyone is working hard to make our world a better place .

We only have one earth and we love her so much , we don't want to leave her or make her unhappy or sick .

We are working thinking about our future and having a sustainable world 

You would not believe ! my eyes are now filled with soothing greenery 

! 

Pond with ducks ,plants, butterflies bees ,dragonflies , grasshoppers everywhere with farmers and villegers .

And there is no pollution , no dirt 

literally zero waste . Everything is recycled reuse reduced and upcycled .

We have mighty leaders reliable law and trustworthy government .

At this time the world is so beautiful , everyones heart is so beautiful .its the happiest world ever .

I know its still like a dream to you .

But if i say its true you would ask me who did it ? And my answers is us , all of us everyone unitedly . One by one from various countries bright minds and leaders came up and worked for the change .

You everything you wanted to be. I'm nothing different from you .

I am you and you are still in me. 

On this world of 2030 .

Im compltetinng all the dreams that a teenager saw on her 16's. Teacher and connecting with hearts through internet .helping the poor and helpless ,working with the UN , studying in Japan and doing a research .

While your reading even if 

you believe in my words the law of attraction will make it true because youve already started working on it .

I wrote this letter for a competition but never end up giving it to someone or somewhere because it became special.

[bountyofbeads]

🚨 BREAKING NEWS ALERT 🚨 🚨

John Conyers Jr., long-serving congressman who co-founded Congressional Black Caucus, dies at 90

By John Otis | Published October 27 at 4:36 PM ET | Washington Post | Posted October 27, 2019 |

John Conyers Jr., who became the longest-serving African American in Congress, co-founded the Congressional Black Caucus and helped create a national holiday in the name of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. but whose career rapidly crumbled at 88 when he resigned amid sexual harassment allegations, died Oct. 27 at his home in Detroit. He was 90.

His spokeswoman Holly Baird confirmed the death. Additional details were not immediately available.

A liberal Democrat from what is now Detroit’s 13th Congressional District, Mr. Conyers was first elected in 1964, becoming one of five African Americans in the House. His overwhelmingly Democratic constituents reelected him 26 times over a period spanning 10 presidents, from Lyndon B. Johnson to Donald Trump.

As the longest-serving member at the time of his resignation, Mr. Conyers earned the title “dean of the House of Representatives,” and this job security allowed him to promote progressive, sometimes controversial causes that won him a national following.

He co-sponsored the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which prohibited discrimination at the ballot box. His fierce criticism of the Vietnam War led to clashes with Johnson and landed him on Richard M. Nixon’s “enemies list” of political opponents.

After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Mr. Conyers voted against the USA Patriot Act because he feared it would roll back civil liberties. He later suggested that President George W. Bush should be impeached, saying he misled the country ahead of the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Mr. Conyers’s twilight years were marred by allegations of sexual harassment. According to legal documents published by the online publication BuzzFeed in November 2017, several of his female staff members claimed that he had approached them to request sex and that he had engaged in unwanted touching and other impropriety.

One former staff member received a settlement of more than $27,000 from Mr. Conyers’s office after alleging in 2015 that he fired her for not accepting his sexual advances. The congressman denied any wrongdoing. But after the House Ethics Committee opened an investigation and numerous representatives called for him to step down in November 2017, Mr. Conyers step down from hs post as top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. The next month, he announced his resignation, after 52 years in office.

“My legacy can’t be compromised or diminished in any way by what we are going through now,” Mr. Conyers declared defiantly. “This too shall pass.”

Before the scandal, Mr. Conyers had been an inspiration to African Americans from Detroit to the Deep South and became, in effect, a member of Congress at large.

“In many districts around the country, black voters did not feel represented by their leaders so they would reach out to African American congressmen, like Conyers,” said Michael Fauntroy, who interned for Mr. Conyers in the early 1980s and is now an assistant professor of political science at Howard University.

Mr. Conyers, in turn, urged skeptical African Americans to get involved in politics. One of his early mottos was: “Register, vote, run for office. It’s power that counts.” To better harness that power and secure passage of legislation on poverty, racism, human rights, unfair tax policies and health care, Mr. Conyers and 12 other African American House members founded the Congressional Black Caucus in 1971.

Mr. Conyers strongly backed the Rev. Jesse Jackson’s 1984 campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination and was an early supporter of candidate Barack Obama, who was then a Democratic senator from Illinois. Yet Mr. Conyers also could be caustic of fellow Democrats to demonstrate that he was not blindly loyal to anyone.

In 1979, he described President Jimmy Carter as a “hopeless, demented, honest, well-intentioned nerd who will never get past his first administration.” Decades later, Mr. Conyers criticized Obama for making foreign policy too dependent on military muscle. His intention, Mr. Conyers said of Obama, was “to make him a better president.”

He presented himself as an emeritus member of the Washington establishment, and had participated in many high-profile political battles.

Mr. Conyers was the only member of the House Judiciary Committee to take part in impeachment proceedings against President Richard Nixon in 1974 for the Watergate bugging scandal and coverup, and against President Bill Clinton in 1998 for lying about his affair with White House intern Monica S. Lewinsky.

Mr. Conyers considered Nixon a criminal and helped draft articles of impeachment against the president before he resigned. However, he called the effort to impeach Clinton a Republican coup d’etat and “the most tragic event in my career.” He voted no when the House voted to impeach Clinton. Eight years later, Mr. Conyers became the first African American to chair the Judiciary Committee.

All along, Mr. Conyers was a master of the politics of symbolism. He hired civil rights activist Rosa Parks, who worked in his Detroit office for 20 years. He introduced numerous bills calling for reparations for the descendants of slaves, an issue that resonated among blacks but did not gain traction in Congress. More successful was his 15-year struggle to recognize King, the civil rights defender.

Four days after King was assassinated on April 4, 1968, and with the support of his widow, Coretta Scott King, Mr. Conyers proposed the first of many bills calling for a federal holiday in his honor.

The proposal met resistance from Republicans, notably Sen. Jesse Helms (N.C.), who accused King of Communist sympathies and complained that only one other holiday, Columbus Day, was named after a person.

Mr. Conyers kept pushing, millions of people signed petitions and entertainer Stevie Wonder pitched in with the hit single “Happy Birthday.” President Ronald Reagan in 1983 signed legislation setting aside the third Monday in January as Martin Luther King Jr. Day; the day was chosen because it was near King’s Jan. 15 birthday.

In a 2008 interview, Mr. Conyers called it “far and away the thing I am most proud of.”

But as the Detroit Free Press, his hometown paper, once described it, “For every brilliant move, there’s a dud.” Mr. Conyers was famous for missing votes on the House floor. Critics claimed that his effectiveness was dulled by growing arrogance and a refusal to compromise. He was prone to gaffes, prompting Time magazine political columnist Joe Klein to call him “foolishly incendiary.”

When Mr. Conyers ran for mayor of Detroit in 1989, challenging Democratic incumbent Coleman A. Young, he announced his bid by saying, “Move over, Big Daddy, I’m home.” Mr. Conyers finished third in the primary and then lost again in 1993.

Mr. Conyers could be a demanding boss. In addition to the allegations that he sexually harassed staff members, the House Ethics Committee investigated him for pressuring staff members to babysit for his children and to chauffeur him to private events in government vehicles.

After an investigation that lasted more than two years, the panel announced a deal in 2006 in which it dropped the inquiry in return for Mr. Conyers’s promise that he would not ask his staff members to do nonofficial work for him.

In 2009, Mr. Conyers’s wife, Monica Esters Conyers — a former campaign staff member 36 years his junior — was convicted of bribery while serving on the Detroit City Council and was sentenced to 37 months in prison.

John James Conyers Jr. was born in Detroit on May 16, 1929. He served in the Army Corps of Engineers during the Korean War. With the help of the G.I. Bill for veterans, he graduated from Detroit’s Wayne State University in 1957 and its law school in 1958.

His interest in public affairs was partly because of his father’s position as an international representative for the United Auto Workers and, for a time, Mr. Conyers worked as a labor lawyer. He also was a legislative assistant to Rep. John D. Dingell (D-Mich.), one of the few House members to serve even longer than Mr. Conyers.

In the early 1960s, local Democratic Party elders considered Mr. Conyers too young to pursue federal office. Despite their opposition, Mr. Conyers ran in the 1964 Democratic primary for what was then Detroit’s 1st Congressional District and won by a mere 45 votes. He then scored a landslide victory in the general election.

Mr. Conyers had two sons, John III and Carl. Complete information on survivors was not immediately available.

In office, Mr. Conyers went on to fend off challenges from candidates who hadn’t yet been born when he was first elected.

[ericahenry]

Shalom lamm claims drug Consumption in Mexico and Narcomenudeo Law

Shalom lamm Mexico is known for high rates of crime, violence, and drugs. The country is also in limelight for drug trafficking, the divisions within the leading drug trafficking cartels, and their diversification. The government of the country has taken all possible actions to control the key markets for trafficking drugs within the country or across the border. The reaction of the Calderón administration has been in action considering two key factors: the expanding incorporation of the armed forces in the security of public tasks, and legal reforms that are specifically designed to effectively fight against the crime and illegal trafficking of drugs across the border.

One study about drug consumption or trafficking and other illegal activities related to drugs can be well studied from the Mexico chapter- a research study Systems Overload: Drug Laws and Prisons in Latin America. This research paper studies the connection between drug legislation and the prison situation in the country.  It also highlights the stretch penalties for crimes related to drugs and the use of preventive detention in current years are two key factors that have aided the increase of the population of prison in Mexico. According to a study conducted between 1998 and 2008, by Mexican officials, it has been concluded that the total number of prisoners in Mexican jails nearly doubled. The number of prisoners raised from 128,902 prisoners to 219,752.

The statistics of the above-mentioned paper also highlights two key points:

Most internment for drug-related crime might not end up in judgment. Although the number of molded-up people reflects the intensity of war against managed crime is certain to work, the statistics show that in hundreds of cases these presentments do not result in judgments. During the initial years of the war against the drug-related mafia and other crimes reached almost  226,667, but only 51,282 of them faced trial, of whom 33,500 were sent to prisons. Shalom lamm said, “These figures show that a great number of guilt-free people are being prisoned. The studies also show that there is no proper process of an investigation conducted by the government officials.  According to Ana Paula Hernández, author of the chapter, no proper and authentic proofs were presented before the judiciary.  The majority of prisoners are usually due to small-scale drug-related crimes. Some of them are drug dealers on a small scale. While some of them are people who kept a little number of drugs for their personal use.

Shalom lamm set the statistics in the report show that a large number of people who are in prison are those who are a minor threat to society and who play a little role in the trafficking of drugs. According to Hernandez, “The statistics calculated shows that usually, the convicts are not nationwide drug traffickers but small-scale dealers and convicts for keeping a little number of drugs,”. The paper also concludes the kind of crime performed by those convicts and the length of their punishment. In the majority of the cases studied,  culprits were given the minimum level of punishment. this leads to a conclusion that the cases involved the possession of drugs for consumption or low-level dealing.

To stretch on these observations, the Mexico report focuses on 3 major states of Mexico. These states are Chihuahua, one of the states most affected by drug trafficking; Jalisco, because it is the state with the highest number of detainees for drug-related crimes; and the Federal District since it has the largest population in the country. One of the major obstacles for this study was the lack of information and the inconsistency of several of the statistics supplied. But, the data collected does make a clear sketch of how drug-related crimes were punished up until the Narcomenudeo Law was announced in August of 2009 and suggests areas that need a detailed investigation.

Shalom lamm says that one of the states of Mexico, named Jalisco shows the most concerning statistics. It shows that out of the 42,153 people prisoned for crimes related to drugs since the start of President Calderón’s Administration, only 3,400 have been presented in the courts and judiciary and 2,173 have been prisoned. Based on the data provided by the Mexican local courts, it is concluded that possession of a certain amount of marihuana is the reason behind a large number of people in the state.'s jail  The possession of marihuana is followed by the possession of cocaine. The possession aims to sell these out even in small amounts. This is illegal too and can result in a small-scale conviction.

Besides, research conducted in 2009 shows that almost 50 percent of those culprits in jail for trading drugs in the Mexican state and Federal District and were convicted for keeping drugs worth the US $100 or less, and 25 percent were for amounts worth US$ 18 or less.  According to Hernández. These actions and punishments not only affect the lives of the convicts but also affects the lives of their families.  The family is left without any income. These people end up harming society than the $100 worth of drugs they intend to trade.

Shalom lamm said that, In Mexico, a major change in the female culprits is also inclined on a national level. In the past years, female prisoners would be charged for theft, but in the current century, the number of women in the jails was culprits of drug-related crimes.  The major number of women prisoners in Mexico are young, poor, illiterate, or with only basic education, and are nearly always single mothers.

Most of them are in jail for trafficking drugs in Mexico showing the final link in the chain of drug trafficking. According to Hernández. “Majority of these prisoned women are involved into dealing or transporting even a small of drugs to support their families, and their main aim was to get rid of poverty. There are also several women, who are trapped in the drug dealing. Such a story is narrated by a woman in prison in Mexico, named Rosa Julia Leyva. This lady tells her life story and how she ended up in jail in a short video. This video was allowed by the government officials and the press to make women aware of drug dealing and how they can protect themselves. As the country does not give leverage to the drug dealers anymore.

The Mexico chapter also concludes the possible consequences of the implementation of the Narcomenudeo law. This law has resulted in making the Mexican jails overcrowded because it does not let anyone who is involved in trafficking of drugs on any level.

[patrickwritessometuff]

The Rising Resurgence of Authoritarianism in the Democracies in Southeast Asia

Abstract: This is a comparative study into the Philippines, Thailand, and Indonesia exploring the recent rise and surge of authoritarian and populist leaders in these countries. This study will explore all three countries’ recent histories, the rise of their current leaders, and their current status quo with an institutionalist perspective.

The introduction defines what Authoritarianism is and the various forms it takes on and summarizes the current governments of the Philippines, Indonesia, and Thailand with the next subsequent sections exploring the recent history and current status quo of these countries and delving deep into their leaders while touching upon the repeating patterns of authoritarianism in these countries’ history. The conclusion delves deep into the reasons and economic and social factors that led to the Southeast Asian authoritarian leaders coming into power.

Introduction: Authoritarianism and Its Various Flavors:

Authoritarianism seems to be in vogue for many leaders of the 21st century. The rise of Populist and Authoritarian strong-man leaders like Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro, and China’s Xi Jinping on the international stage feels like a response to the years of Neoliberal hegemony most of the world has enjoyed after the Fall of the Berlin Wall. No region feels more like it is sliding towards Authoritarianism than Southeast Asia. Authoritarianism is defined by Encyclopedia Britannica “as any political system that concentrates power in the hands of a leader or a small elite that is not constitutionally responsible to the body of the people.” Authoritarian leaders frequently wield control unilaterally and independently of established bodies of law, and they may not normally be replaced by voters who freely select between different competitors in elections. In authoritarian regimes, the right to establish opposition political parties or other alternative political forces to fight for power with the ruling party is either restricted or just plain nonexistent. What is in common with authoritarians is the use (or abuse, as some of their critics would say) of institutions like Legislative, Judiciary, the Military, and Law Enforcement to curb resistance and dissent against the State and the Regime. Authoritarians seek only to retain their power and influence. Human rights and democratic institutions are damned.

Not all authoritarian leaders are built the same or have the same political and social beliefs, nor does any political system have a monopoly on authoritarianism. On one side of the political spectrum is Chile’s Augusto Pinochet, who was a free-market-oriented populist ultra-nationalist with ties to the libertarian capitalist United States, and on the other side of the spectrum is Cuban Prime Minister Fidel Castro, a Marxist-Leninist nationalist with ties to the communist Soviet Union.

Southeast Asia’s recent additions to the list of Authoritarian leaders almost exclusively seem to lean more into conservative right-wing authoritarianism. Philippines’ Duterte is a law-and-order oriented populist authoritarian who has been waging war against criminality, corruption, and crime. Meanwhile, Thailand’s Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha is a royalist military hardliner who seeks to bring Thailand back to the late fifties. Indonesian’s Joko Widodo, once lauded as a liberal reformist, the “Obama of Indonesia” and “a new hope” for Democracy in a country that has always struggled with authoritarianism, has actually started a turn into authoritarianism through his own Duterte inspired hardline War against Illegal Drugs and the appointment of his political rival Prabowo as Minister of Defense along with former regime members of former Indonesian dictator Suharto.

Thailand: A Royal Mess Thailand’s slide to Authoritarianism began in 2014 when a Military Junta called the NCPO or the National Council for Peace and Order led by Prayut Chan-o-cha, overthrew and toppled the elected government of Yingluck Shinawatra, Thailand’s first female Prime Minister and sister of previous Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. (Kongkirati 2018) Even before the Military coup that unseats Yingluck, the country was already under deep turmoil after the proposal of a very controversial amnesty bill that would have pardoned various politicians, including Yingluck’s brother Thaksin Shinawatra, Thailand’s former neoliberal Prime Minister under self-imposed exile after charges of corruption. During this time, the conflicts between pro and anti-Shinawatra forces have been ongoing for the past few years ever since Thaksin put himself in self-imposed exile. (McCargo 2015)

This bill received unanimous opposition across Thailand’s political spectrum, including pro-Thaksin leftist and liberal groups like the “Red Shirt” movement, because it would have also provided amnesty for murder charges relating to the 2010 Military crackdown. The bill was thrown out, but the damage was already done; political violence and anti-Government protests continued throughout the country, with the biggest being “Bangkok Shutdown,” where the anti-Thaksin faction locked down parts of Bangkok in protest. All 150 of the opposition MPs resigned, and Yingluck had to dissolve Parliament and call for snap elections, but violence continued in the polling places (McCargo 2015). This continued unrest led to the military coup and the rise of the NCPO as the current ruling class. The battle between the two pro and anti-Thaksin factions also continues to this day. (Chambers 2015)

This coup and the subsequent military dictatorship effectively harkened back to the rule of Field Marshall Sarit Thanarat (who came into power under similar circumstances in a military coup) styled military authoritarian rule of the late Fifties and early Sixties. It also brought back the old model of “Thai-style Democracy” in which the alliance between the Thai Monarchy and the Military dominates the country’s politics with an ultra-conservative discourse. With the coup, the Military has effectively established itself as the new ruling elite, enhancing its influence on politics, budget, and size. (Kongkirati 2018) Another aspect of Thailand that has been recently gained even more power because of the coup is the monarchy. King Vajiralongkorn’s ascent into the throne in 2016 has been worrying for a lot of people in Thailand as some have viewed him unfit for the throne. Unlike his father, King Bhumibol Adulyadej, who was a well-loved monarch, Vajiralongkorn has had his fair share of controversies, including his decision to rule the country from Germany. (Farelly 2017)

In Thailand, insulting, defaming, or threatening the King, Queen or heir-apparent, heir-presumptive, or regent is subject to something called Lèse majesté laws.  This makes it so that doing so is illegal and a national security issue and will land the one doing it in jail. There have been concerns from human rights groups that these Lèse majesté laws are being used and abused by the military ruling class to curb dissent against the monarchy and the military. Other forms of legislation, such as the Computer Crimes Act and sedition laws, have been invoked by the authorities to deal with alleged damage and insults to the monarchy.

The 2019 Thai general election in accordance with the 2017 Constitution was supposed to bring some sort of status quo change into the country but because of the elections’ controversial results leading to Prayut and his allies to retaining their country, everything seems to be back to square one. More recently as of the writing of this paper, the country is once again amidst political turmoil, which began in 2019 after the disputed elections that ended with Prayut Chan-o-cha’s return to power as Prime Minister. A Pro-Democracy movement reminiscent of the ones that emerged during the Hong Kong protests has been growing and shows no sign of stopping despite the rise of COVID19. This movement has been demonstrating for several months, demanding the need for a new constitution and curbing of the King’s powers, using modern pop culture references from the Hunger Games and Harry Potter to be able to indirectly criticize the Monarchy.

Philippines: “Change is Coming” and the Rise of Duterte “Change is Coming.” That was the political slogan of then-presidential Candidate Rodrigo Roa Duterte, known by his nicknames Digong and Rody; this was the slogan that carried him through the Presidential Race in 2016. A Presidential race he ended up winning.

Duterte has already built up a reputation as an effective law-and-order politician for his tenure as Mayor of Davao City, a position he held on and off for over twenty years. Before becoming a politician, he served in the city prosecutors’ office for almost a decade. His career in politics started out as the city’s Vice Mayor, appointed by Former President Cory Aquino after the 1986 People Power Revolution. (Kimura, Kuhonta 2018) He made his name as one of the negotiators in the 1989 Davao Hostage Crisis, where sixteen inmates who had escaped from the Davao Penal Colony took fifteen hostages in the Davao Metropolitan District Command Center.

During his tenure, he was able to transform Davao City from a city caught between Moro Rebellions and Communist Insurrections to one of the safest cities in the Philippines. This success at a lower level contributed to his reputation as an effective political leader (Kimura, Kuhonta 2018). Though his methods and alleged ties to the so-called Davao Death Squad have drawn controversy from Human Rights Groups.

Duterte presented himself as an outsider in comparison to the mostly Luzon-based political elites that he was running against in the elections, people from established political families like Mar Roxas and Grace Poe (Kreuzer 2020). He leaned into this perception of himself as the outsider and encouraged it.

For a lot of his voters, that was his appeal, he was the guy who called out “Imperial Manila” for ignoring and imposing their rules on Visayas and Mindanao. He criticized the current political establishment at the time for its perceived failures in handling the Mamasapano Massacre and the response to Typhoon Haiyan. This left the Benigno Aquino III’s Liberal Party’s reputation tainted and continued to haunt them well into the 2019 Senate elections where none of their eight “Otso Diretso” candidates won a seat at the Senate.

Duterte also allied himself with other political elites that could help further his own political ascent, with close political allies including Bongbong Marcos, son of former president Ferdinand Marcos and Alan Peter Cayetano, son of former senator Rene Cayetano. Major Political Parties like Partido Demokratiko Pilipino–Lakas ng Bayan (PDP Laban) and the Nacionalista Party also allied themselves with Duterte in the 2016 Election with Duterte running as the Presidential Candidate for PDP Laban.

During the elections, Duterte continued his run as a law-and-order candidate with an anti-Illegal drug platform promising to eradicate drug trafficking operations and a push for a charter change to Federalism, a form of government Duterte supports and one that would give more freedom to the smaller regions and more autonomy from “imperial Manila.” . (Kimura, Kuhonta 2018)

The first big challenge to Duterte’s presidency happened on May 23, 2017, when what is now known as the Battle of Marawi or the Marawi Siege began. This five-month long conflict between the Philippine military and members of the Maute-ISIS group lay siege to the entire city of Marawi acted as a trial by fire of sorts for Duterte and ended up with the destruction of Marawi.

His tenure as President has been wracked with controversies upon controversies, the biggest one probably being his bloody tokhang campaign against illegal drugs which human rights groups have slammed for being allegedly prejudiced against the poor and lower classes, as of this writing the war on drugs has already had 5,810 suspects killed in official anti-drug operations (Kreuzer 2020.)

His approach to the territorial dispute in the West Philippine Sea and China in general has also been criticized, with some accusing him of cozying up to China instead of fighting against them for the disputed territory. He has welcomed Chinese investors to invest in the country. His pro-China rhetoric has been concerning for some people who believe that China is just another imperialist power who seeks to colonize and take advantage of the Philippines. His sponsored anti-terror bill has been decried as unconstitutional and draconian by activist groups and the opposition. And some aspects of it, particularly it’s constitutionality and if it does break the writ of hebeas corpus is still being hotly debated.

His ties to Former Senator Bongbong Marcos, the rest of the Marcos family and some of late dictator’s allies have also been heavily scrutinized. His support for the burial of dictator Ferdinand Marcos with military honors in the Libingan ng Bayani (Cemetery of Heroes) has spurred nationwide controversy and protests with claims of historical revisionism especially from the Martial Law victims and their relatives. (Kreuzer 2020)

Despite all his controversies however, he continues to enjoy high approval ratings from polls and surveys. In 2020 in a Pulse Asia Research Inc. survey, Duterte received a 91 percent approval rating in both trust and performance, the highest out of any government official. This collective support indicates that Duterte’s exercise of political power is not seen by most Filipinos as a threat to their independence or democracy as a whole, but rather as a source and a symbol of social security (Kreuzer 2020).

Indonesia: Joko Widodo Jokowi is probably the least authoritarian of the three heads of state. Still, his Duterte-esque and somewhat draconian anti-drug policies makes him still count as authoritarian. There are a lot of parallels between him and President Rodrigo Duterte. Like the Philippine President, Joko Widodo (widely known as Jokowi) started out as the Mayor of a medium sized City called Surakarta in Central Java in the wake of Indonesia’s democratization and decentralization initiatives (Kimura, Kuhonta 2018). Widodo was a furniture exporter who at the time had little to no experience in politics before running for Mayor in 2004, but against all odds he won. Thrust to the position of local leadership, he pushed for a reformist agenda which appealed to pro-poor and pro-investment constituencies. He cracked down on corruption and reduced the red tape that hampered investments. He also implemented healthcare and education policies that expanded access to the poor (Kimura, Kuhonta 2018).

In 2014 Jokowi won in the Presidential race against former general Prabowo Subianto, Prabowo was a controversial military man, with ties to Indonesian dictator Suharto and had already been under fire from Human Rights groups for alleged human rights abuses (Bland 2019). Jokowi was the first Indonesian President to not be from an elite political or military background. As a President, he continued his push for pro-poor initiatives including a national universal healthcare policy that he promises would cover the entire population of Indonesia. His focus for most of his two terms has been infrastructure and development . (Kimura, Kuhonta 2018).

Some of the issues he’s faced during his tenure has been conservative Islamic parties which continue to spread discrimination regarding other ethnic groups in the country, Jokowi’s handling of these issues have been controversial to say the least, his critics say that Jokowi has allowed human rights, the rule of law, and the protection of minorities to weaken since he was elected in 2014. Law enforcement has been politicized, with the detention and jailing of government opponents on questionable charges. In the face of criticism from conservative Islamic parties, Jokowi has blinked, legitimizing anti-pluralistic ideologies that undermine the rights of minorities in Indonesia and emboldening the proliferation of divisive identity politics. (Bland 2019) And with politically surrounding himself with influential retired generals, he has promoted an increasing political position for the military, threatening to undermine the trends that followed the fall of Suharto in 1998. (Heydarian 2019)

This appointment of former Military officials, some tied to the late dictator Suharto himself has led to concerns about Indonesia falling back to an authoritarian dictatorship. Especially when one of those military officials include his former political rival Prabowo Subianto, someone with an allegedly already spotty record in human rights. (Heydarian 2019) There is also the issue of Jokowi’s drug war. Inspired by Rodrigo Duterte’s own violent campaign against illegal drugs, Jokowi began his own campaign. He once said in his words, “Be firm, especially to foreign drug dealers who enter the country and resist arrest. Shoot them because we indeed are in a narcotics emergency position now.”

In 2019 his presidency faced several protests. From the May 2019 Jakarta Protests and riots where rival Prabowo Subianto refused to accept his defeat against Jokowi which led to large scale protests. These Protests started on the day the election results were officially declared on 21st of May. Tense demonstrations around the buildings of the electoral agencies were accompanied by rioting in many areas on the night of May 21. As a result of the protests, eight individuals were confirmed dead, with hundreds wounded. The use of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp was also restricted to prevent protesters from being able to organize and talk to each other. Another protest later that year also took place in Indonesia Papua as a reaction to the detention of 43 Papuan students from Surabaya for perceived disrespect of the Indonesian flag, with the Government of Indonesia implementing an internet blackout throughout the whole region. Clashes between demonstrators and policemen resulted in casualties, killing more than 30 people in both the clashes and the riots. Another protest again in 2019, From 23 September 2019, a series of widespread demonstrations led by students occurred in major cities in Indonesia to rally against proposed laws diminishing the power of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) as well as several bills, including a revised criminal code punishing extramarital sex and defamation against the president. The protesters were mostly students from over three hundred universities, the police reported that in the capital city of Jakarta that at least 254 students and 39 police officers were wounded and were being treated in hospitals. Two students were killed in Kendari, Southeast Sulawesi, one of whom was reportedly shot during a violent altercation. In Jakarta, further three demonstrators were killed.

Conclusion: By looking through the recent histories of each country and the repeating patterns between all three, there appear to be multiple factors that recur throughout two or three of them, which likely contributed to the rise of these Authoritarian leaders.

The first one is an apparent nostalgia for previous dictatorial and authoritarian regimes from a sizeable number of the population. Philippines, Thailand, and Indonesia all have similar histories involving authoritarian dictatorships; the Philippines has Ferdinand Marcos’ regime, which ran from 1965-1986, Indonesia has Suharto’s dictatorship which was from 1968-1998, and Thailand has Field Marshall Sarit Thanarat’s military dictatorship from 1959 to 1963. The first two still being relatively recent enough to have an influence on the popular consciousness and politicians (or family members of those politicians) with ties to those regimes still being alive, while the third was instrumental in bringing the Monarchy back to the forefront again in politics where it continues to be until now.

In the Philippines, this manifests as Marcos apologia and revisionist history about the Marcos regime and the Martial Law time period, which Duterte seems to exploit through keeping close ties with the Marcos family and allowing the late dictator’s burial in the Libingan ng Bayani. In Indonesia, Jokowo’s attempts to centralize power, push for further infrastructure and development coupled with the appointment of dictator Suharto’s old allies into key positions in the government like Prabowo Subianto also has opened comparisons to the late Indonesian dictator. At the same time, Thailand’s Prime Minister seems to be pushing for a return to Sarit Thanarat’s military dictatorship, where the Monarchy and the Military are in control of the majority.

Another thing to consider is the new form of propaganda made possible by the advent of the internet and social media, with all three heads of state have had allegations of using troll farms and fake news sites and blogs to spread propaganda thrown against them in their elections. Fake news and misinformation about the Marcos Regime also continue to make its way through social media. Combating authoritarianism also means combating against this form of propaganda, either through proper education or curbing the avenues in which this kind of misinformation flows through.

The second one is the failure of modern neoliberal democratic regimes and institutions to address systemic problems and concerns like corruption and poverty, causing the populace to lose faith in the neoliberal system. The descent of Thailand to authoritarianism can be traced back to its inability to probably address and resolve the issues of the Thaksin Shinawatra corruption charges, the 2010 Military crackdowns, and various other connected issues and events; the Amnesty Bill was just the straw that broke the camel’s back. Jokowo’s early liberal presidency quickly degenerated to semi-authoritarianism.

The rise of Duterte can be traced back to the disillusionment of the Filipino lower and middle classes with the Aquino administration, several years of apparent economic prosperity that never trickled down to or actually benefited the lower classes, some of which continued to live in poverty. President Duterte and Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha managed to zero-in on to this disillusionment in the system, criticizing the neoliberal democratic status quo and the political establishment that run it while presenting themselves as stronger and more effective alternatives to the system.

It seems like it’s pretty clear that the neoliberal democratic system from most countries in Europe and the United States have failed to bring these countries out of poverty and also haven’t fixed issues of corruption, leading to lower and middle classes looking for alternatives outside the elite political establishment.

As for actual solutions, there appears to be no easy ones, Authoritarian leaders are just the response to the of the socio-political problems and civil unrest these specific nations are dealing with. They represent a dissatisfaction with the current neoliberal status quo, which manifests as a search for an alternative or as nostalgia for previous dictatorial authoritarian leaders.

References: Bland, B. (2019). Politics in Indonesia: Resilient Elections, Defective Democracy. Lowy Institute for International Policy. pp. 2-7. Chambers, P. (2015). Civil-Military Relations in Thailand since the 2014 Coup: The Tragedy of Security Sector "Deform". Peace Research Institute Frankfurt. Retrieved October 20, 2020. pp. 2-9 Farrelly, N. (2017). Thailand’s Triple Threat. Lowy Institute for International Policy. Pp. 6, 14-15. Heydarian R. (2019).  A revolution betrayed: The tragedy of Indonesia’s Jokowi. Al Jazeera. Kimura, E., & Kuhonta, E. (2018). Jokowi and Duterte: Do Local Politics Apply? East-West Center. Pp. 1-2. Kongkirati, P. (2018). HAUNTED PAST, UNCERTAIN FUTURE: The Fragile Transition to Military-Guided Semi-Authoritarianism in Thailand. Southeast Asian Affairs, pp.363-376. KREUZER, P. (2020). A PATRON-STRONGMAN WHO DELIVERS.: EXPLAINING ENDURING PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR PRESIDENT DUTERTE IN THE PHILIPPINES. pp. 18-27. McCargo, D. (2015). THAILAND IN 2014: The Trouble with Magic Swords. Southeast Asian Affairs, pp.337-358.

[msclaritea]

Charles Koch’s Big Bet on Barrett

For almost 50 years, the multibillionaire has been pushing for a court unfriendly to regulation of the market. He may be on the brink of victory.

Charles Koch has activated his political network to support Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination, and to tip the scales on her nomination battle in the U.S. Senate. While much of the commentary about Judge Barrett’s nomination has focused on the real prospect that Roe v. Wade may be undermined or overturned, Mr. Koch has other concerns. Judge Barrett’s nomination is the latest battleground in his decades-long war to reshape American society in a way that ensures that corporations can operate with untrammeled freedom. It may be a pivotal one.

Since the early 1970s, Mr. Koch has sought to dismantle most federal regulatory institutions, and the federal courts have been central to that battle. In 1974, Mr. Koch gave a blistering speech to a libertarian think tank, called the Institute for Humane Studies, in which he outlined his vision of the American regulatory state, and the strategy he would employ over the ensuing decades to realize that vision.

 On the list of government interventions he condemned were “confiscatory taxation, wage and price controls, commodity allocations programs, trade barriers, restrictions on foreign investments, so-called equal opportunity requirements, safety and health regulations, land use controls, licensing laws, outright government ownership of businesses and industries.” As if that list were not exhaustive enough, he added, “… and many more interventions.” In short, Charles Koch believes that an unregulated free market is the only sustainable structure for human society.

To achieve his goal, Mr. Koch has built an influence network with three arms: a phalanx of lobbyists; a constellation of think tanks and university programs; and Americans for Prosperity, a grass-roots army of political activists. And shaping the U.S. judiciary has been part of Mr. Koch’s strategy from the beginning. In that 1974 speech, he recommended a strategy of “strategically planned litigation” to test the regulatory authority of government agencies. Such lawsuits could make their way to the Supreme Court, where justices could set precedent. In the 1990s, he focused on lower-level judges, funding a legal institute that paid for judges to attend junkets at a Utah ski resort and Florida beachfront properties; the judges attended seminars on the importance of market forces in society and were warned against consideration of “junk science” — like specific methods to measure the effects of pollution — that plaintiffs used to prove corporate malfeasance. Mr. Koch also sought to influence the judiciary at the federal level. Between 1997 and 2017, the Koch brothers gave more than $6 million to the Federalist Society, a nonprofit institute that recruits libertarian and conservative judges for the federal judiciary, according to a tally by the activist group Greenpeace.

Mr. Koch’s efforts on the Supreme Court intensified after Donald Trump’s election, when a Republican-controlled Senate opened the way to install judges who could tip the court’s ideological balance. Americans for Prosperity undertook national campaigns to support President Trump’s previous Supreme Court nominees, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. A.F.P. said the Kavanaugh campaign alone — fliers, digital ads and staff for phone banking and door knocking — ran into “seven figures.”

Now, Americans for Prosperity is doing the same for Judge Barrett. A.F.P. activists are pressuring U.S. senators in several states, with a particular eye toward vulnerable Democrats like West Virginia’s Joe Manchin. The group is also working in Alaska, where Republican Lisa Murkowski has given mixed signals about whether she is willing to vote on Judge Barrett’s nomination before the next president is elected.

Mr. Koch is selective about where he spends on politics, and the returns to reshaping the Supreme Court could dwarf the millions he’s invested. The court plays a pivotal role in determining how much regulatory power the federal government has over corporate America. The closest the Supreme Court has come to reflecting Mr. Koch’s vision for regulation is the  “Lochner era” of the early 20th century, during which an activist court struck down a wide range of federal regulations on business, turning the country into a free market free-fire zone.

A Supreme Court that has swung hard to the right could reverse earlier decisions and issue new ones that create something like a new Lochner era. In the world of corporate law, the lodestar legal case is Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council. This case, decided in 1984, created an important legal precedent called “Chevron deference.” It holds that courts should generally defer to an agency’s interpretation of a law enacted by Congress when the law is ambiguous (provided that the agency interpretation is reasonable). This helps empower agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency to operate complex regulatory regimes, even if some details are not specifically detailed in the law. The current Supreme Court has signaled a willingness to reconsider this precedent, a move that could dramatically weaken federal regulatory agencies.

Mr. Koch and the Trump administration are united in their desire to undo the Chevron decision. Mark Holden, a board member of Americans for Prosperity, has publicly decried Chevron deference as a tool of tyranny. “The administrative state is often fundamentally at odds with our carefully crafted constitutional order,” Mr. Holden, then general counsel for Koch Industries, wrote in a 2018 op-ed essay for The Hill. He said the legal precedent gave agencies like E.P.A. so much power that they consolidated the authority of all three branches of government under one roof: Passing rules, enforcing them and then handing down verdicts in administrative courts. At the White House, a former White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, said the Trump administration sought to appoint Supreme Court justices who would rein in the independent agencies. Justice Gorsuch, for example, wrote multiple appeals court opinions that echoed Mr. Holden’s views.

The Koch network apparently has faith that Judge Barrett will rule in concert with these beliefs. This is something of a gamble. She has been a federal judge for only three years, leaving a short paper trail of cases and academic work from which to deduce her views. Judge Barrett’s legal writings do point toward one important idea: She, like many judges, appears to believe that some precedents which the court has created with its decisions should be overturned. Judge Barrett has publicly said that her judicial philosophy is the same as former Justice Antonin Scalia. As Lisa Heinzerling, a law professor at Georgetown, told The Washington Post, what this signals depends on which version of Justice Scalia Judge Barrett agrees with. Justice Scalia was a supporter of Chevron deference early in his tenure, but became more skeptical of it over time as he defended the power of courts to undo or weaken acts of Congress.

The Americans for Prosperity campaign literature supporting Judge Barrett does not appear to mention the Chevron case, nor any other ruling about corporate power. One Facebook ad simply says that she is “committed to our Constitution, and that she won’t legislate from the bench.” Spokesmen for A.F.P. echo that line, emphasizing that the Koch network isn’t looking for policy outcomes, but for honest jurists who will follow the Constitution to the letter.

History shows that it is just as effective to legislate from the bench by striking down laws as by upholding them. The Lochner era proves that policy negation is just as powerful as creation, and it affects just as many lives. As Charles Koch has written and stated so often in the past five decades, there are many, many laws and programs that he would like to negate. With the nomination of Judge Barrett to the court, he appears to be closer than ever to achieving this goal.”

Christopher Leonard (@CLeonardNews) is the author of “Kochland: The Secret History of Koch Industries and Corporate Power in America,” and director of the Watchdog Writers Group at the Missouri School of Journalism.

[ladystylestores]

New York Times to move Hong Kong staff to Seoul over press freedom fears

Image copyright Reuters

Image caption Hong Kong’s days as a global media hub are under threat

The New York Times says it will move some of its Hong Kong staff to Seoul as concerns mount over the implications of a severe new security law for the city.

The US news outlet said the law “unsettled news organizations and created uncertainty about the city’s prospects as a hub for journalism”.

Reporters will remain, but the digital editing team will relocate over time.

Global media organisations often face restrictions on the mainland but Hong Kong had been an exception so far.

The controversial law criminalises subversion, secession and collusion with foreign forces.

“China’s sweeping new national security law in Hong Kong has created a lot of uncertainty about what the new rules will mean to our operation and our journalism,” New York Times executives wrote in an email to staff, according to a report published on the paper’s own website.

“We feel it is prudent to make contingency plans and begin to diversify our editing staff around the region.”

Who is moving and why?

The paper – which has had a presence in Hong Kong for decades – did not say exactly how many staff would be moving, but said it would be around a third of the overall headcount.

They will not include correspondents covering Hong Kong but staff from the digital operation which handles online coverage when offices in New York and London are offline.

“We will maintain a large presence in Hong Kong and have every intention of maintaining our coverage of Hong Kong and China,” the paper’s director of communications Ari Isaacman Bevacqua told the BBC.

“We plan to retain our business and print hub in Hong Kong while, over time, moving our digital editing hub to Seoul, giving us flexibility while keeping all of our resources easily accessible and in the region,” she said.

Image copyright AFP

Image caption Authorities say the security law is needed to curb unrest

Why people are scared of Hong Kong’s new law

China’s new law: Why is Hong Kong worried?

The paper’s own report said that several of its staff had already faced difficulties securing work permits saying they were “hurdles that are commonplace in China but were rarely an issue” in Hong Kong.

Are journalists under pressure in Hong Kong?

A number of international media organisations including the CNN, CNBC, Bloomberg and the BBC have staff in Hong Kong.

“Hong Kong has been a leader in supporting the rights of a free press in Asia for decades, and it is essential that it continues to do so, particularly given the treatment of members of the independent press within mainland China and the global nature of the coronavirus pandemic,” Ms Bevacqua told the BBC.

When the territory was handed back to China in 1997, it was guaranteed substantial freedoms under the “one country, two systems” principles, but even before the 2020 security law Beijing has been accused of increasingly undermining freedom of speech and the media.

In 2018, Financial Times journalist Victor Mallet was barred from entering the city on a tourist visa just weeks after his work visa had not been renewed without any explanation.

Mr Mallet had been the Vice-President of the city’s Foreign Correspondent’s Club, which had angered Beijing by hosting a guest speaker who advocated secession.

Image copyright Reuters

Image caption Victor Mallet had been running the FT’s Asia operations for almost two years

Earlier in 2020, mainland China effectively expelled journalists from three US newspapers when it ordered reporters from the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal to return their media passes within days.

What is the new security law?

It is wide-ranging, making inciting hatred of China’s central government and Hong Kong’s regional government illegal

Allows for closed-door trials, wire-tapping of suspects and the potential for suspects to be tried on the mainland

A wide range of acts, including damaging public transport facilities, can be considered terrorism

Internet providers might have to hand over data if requested by police

Authorities in both Hong Kong and mainland China insist the security law would not affect freedom of speech but was needed to quell the waves of unrest the city has seen over the past years.

For many critics though, the law undermines the freedoms that set Hong Kong apart from the rest of China and helped define its character.

Media playback is unsupported on your device

Media captionMany Hong Kong residents are worried the new security law means the ‘one country, two systems’ principle no longer exists

People in Hong Kong prize civil liberties such as free speech, the right to protest and an entirely independent and robust judiciary, as permitted in the Basic Law.

In recent years, Hong Kong has seen a series of protests demanding more rights. In 2019, rallies over a now-scrapped bill permitting extraditions to the mainland turned violent and fuelled a broad pro-democracy movement.

Source link

قالب وردپرس

from World Wide News https://ift.tt/38XrIq9

[loyallogic]

Is it possible to pass judiciary exams without joining a coaching centre?

This article is written by  Suman Chatterjee Team LawSikho.

The first, BIG question that baffles most judiciary aspirants, and frankly, even the best of them, is whether to join any coaching institute or not. “Do I even need a coaching institute? Can’t I do without it?” 

Obviously, there are more fortunate people who need not ask this question. They have the money and they will definitely sign up for the best coaching service that money can buy and maximize their chance of getting through the difficult exam.

But there are people like us who need to think and rethink. 

Some of our friends are already preparing on their own. They say that all you have to do is to mug up the textbooks, bare acts and case laws, and read up on the current affairs daily. 

Some of them already have study notes with them from their LLB coaching classes, and they think that’s enough. 

Then there are some who have huge faith in their own capability and they think joining coaching classes goes against their philosophy. If they pass, they would do so on their own merit, without any help. 

So, what’s the truth?

Can you pass the judiciary exams without joining a coaching centre?

Definitely, you can. 

There are numerous examples where aspirants have overcome multiple odds in their lives and cracked the judiciary exam without joining any single class ever! A rare mix of talent, determination and hard work. 

However, from what I have seen year after year, is that a large majority of those getting through judicial services are obtaining coaching services. Very few makes it through without any coaching. For the purpose of this article, I have spoken to a few such judges to get an idea about how they did it.

I must warn you that it does not seem easy at all. Cracking the judiciary exam is one level of difficulty, but doing it without high quality coaching services on your corner is even harder.

I assume if you are still reading this, that is because you really do not have the money and you can’t help but prepare on your own.

Do not be demotivated. We are here to help you with the best information you need to know first. You are not the first person who faced this situation, and many before you have successfully cleared. 

If you want to go the “free” route, what choices do you have?

Read on.

What are the free resources available for judicial services exam training?

If you are looking for bare acts, you can get it online. There are several options for the same – Bare Acts Live, National Portal of India, Vakilno1 and Advocate Khoj – with the first one being my personal favourite.

If you are looking for legal study notes, I am sorry there are not many options. You might check this website for a quick revision but this is not going to suffice for your judiciary preparation though. iPleaders blog has tons for free articles that may be of great use if you know what you are looking for. 

There are several other legal blogs worth checking out. Blogs can be followed for informational purposes but they do not serve as good resources for judiciary test preparation. 

(Without any false modesty, I believe our blog is far superior to this one. We cover a varied range of legal topics over there every day, and You will learn a lot about law from the dozens of articles published over there every day.)

Definitely take full advantage of all the free tutorials on law that are available on YouTube, including the LawSikho YouTube channel.

Apart from this, if you are looking for a judiciary-specific resource, I am sorry I have not been able to find any worthwhile free resource so far. No free lunches this time.

Law textbooks can not be procured online, even via torrent engines! You have to buy them. 

Mock test papers? Past question papers? Again, not freely available. You have to buy them. 

Judgment writing? Well sure, you can read judgments online for free (Indian Kanoon is a great free resource for the same) but there is no one teaching you how to write judgements for free. 

Subscribe to current affairs and GK resources through YouTube and blogs that cover legal news regularly. For instance, we provide free GK and current affairs updates on LawSikho Youtube channel. We also do lots of free webinars with past years toppers which may help you to figure out your own strategy.

LiveLaw is also a good source for regular free legal news updates. 

Luckily there are lots of low-cost resources. Although not free, these are easy to afford.

What are the low-cost resources available for preparing for the judicial services exam?

The lowest-cost option is nothing but doing it alone but with paid resources such books and cheap mock tests. 

Also you will have to find people who will mentor you for free.

Buy the mock test papers and past years question papers. 

Buy the textbooks and bare acts (hard copies are always better!). 

And start preparing for the judicial services exam on your own.

I can’t think of any approach cheaper than this. The products and services that you buy or pay for are bare essentials. 

The rest … you go alone. 

I would suggest practicing a lot of mock tests which help a lot to develop a sharp understanding of what you need to prepare for.

You need someone to check your subjective answers and give feedback, this is not optional. You can get someone with experience of giving judicial exams in the past, provided they are knowledgeable and reliable. Paying at least a small sum is desirable because very few people will do this job seriously unless they are compensated in some way at least. 

You can find people who gave the paper in the past and acquire their study material for free or a low cost. Many people are happy to give away those materials, the sight of which gives them nightmares! 

Sometimes, you have to pay a penny on the dollar for them. Either way, you can get some good study material if you spend some time figuring this out. 

Getting your hands on the right study material and textbooks will be quite important here.

Also, sometimes you may have to prioritise saving time rather than saving money, if you have the option, given the massive amount of syllabus you need to cover. 

*************

How to balance law school curriculum with Judiciary preparation & attain success

Preparing for a judicial exam is not really easy when you start your preparations early while still being a law school, we struggle a lot to keep a balance between our preparations and academics. 

Let us hear from Mohit Rai (Jharkhand Judiciary Rank, 45) who shares some tips and tricks to balance law school curriculum with Judiciary preparation & attain success.

(Click on the Play button to watch the video)

*************

What kind of self-study is required to clear the exam without any coaching?

The trick to crack one of the toughest competitive exams is to focus on speed and accuracy. Not only do you have to cram tonnes of information and memorize dozens of case laws but you also have to be able to crank all of that out at an insane speed during the exam. 

To start with, self-study for the judiciary exam is going to be one heck of a challenge! Why? 

To pass this exam, you have to put yourself through a military routine and you have to do it on your own. There will be no one to motivate you, inspire you or push you. 

You may not have any peer to compare or collaborate with, and you will be alone in your room with your books and your laptop.

Also, keep in mind that during this time, some of you might have been taking a one-year hiatus to prepare for the exam. The level of mental pressure and expectation is at a maximum at such times. 

To cope with that and still have a solid enough preparation to crack the exam in one shot is not easy at all.

If you still are determined to be a lone wolf and prepare for a solo journey, here are a few pointers for you.

You need to have a plan. You need to be completely honest with yourself and decide where you stand. You must know where your strengths and weaknesses lie. Once you know what you need to work on the most and the least during your preparation, you can start with the rest. 

Bare acts above everything else! No, not textbooks or practice test papers. What you must make sure first is that the sections and articles of Indian acts and rules and regulations are at your fingertips. When asked whether the section of that act contains the word “may” instead of “shall”, you should be able to recall it in its entirety.

Latest amendments and case laws must not be ignored.  Some of the acts like the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, are dynamic in nature and go through a lot of changes almost every other year. You must stay abreast of those little changes and also maintain a list of the relevant case laws that preceded or followed any amendments.

Read newspapers daily. If you want to improve your GK and current affairs, there is no better alternative to this. In my opinion, The Hindu and The Indian Express are the two best newspapers with lots of value for judiciary aspirants in terms of information and analysis. 

Prepare your own study notes. Study from your textbooks and bare acts, but don’t forget to prepare study notes from the same. Juggling between multiple fat tomes and shuffling through pages to find that one single section or word you forgot even after 10 times revision, is definitely not a good idea. Especially during the exam, before which you will need some effective revision. What you need instead are easily accessible notes that are laid out in an eye-catching and simple-to-understand manner.

Previous years’ question papers? Of course. If you are aware of the types of questions that are often asked in the judiciary exams, you would be able to prepare better for those specific questions. Many publications provide question papers from previous years, and that too, chapter-wise, so that you can focus on a single chapter at a time. 

Time management. Do remember that you are chasing a huge syllabus and that too in a limited time. Time is of the essence. You have to set out a time goal for each paper to complete studying, revising and then re-revising it. You also have to do hundreds of mock test papers within the stipulated time. Keep a timer if you want. Sometimes, you know everything but you could not finish the paper because of running out of time. Not this time though, right?

Frankly, self-study for this exam is not a piece of cake! Only the truly meritorious one with massive determination and ironclad discipline might be able to pull this off. 

Once you join a good coaching system though, like one from our LawSikho Lord of the Courses, you get a huge support system. You have top teachers helping you learn the most important concepts and helping you to focus your energy on only high priority tasks. You get all your study material in one place. You get regular capsules for GK and current affairs. Your revision notes are prepared by someone else even if you struggle to make your own handwritten notes. You always have access to faculty members for doubt clearing!

Naturally, many students who wouldn’t get through with self study only, get through to judicial services because they can afford all this support system which helps them to produce better results.

In order to clear the judiciary exam without this support system, you need to create your own support system. If you have enough well wishers who can help you with doubt clearing and guidance, that is a great start. 

Remember that you don’t want to take a chance with this exam. In many judiciary exams, you are allowed no more than three or five attempts.

Every attempt counts. 

What are various premium solutions available for cracking the judicial services exam? Can you get scholarships?

There is only ONE premium solution available for cracking the judicial services exam.

It’s joining a coaching class that specializes in training for the exam. 

Even if you can’t afford it or do not want it, no problem. You at least should know what it is like, so you can make your strategy better. Also, you can approach coaching centres and see if anyone is willing to give you a scholarship that will bring down your costs big time or even cover the entire course fee.

Many coaching centres are willing to take highly intelligent law graduates, provided they are dedicated, at a negligible or low cost for coaching. They do this for talented students because they want to build track records of having trained successful candidates, which they advertise later.

Now coaching classes come in all shapes and sizes. Some of them are extremely popular with big banners around the city and some of them are relatively unknown ones around the neighbourhood corner. 

Click Above

While the popular ones can charge lakhs of rupees (1.5 lakh to 2.5 lakhs per annum), the smaller ones will be more budget-friendly. 

Again, do you want to save a few thousand rupees or spend more if you can increase your chances of becoming a judge? It’s your call. That is how most people who have the money look at it.

The coaching class can also be either an online or an offline coaching class. Some aspirants prefer offline coaching classes while others prefer online ones. We really prefer online because you save travel time, get to stay at home and save money on that count, do not have to struggle with living in a strange city in conditions of hardship as is the case with most PGs for students, and can continue to work while preparing for judicial services exams.  

Your background, preferences and resources at your hand should dictate your choice, and you don’t want to make the wrong choice. In most cases, coaching centres charge an upfront fee which they probably might not refund if you don’t like it later. 

(This is unlike LawSikho’s judiciary test prep course, Lord of the Courses, that is bound under a non-wavering 45 days money-back guarantee. Also, we have a monthly payment plan that is very easy on the pocket. Also, we give out some scholarships at present.)

Are their examples of people being able to crack judicial services exams without coaching?

There are many instances where law graduates have passed the judiciary exam without any coaching at all. More so, some of them have even been able to secure a rank and become a topper!

Manu Prinja, a Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law (RGNUL) grad with an LLM from the Panjab University of Law, Chandigarh, who cleared the Himachal Pradesh Judicial Services Exam, 2018, focused on memorizing bare acts before everything else.

“Get acquainted with the Bare Acts. I did not take any coaching. I did it through self-study, which was a long shot. It took me a couple of years to get acquainted with each and every part of every Bare Act in the syllabus. 

Memorise almost all the Bare Acts. Mostly, in exams you will get a Bare Act. The clearer you are with the Bare Act – it’s easier to apply the law then. It doesn’t really matter if you know a lot of case laws or know a lot of jurisprudence, because it is not a test of that. It is a test of the law. I think everyone should stick to the Bare Act.”

Aakash Sharma, an LLB graduate from Campus Law Centre, Faculty of Law, Delhi University, with an LLM from NLU, Delhi, cracked the UP Judicial Services Examination, 2016, without any coaching.

This is what he writes:

“I did not take coaching. I made my own notes from scratch. It was a painstaking job. Preparation for judicial services can informally start from the law school itself once the candidate has diligently read all the landmark cases in the various subjects. One should also cultivate a rational and reasonable world view and should be able to have independent opinions which are free from any bias. This exam requires utmost dedication from the candidate. It requires at least 1-2 years of dedicated preparation if you are starting from scratch. On the other hand, if you were paying attention in college itself and actually studied from cases and bare acts and not guidebooks, you can clear the exam with 6 months of preparation also.”

Harsh Vardhan Dhakar, a law graduate from School of Law, Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya, Indore, in 2018 and who hails from Shivpuri, Madhya Pradesh, secured AIR 62 in UPPCSJ 2018-19 and AIR 49 in MP Judiciary 2019. 

He took coaching but is of the view that coaching is not necessary to crack the judiciary exam. In fact, he claims that the exam strategy he used is his own and that anyone, regardless of whether they have gone for any coaching can do the same.  

Even Utkarsh Singh, an LLM from LU, who bagged the 542nd rank in the UP Judicial Service Civil Judges (Junior Division) Exam, did not take any coaching except for guidance from his university professors.

I hope these words will fill you with hope in case you are unable to afford any judiciary coaching and that all your hard work will bear fruit.

Do you have any further questions?

If you have any further questions that we can help you with, let us know. And we are giving out a few scholarships. 

This would be a good time to apply if you are interested in studying Lord of the Courses with a scholarship. 

We are soon going to launch a scholarship test as well, to identify the best candidates who deserve a scholarship. 

Stay in touch and watch this space. Forward this to friends who can benefit from this. 

To your success.

P. S. LawSikho is running hour-long webinars every day. Want to learn how to improve your learning skills? Prepare an LLM application to a foreign university? Career opportunities in new, upcoming areas of law? Don’t miss these high-quality webinars with industry and academic experts. 

P. P. S. All our premium courses are covered under an unwavering 45 days full money-back guarantee. 

After taking a course, if you feel like it is not working out for you, maybe you are not getting enough value out of it or it is not meeting your expectations, just get in touch with us. We will refund every rupee you paid for the course.

No questions asked, as long as the minimum requirements of the refund policy are fulfilled.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/joinchat/J_0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

The post Is it possible to pass judiciary exams without joining a coaching centre? appeared first on iPleaders.

Is it possible to pass judiciary exams without joining a coaching centre? published first on https://namechangers.tumblr.com/

[hudsonnhdequ422-blog]

So You've Bought Hudson New Hampshire ... Now What?

The city for 03051 is normally the name of the most crucial post office. When mailing your bundle or letter, usually involve the popular or appropriate towns. Working with any city in the list of unacceptable metropolitan areas may possibly lead to delays.

Folks in Group quarters - Wards normally hospitals for individuals which have no common residence in other places (%)

just desired to say thanks for giving us a better than typical look at the significant things that run our life food items weather planting to the fallowing year ETC.

But That is New Hampshire where small gatherings are common as well as the townsfolk assume to begin to see the major candidates over and over once again. So it’s relative; however 5 months before the primary.

This park's artwork selection features a clock crafted from bouquets, siblings in the tree's roots, in addition to a dove made outside of weapons.

A nationwide application that encourages Protected firearms handling and storage procedures amongst all firearm homeowners through the distribution of security education and learning messages and free of charge firearm safety kits.

When you are on a private link, like in your own home, it is possible to operate an anti-virus scan on the unit to be sure It's not contaminated with malware.

D White (visitor) Hudson is Just about the most Tranquil and freiendly communities over the confront of the earth a decade in the past

September 18, 2015 at 2:31 am It seems to me her character is barely now just starting to meet up with her. Up right up until now, she’s managed to have away with every thing, dropping only her career with the Democratic Household Judiciary Committee Watergate staff and being forced to surrender her legislation license to stop suspension or disbarment.

People in Group quarters - Wards in army hospitals for individuals who have no usual house elsewhere (%)

TripAdvisor LLC isn't liable for material on external Sites. Taxes, costs not involved for bargains information.

The number one trucker app for iPhone, iPads and iPods. In case you drive a huge rig, you would like this app. If you merely drive on street trips in a car and want building your stops rely, you can expect to enjoy this application.

Precipitation all over this area is reasonably regular, with snow or rain usually remaining a risk. Portsmouth is in the center of the seacoast area. Summers are brief and generally neat, on account of ocean impact breezes. While pretty from time to time it'd strike 90 degrees, usually, daytime temperatures are from the high 70's-minimal 80's. Evenings might be awesome, Primarily over the beaches, so Possess a sweatshirt useful. Slide might be on the list of nicest seasons and drop foliage tours with the seacoast region have become as popular as viewing the colours while in the mountains. The peak shade period is later than more inland or up north. By the 3rd 7 days of Oct, you are observing shades at their very best. Winters are chilly, damp, and unpredictable. Ice and freezing rain are popular in comparison with significant snow inland, but that does not imply the seacoast does not get significant snow. A superb old fashioned N'or easter can dump much more than a foot of snow within the Coastline. Spring is not very pleasurable. April is often cold and rainy. Early May well is often exactly the same. By Memorial Working day, temps. start to climb, but Do not be amazed when you invest your Memorial Day picnic that has a sweatshirt on.

The Police Documents Department is to blame for maintaining and submitting police documents created by the department. These involve: incident reviews, crash reviews, arrest data, and photos. The department maintains both of those paper and Digital copies of the following data:

[everythingtimeless]

Historical Hour With Hilary: 1x01

Welcome to Historical Hour With Hilary, which is exactly what it says on the tin: for each week of the rewatch, I (@qqueenofhades​) will be writing a companion piece discussing aspects of the real-life history, people, and events featured in the episode, depending on what I feel like covering. I aim to amaze, entertain, and educate you, one of which I occasionally may end up actually doing. In this first installment, I very quickly discovered that it had relatively little to do with the Hindenburg disaster of May 6, 1937 itself, but much more with the stone-cold badass female journalists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, who could have served as the inspiration for the fictional Kate Drummond that the Time Team meets in their first trip to the past, and who makes a particular impression on Wyatt. So. Much. Badass.

Be advised: You may want to run headfirst through a brick wall after learning about these women, from the sheer amount of awesome pulsating through you. I cannot be held legally responsible if you do this.

A woman working in the 1930s as a print journalist, even a foreign or war correspondent as it’s hinted Kate is, would not be completely or even considerably uncommon. They already had a history of over a hundred years. Anne Royall (1769-1854) is commonly credited as the first professional female journalist in America, a hard-nosed saleswoman who would stop at nothing to sell her paper and who was also rather famously known as the first woman to obtain a presidential interview, with John Quincy Adams, by catching him skinny-dipping in the Potomac River one morning and sitting on his clothes until he agreed to talk to her. (She certainly interviewed him, the sitting-on-clothes part is somewhat colorful, but shhh.) Margaret Fuller (1810-1850) was known as the best-read person in New England of either gender, was the first woman allowed to use the Harvard University library, and wrote a landmark work, Woman in the Nineteenth Century, that was profoundly influential on the thinking of Susan B. Anthony and the beginning of the suffragette movement, and which critiqued the treatment of Native and African Americans alongside the ongoing oppression of women. At the New York Tribune, she was the first full-time literary critic and book reviewer in America, and later the Tribune’s first female foreign correspondent.

Victoria Woodhull (1838-1927), meanwhile, is a personal heroine of mine. The first woman to run for President of the United States (having nominated Frederick Douglass as her running mate), she was also the first female stockbrocker on Wall Street, founded Woodhull and Claflin’s Weekly with her sister Tennessee, was an advocate of free love and the right to do this without any government interference, gave numerous blazing speeches on female equality, political advocacy, and equal rights, and otherwise was engaged in fucking the patriarchy in every direction the patriarchy was available to be fucked. She fought with Anthony Comstock, self-appointed guardian of late 19th-century America’s moral virtue and sponsor of the anti-obscenity Comstock Laws (who absolutely did not approve of fucking in any shape or form) and testified before the House Judiciary Committee about women’s suffrage; in fact, she was too radical for even some of the suffragettes themselves. A few decades later, Elizabeth Cochran Seaman (1864-1922), far better known as the intrepid Nellie Bly, was pioneering investigative journalism as a reporter for the New York World; she traveled around the world in 72 days as a publicity stunt to better the fictional 80-day journey by Jules Verne’s hero Phileas Fogg and wrote a book about it; she famously posed as a patient and got herself committed to a mental hospital for 10 days to reveal the inhumane conditions of insane asylums at the time, wrote a book about that too, and was instrumental in pushing for reforms in caring for the mentally ill as a result.

Despite these trend-setting women, female journalists were still rare in America at the turn of the twentieth century, but the number had risen from just 288 (in 1880) to 12,000 in 1930 -- almost 25% of all journalists. They were, however, often restricted to typically “female” subject interests (the home, fashion, cooking, etc) and faced, as you might expect, considerable sexism. In 1939, Zelda Reed complains about men who pay lip service to being feminists, but won’t actually hire women to be reporters (or pay them equally...  The More Things Change.Gif). During this period, however, Kate Drummond would have been part of a steadily growing -- and even more awesome -- cohort of female correspondents, including the likes of:

Clare Hollingworth (1911-2017 -- yes, she died just this past January at the age of 105) who was the first correspondent of any gender to break the news of Hitler’s invasion of Poland and the start of the second world war. She then went to work personally issuing British visas for Germans, Jews, and communists to escape the Nazis, which MI5 put a halt to because of concerns about too many “undesirables” entering the country (THE MORE THINGS CHANGE DOT GIF!!!) She would later write about conflicts in Vietnam, Algeria, the Middle East, the cultural revolution in China, and interview the shah of Iran (both the first and last interviews he ever gave). She also broke the Kim Philby spying scandal during the Cold War, and worked for a laundry list of noted papers.

Sigrid Schultz (1893-1980) also covered the First and Second World Wars, was the first chief of Central Europe and foreign correspondent for the Chicago Tribune, and she hated all these goddamn Nazis up in the goddamn place. Really hated them, wrote extensively about them (under her male pseudonym John Dickson) had unprecedented access to them, wrote pieces exposing the concentration camps and the treatment of Jews under Hitler’s regime, and was called “the dragon lady from Chicago” by Hermann Goering. You know, Hitler’s right-hand man. I’m sorry, if Number Two Nazi is scared of you and calls you a dragon lady, you are automatically The Awesomest. I don’t make the rules.

Martha Gellhorn (1908-1998) was probably one of the greatest journalists and war correspondents of the 20th century, full stop. The third wife of Ernest Hemingway (who we also meet a few Timeless episodes down the line) between 1940-1945, she covered every major conflict of the 20th century and was the only woman to land at Normandy on June 6, 1944. How did she do that? Because Hemingway stole her press credential to cover D-day, so she stowed away in a hospital ship toilet, hit the beach disguised as a stretcher bearer -- and beat ol’ Ernest there, just for good measure. She was determined to be remembered in her own right and not just for her contentious relationship with him; there is now the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism.

Helen Kirkpatrick (1909-1997) also covered WWII extensively, for both British and American newspapers, and entered Paris in August 1944. She later reported on the Cold War, was a longtime Democratic Party activist, and received both the French Legion of Honor and the U.S. Medal of Freedom. Virginia Cowles (1910-1983) also worked on some of the same conflicts as Gellhorn and Kirkpatrick, including the Spanish Civil War and WWII.

Margaret Bourke-White (1904-1971) and Dorothea Lange (1895-1965) were groundbreaking photojournalists working during the 1930s and the height of the Depression (you’ve definitely seen Lange’s most famous photo, Migrant Mother) which helped show the real consequences of the economic devastation. The crash of the Hindenburg itself was a major landmark in the history of journalism (scroll about halfway down the page) due to the wide availability of newsreel and radio coverage of the disaster -- and as we can see, Kate Drummond, had she survived her encounter with the Time Team, would have been in some truly amazing company indeed, covering both it and the conflicts to come. She would also have been a familiar character in a movie to audiences at the time, given as Hollywood has arguably gotten much worse at portraying female journalists.

(Read more about all these women here.)

Join me next week as the Time Team, and we, head to 1865 and the assassination of Abraham Lincoln...

[go-redgirl]

Tucker Carlson

Tucker Carlson: Kochs Donate To Big Tech Companies That Silence Conservatives "To Do Their Bidding"Posted By Ian Schwartz On Date December 21, 2019

TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NEWS: We’ve told you a lot on this show over the past few years about how Google, Facebook, and Twitter work in secret to impose a leftwing political agenda on this country. 

In 2016, for example, Google employees worked behind the scenes to boost Hillary Clinton’s voter turnout. They seemed despondent when they couldn’t stop Donald Trump from winning. Google, as you know, regularly suppresses conservative videos on YouTube. 

At one point, the company even contemplated rigging its search results to undermine Trump’s immigration policy. Twitter, meanwhile, often bans users entirely for the crime of disagreeing with the left. At this point it’s clear that big tech hates conservatives, and works assiduously to hurt them. Republican voters are starting to figure this out. A HarrisX poll from last year found 83 percent of Republicans understand that tech is biased against conservatives. Another poll this summer found that 42 percent of all voters, not just conservatives, think the Trump administration should take action to push back against the tech monopolies’ political bias. So far, that isn’t happening. No one in Washington is doing anything. But it doesn’t have to be that way. 

Tech companies have thrived under a special immunity they received from Congress that protects them from lawsuits over what people say on their platforms. It’s an exemption that Fox News, for example, does not have. Why does Google have it? Senator Josh Hawley would like to know. Hawley has proposed stripping immunity from tech companies, and 

treating them like everyone else, unless they can maintain neutral platforms for all views, which was of course the original deal. It’s a great idea, but it hasn’t happened. 

Another idea is breaking up major tech companies, so a handful of monopolies don’t have effective veto power over the first amendment. Another great idea that hasn’t happened. Why all the inaction? A big part of the problem is that conservative nonprofits in Washington, the ones that are supposed to be looking out for you, aren’t actually looking out for you. They’re looking out for big tech. A new report from the Campaign for Accountability obtained by this show, highlights how conservative organizations in DC have colluded with big tech to shield leftwing monopolies from any oversight at all. This October, for example, Americans for Prosperity, a purportedly conservative group controlled by the billionaire Koch family, launched an ad campaign supporting Facebook and google. 

The ads targeted state attorneys general, Republicans and Democrats,  leading antitrust investigations of those two companies. In March, Americans for Prosperity ran digital ads urging members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to quote, “oppose any effort to use antitrust laws to break up America’s innovative tech companies.” In all, the Koch network quietly spent at least $10 million defending Silicon Valley companies that work to silence conservative. 

As one former Koch employee recently told this show, quote, "I know for a fact they take money from social media companies to do their bidding.” It turns out he was right. Google has given money to at least 22 right-leaning institutions that are also funded by the Koch network. These include the American Conservative Union, the American Legislative Exchange Council, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, and the Mercatus Center.

 Google, for example, was the single largest donor to the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s annual dinner in 2013. What does all this money buy? Well in September of 2018, the Competitive Enterprise Institute and three other groups funded by Google and the Kochs sent a joint letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions expressing grave concerns over DoJ’s plans to look into whether search engines and social media were hurting competition and stifling speech. 

Big Tech companies silence conservatives. Conservative nonprofits try to prevent the government from doing anything about it. Makes sense. And then there’s the Heritage Foundation, maybe the biggest and best-funded think tank in Washington. Half the conservatives in the city seem to have worked there at one time or another.  

Almost thirty years ago, I did. To this day, there are a lot nice and well-meaning people at the Heritage Foundation. As as an organization, Heritage no longer represents the interest of conservatives, at least on the question of tech. 

A recent paper by Heritage, entitled “Free Enterprise Is the Best Remedy For Online Bias Concerns,” defends the special privileges congress has given to leftwing Silicon Valley monopolies. If conservatives don’t like it, Heritage says, they can start their own Google. The paper could have been written by tech lobbyists, and in fact may have been. 

A trade association that represents Silicon Valley called the liability exemption Google enjoys, quote, “the most important law in tech.” Heritage’s paper repeats that line, verbatim, word for word, along with many others. It’s embarrassing. But Heritage isn’t embarrassed. None of the so-called “conservative” nonprofits in Wasington are. 

They make deals with people who hate you, secretly sell out your interests, then beg you to tithe like it’s the medieval church. 

That’s the system we’ve had for decades. Maybe that’s why, no matter how much money you send, nothing gets more conservative. You wonder how much longer this can continue.

[opedguy]

New York Times Corrects Kavanaugh Story

LOS ANGELES (OnlineColumnist.com), Sept. 16, 2019.--When the New York Times published its recent story about past sexual exploits of Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Democrats once again rushed to judgment. Kavanaugh’s main accuser Dr. Christine Blasey-Ford insisted Kavanaugh tried to rape her at a party in a private home back in high school.  Blasey-Ford testified Sept. 27, 2018 before the Senate Judiciary Committee, recounting events that she could neither recall accurately nor corroborate.  Her best friend, Leland Keyser, whom Blasey-Ford placed as an eyewitness to the alleged attack could not recall the incident. While all Democrats on the Judiciary Committee said they believed Blasey-Ford, it became clear the hearing was a partisan attempt to deny Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court.  When you consider all Democrats believed Blasey-Ford, yet not one Republican, it exposed Washington’s extreme partisanship.

            New York Times recent report of a Yale classmate of Brett Kavanaugh named Max Steir, currently CEO of a Clinton-linked nonprofit, said in a recent book by Robin Pogebin and Kate Kelly that he “saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of female student.”  When the New York Times published its story Sept. 13, it prompted renewed outrage, with many Democrats, like in the Blasey-Ford testimony, calling for Kavanugh’s impeachment or disqualification.  Times’ story did not mention that that Pogebin and Kelly’s book said the female victim could not recall the incident. Nor did the Times story report that Stier worked as Clinton defense attorney.  Stier insists he notified the FBI before the Blasey-Ford testimony but they did not follow up on the unverified story from Brett’s college days.

            What’s significant about the New York Times correction is that contains exculpatory facts were omitted in the story, creating the worst impression for Kavanaugh.  Because of Washington’s toxic partisanship, the same Democrats that believe Blasey-Ford once again called for Kavanaugh’s disqualification.  When Trump calls the New York Times “fake news,” this is precisely the reason, where unverified statements with unnamed sources spread the kind of partisan innuendo and pernicious gossip designed only for character assassination.  For the over two years of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, the Times published numerous stories with again unverified and unnamed sources making outrageous statements about Trump’s ties to the Kremlin.  When Mueller came out with his final report March 23, it refuted scores of Times’ stories proving Trump’s Russian collusion.

            When it comes to biased partisan reporting, the Times takes the cake, perhaps more egregious than the Washington Post and HuffPost Internet paper.  Partisan readers don’t care about the factual basis to the Times’ reporting, only whether it does damage to Trump or any of his associates.  Kavanugh’s case was egregious partisanship because the entire Senate Judiciary Committee voted on partisan lines, not where the facts took them.  Dredging up Kavanaugh’s alleged past misconduct, the Times hoped to damage Trump’s credibility heading into the 2020 Election Year.  “It’s more clear than ever that Brett Kavanaugh lied under oath.  He should be impeached.  And Congress should review the failure of the Department of Justice to properly investigate the matter,” said Democrat presidential candidate former HUD Secretary Julian Castro.  Castro used the Times story for partisan purposes.

            Duping most Democrat hopefuls, the New York Times should be called out for its substandard reporting, well below any conventional journalistic standards.  Publishing corrections or retractions isn’t enough when the damage has already been done. “Kavanaugh should resign and if he does not, the House should impeach him,” said Democrat candidate South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg.  Sen. Elizabeth Warrant (D-Mass.), Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and former Texas Congressman Beto O’Rourke, all Democrat presidential candidates, said the same thing. Not one of them admit they were duped by the New York Times, trying to save face now that the facts came out. Even House Judiciary Chairman Jerold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said he’s open to taking a second look at the Kavanaugh affair but admitted he’s focused on impeaching the president not reopening the Kavanaugh case.

            Exposing the extreme partisan reporting of the New York Times, the recent story about Kavanaugh speaks volumes about the fake news media, willing to violate any journalistic principle to advance the Democrat political agenda.  Watching Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), former VP Joe Biden (D-Del.) and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) fall into the same trap shows how little integrity exists in politics. When a respected new organization allows politics to infect its reporting, it no longer remains faithful to the First Amendment.  Free Speech does not give an accredited new organization a license to lie to the American public or omit certain key facts which would influence the public’s thinking. Democrat presidential candidates know the facts, especially the corrections, yet still blow smoke to advance the Democrats agenda heading into 2020.  No news organization can exist to push partisan politics.

About the Author  

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

[upshotre]

PMB's second term: Ain't no stopping us now, we're on the move

  By FEMI ADESINA Those who were young (men-about-town) in the 80s will remember the 1979 hit track by McFadden & Whitehead, titled Ain't no stopping us now. The lyrics goes thus: Ain't no stopping us now! We're on the move! Ain't no stopping us now! We've got the groove! And if you ponder and reflect on the political journey of President Muhammadu Buhari, right from 2003, when he threw his hat into the ring, till now, there have been spirited attempts to stop him. It got to a head in the build up to the 2019 elections, when a pernicious confederacy was put together, all to stop Nigeria's inexorable march to greatness. It failed, resoundingly. On Wednesday, May 29, 2019, President Buhari will take oath for second term in office. Millions of good Nigerians will be delirious with joy, but some other significant minority would be in 'sifia' (severe) pains. Why? Ain't no stopping Muhammadu Buhari, he's on the move! The man will get his groove, and evildoers will be in trouble. The combat between light and darkness, evil and good, has been an eternal one. Some people love darkness more than light, because it is under the cover of darkness that they thrive, luxuriating in their evil acts: grand larceny, plunder, killings, and others. So, they will never love the Mai Gaskiya (the honest man), and would do everything to stop him, or pull him down. The efforts to stop Buhari have been robust, pulsating. After a reputation of honesty and probity as military governor, petroleum minister, member of the Supreme Military Council, his colleagues found no one better to wear the diadem as military head of state than the ramrod straight man from Daura. And he began to reset the foundations of Nigeria, knocking sense into the heads of the corrupt and those prone to indiscipline. It was no longer business as usual. But the dream run lasted only 20 months, before they truncated it. The landlords of Nigeria struck, and stopped Buhari. Up in smoke went probity and accountability. Discipline flew out through the window. And we went back to a place worse than square one. The man came back as a reformed democrat. He sought to be president in 2003, 2007, and 2011. But those in mortal fear of righteousness in high places banded together, and stopped him. The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) had perfected the art of elections manipulation, and they used it to the hilt. However, in 2015, there ain't no more stopping Buhari. A massive coalition for change was built around him, and good Nigerians stood up for the champion. Did he live happily ever after? Not on your lives! The adversaries went after him. Ran, pursued, and attempted to overtake. All sorts of things, physical and spiritual, were thrown at him, just to get rid of the man who would not steal, and not allow people to steal. A debilitating illness came. And for most of 2017, the President was receiving medical attention, both at home and abroad. Instead of goodwill and prayers, they were rejoicing. We've finally stopped him, they gloated. But did they? Could they? Not if God was still alive. Ain't no stopping Buhari, as in August 2017, he got back his groove. His health rebounded, and he resumed work fully. But would Pharaoh desist from pursuing Israel? No. He was destined to perish in a watery grave, so he pursued Israel into the sea. They formed what they called a coalition, vowing that they would stop Buhari from winning the 2019 elections. This was after letters had flown around from the master letter writer, virtually commanding the President to dismount from the horse. That letter writer thinks he's the landlord of Nigeria, as anybody he moved against never survived. He felt he could enthrone and dethrone leaders at will. But the Yoruba people say it's the day that the witch kills twins that she stops eating meat. The letter writer bit more than he could chew, and it stuck in his throat. He formed a political coalition, it collapsed right in his face. He first adopted a political party to use in his bid to unseat the incumbent, then in act of utter confusion, he abandoned that new party, and went for candidate of the PDP. The same man he had spent the past 10 years destroying, writing volumes and volumes of verbiage against, he now attempted to sell to Nigerians. Were we fools? See the grand conspiracy by those who called themselves 'Atikulators.' They included former presidents, some retired military top brass, disgruntled senior civil servants, business people, preachers, and the elite, generally. The sluice gates of free funds had been slammed shut, and they were unhappy. As dolorous as King Lear at his worst. The letter writer mobilized the international community, feeding them with misinformation and disinformation. Fulanization. Islamization, and other creepy concoctions. He was already addressing the PDP candidate as "my incoming President." Oh, how so very easy to build castles in the air! Marabouts, witches, wizards, and false prophets masquerading as pastors, bishops, and archbishops also joined the fray. They began to spew falsehood, which they attributed to God. He that sits in Heaven just laughed at them, and held them in utter derision. All those who were on the wrong side of the law joined the conspiracy. Ex-this, ex-that, who had abused their offices, and were being made to answer questions, crept under the umbrella. They knew if their man won, their cases would die natural deaths. So, for them, it was a matter of life and death. They came with spurious political permutations and calculations. Votes in North-west and North-east would be shared. They would sweep North-central, where they had spent the last two years trying to demonize and de-market Buhari and his political party. South-west would also be shared, and then, they would win South-east and South-south wholesale. It seemed foolproof on paper, particularly when you also throw in massive vote buying, hacking of all the hackables, and a complicit judiciary as Plan B. They were already planning how to sell Nigeria, and tell the poor to go to hell. But they didn't reckon with the staying power of the poor and the downtrodden. They are people who know where their bread would be buttered, and where their future happiness lay. In their millions, they trooped out to vote for the honest man. They chose light, instead of darkness. At the end of it all, about four million votes separated the men from the boys. The man left holding the short end of the stick went to court, claiming some servers from George Orwell's sugar candy mountain, gave him victory. It's within his democratic rights. Ain't no stopping Buhari now, he's on the move! In recent weeks, banditry, killings, murder and mayhem have suffused the length and breadth of the country. Everything appears orchestrated, choreographed, to achieve certain ends. The law enforcement agencies are pointing fingers in certain directions. But Nigerians want them to do more. Pull in the evildoers, and let them face the law. That is what President Buhari tells them at each security council meeting, too. And we will get there. Soon and very soon, because we've got the groove. When the ram runs, its testicles dangle furiously from side to side. But no matter what, the testicles can never fall off. Nigeria will remain united, despite all machinations of the evil ones. In that song by McFadden & Whitehead, you have these lines: There's been so many things that's held us down, But now it looks like things are finally comin' round. Yes. Things are coming round for Nigeria. We will get to where we are headed. Our fair havens, land flowing with milk and honey. The crooked and corrupt won't ever stop us, nor would they rule us again, and the wealth of Nigeria will be used for the good of Nigerians. Ain't no stopping us now, we're on the move! Adesina is Special Adviser to President Buhari on Media and Publicity Read the full article