Podcasts about article iv

The IMF's latest Article IV report on India has a number of suggestions on how we can boost growth, improve private investment, and bring about greater financial stability. Economist Radhika Pandey and Deputy Editor TCA Sharad Raghavan discuss in ThePrint #MacroSutra. Apply here for ThePrint School of Journalism : https://tinyurl.com/48hdbx9d

1UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISIONIn re:INTRUM AB, et al.,1Debtors.Chapter 11Case No. 24-90575 (CML)(Jointly Administered)NOTICE OF APPEALPursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) and Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure 8002 and 8003,notice is hereby given that the Ad Hoc Committee of holders of 2025 notes issued by Intrum AB(the “AHC”) hereby appeals to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texasfrom (i) the Order Denying Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule ofBankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (ECF No. 262) (the “Motion to Dismiss Order”) and (ii) theOrder (I) Approving Disclosure Statement and (II) Confirming Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11Plan of Intrum AB and Its Affiliated Debtor (Further Technical Modifications) (ECF No. 263) (the“Confirmation Order”). A copy of the Motion to Dismiss Order is attached as Exhibit A and acopy of the Confirmation Order is attached as Exhibit B. Additionally, the transcript of theBankruptcy Court's oral ruling accompanying the Motion to Dismiss Order and ConfirmationOrder (ECF No. 275) is attached as Exhibit C.Below are the names of all parties to this appeal and their respective counsel:1 The Debtors in these Chapter 11 Cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors'service address in these Chapter 11 Cases is 801 Travis Street, Ste 2101, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 62I. APPELLANTA. Name of Appellant:The members of the AHC include:Boundary Creek Master Fund LP; CF INT Holdings Designated Activity Company; CaiusCapital Master Fund; Diameter Master Fund LP; Diameter Dislocation Master Fund II LP; FirTree Credit Opportunity Master Fund, LP; MAP 204 Segregated Portfolio, a segregated portfolioof LMA SPC; Star V Partners LLC; and TQ Master Fund LP.Attorneys for the AHC:QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLPChristopher D. Porter (SBN 24070437)Joanna D. Caytas (SBN 24127230)Melanie A. Guzman (SBN 24117175)Cameron M. Kelly (SBN 24120936)700 Louisiana Street, Suite 3900Houston, TX 77002Telephone: (713) 221-7000Facsimile: (713) 221-7100Email: chrisporter@quinnemanuel.comjoannacaytas@quinnemanuel.commelanieguzman@quinnemanuel.comcameronkelly@quinnemanuel.com-and-Benjamin I. Finestone (admitted pro hac vice)Sascha N. Rand (admitted pro hac vice)Katherine A. Scherling (admitted pro hac vice)295 5th AvenueNew York, New York 10016Telephone: (212) 849-7000Facsimile: (212) 849-7100Email: benjaminfinestone@quinnemanuel.comsascharand@quinnemanuel.comkatescherling@quinnemanuel.comB. Positions of appellant in the adversary proceeding or bankruptcy case that isthe subject of this appeal:CreditorsCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 2 of 63II. THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPEALA. Judgment, order, or decree appealed from:The Order Denying Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule ofBankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (ECF No. 262); the Order (I) Approving Disclosure Statementand (II) Confirming Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Intrum AB and Its Affiliated Debtor(Further Technical Modifications) (ECF No. 263); and the December 31, 2024 Transcript of OralRuling Before the Honorable Christopher M. Lopez United States Bankruptcy Court Judge (ECFNo. 275).B. The date on which the judgment, order, or decree was entered:The Motion to Dismiss Order and the Confirmation Order were entered on December 31,2024. The Court issued its oral ruling accompanying the Motion to Dismiss Order and theConfirmation Order on December 31, 2024.III. OTHER PARTIES TO THIS APPEALIntrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLCMILBANK LLPDennis F. Dunne (admitted pro hac vice)Jaimie Fedell (admitted pro hac vice)55 Hudson YardsNew York, NY 10001Telephone: (212) 530-5000Facsimile: (212) 530-5219Email: ddunne@milbank.comjfedell@milbank.com–and–Andrew M. Leblanc (admitted pro hac vice)Melanie Westover Yanez (admitted pro hac vice)1850 K Street, NW, Suite 1100Washington, DC 20006Telephone: (202) 835-7500Facsimile: (202) 263-7586Email: aleblanc@milbank.commwyanez@milbank.com–and–PORTER HEDGES LLPJohn F. Higgins (SBN 09597500)Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 3 of 64Eric D. Wade (SBN 00794802)M. Shane Johnson (SBN 24083263)1000 Main Street, 36th FloorHouston TX 77002Telephone: (713) 226-6000Facsimile: (713) 226-6248Email: jhiggins@porterhedges.comewade@porterhedges.comsjohnson@porterhedges.comIV. OTHER PARTIES THAT MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THIS APPEALThe following chart lists certain parties that are not parties to this appeal, but that may havean interest in the outcome of the case. These parties should be served with notice of this appealby the Debtors who are aware of their identities and best positioned to provide notice.All Other Creditors of the Debtors, Including, But Not Limited To:• Certain funds and accounts managed by BlackRock Investment Management (UK)Limited or its affiliates;• Capital Four;• Davidson Kempner European Partners, LLP;• Intermediate Capital Managers Limited;• Mandatum Asset Management Ltd;• H.I.G. Capital, LLC;• Spiltan Hograntefond; Spiltan Rantefond Sverige; and Spiltan Aktiefond Stabil;• The RCF SteerCo Group;• Swedbank AB (publ).Any Holder of Stock of the Debtors• Any holder of stock of the Debtors, including their successors and assigns.Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 4 of 65Respectfully submitted this 13th day of January, 2025.QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &SULLIVAN, LLP/s/ Christopher D. PorterChristopher D. Porter (SBN 24070437)Joanna D. Caytas (SBN 24127230)Melanie A. Guzman (SBN 24117175)Cameron M. Kelly (SBN 24120936)700 Louisiana Street, Suite 3900Houston, TX 77002Telephone: (713) 221-7000Facsimile: (713) 221-7100Email: chrisporter@quinnemanuel.comjoannacaytas@quinnemanuel.commelanieguzman@quinnemanuel.comcameronkelly@quinnemanuel.com-and-Benjamin I. Finestone (admitted pro hac vice)Sascha N. Rand (admitted pro hac vice)Katherine A. Scherling (admitted pro hac vice)295 5th AvenueNew York, New York 10016Telephone: (212) 849-7000Facsimile: (212) 849-7100Email: benjaminfinestone@quinnemanuel.comsascharand@quinnemanuel.comkatescherling@quinnemanuel.comCOUNSEL FOR THE AD HOC COMMITTEE OFINTRUM AB 2025 NOTEHOLDERSCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 5 of 6CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEI, Christopher D. Porter, hereby certify that on the 13th day of January, 2025, a copy ofthe foregoing document has been served via the Electronic Case Filing System for the UnitedStates Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas./s/ Christopher D. PorterBy: Christopher D. PorterCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 6 of 6EXHIBIT ACase 24-90575 Document 296-1 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 31IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISION)In re: ) Chapter 11)Intrum AB, et al.,1 ) Case No. 24-90575 (CML)))Jointly AdministeredDebtors. ))ORDER DENYING MOTION OF THE AD HOCCOMMITTEE OF HOLDERS OF INTRUM AB NOTES DUE 2025TO DISMISS CHAPTER 11 CASES PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 1112(B) ANDFEDERAL RULE OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE 1017(F)(1)(Related to Docket No. 27)This matter, having come before the Court upon the Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee ofHolders of Intrum AB Notes Due 2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §1112(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) [Docket No. 27] (the “Motion toDismiss”); and this Court having considered the Debtors' Objection to the Motion of the Ad HocCommittee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due 2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (the “Objection”) andany other responses or objections to the Motion to Dismiss; and this Court having jurisdiction overthis matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334 and the Amended Standing Order; and this Court havingfound that this is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2); and this Court having foundthat it may enter a final order consistent with Article III of the United States Constitution; and thisCourt having found that the relief requested in the Objection is in the best interests of the Debtors'1 The Debtors in these Chapter 11 Cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors' serviceaddress in these Chapter 11 Cases is 801 Travis Street, STE 2101, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.United States Bankruptcy CourtSouthern District of TexasENTEREDDecember 31, 2024Nathan Ochsner, ClerkCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29662-1 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 2 o of f2 32estates; and this Court having found that the Debtors' notice of the Objection and opportunity fora hearing on the Motion to Dismiss and Objection were appropriate and no other notice need beprovided; and this Court having reviewed the Motion to Dismiss and Objection and havingheard the statements in support of the relief requested therein at a hearing before this Court; andthis Court having determined that the legal and factual bases set forth in the Objectionestablish just cause for the relief granted herein; and upon all of the proceedings had beforethis Court; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor, it is HEREBYORDERED THAT:1. The Motion to Dismiss is Denied for the reasons stated at the December 31, 2024 hearing.2. This Court retains exclusive jurisdiction and exclusive venue with respect to allmatters arising from or related to the implementation, interpretation, and enforcement of this Order.DAeucegmubste 0r 23,1 2, 0210294CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29662-1 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 3 o of f2 3EXHIBIT BCase 24-90575 Document 296-2 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 135IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISION)In re: ) Chapter 11)Intrum AB et al.,1 ) Case No. 24-90575 (CML)))(Jointly Administered)Debtors. ))ORDER (I) APPROVINGDISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND(II) CONFIRMING JOINT PREPACKAGED CHAPTER 11PLAN OF INTRUM AB AND ITS AFFILIATEDDEBTOR (FURTHER TECHNICAL MODIFICATIONS)The above-captioned debtors and debtors in possession (collectively, the“Debtors”), having:a. entered into that certain Lock-Up Agreement, dated as of July 10, 2024 (asamended and restated on August 15, 2024, and as further modified,supplemented, or otherwise amended from time to time in accordance with itsterms, the “the Lock-Up Agreement”) and that certain Backstop Agreement,dated as of July 10, 2024, (as amended and restated on November 15, 2024 andas further modified, supplemented, or otherwise amended from time to time inaccordance with its terms), setting out the terms of the backstop commitmentsprovided by the Backstop Providers to backstop the entirety of the issuance ofNew Money Notes (as may be further amended, restated, amended and restated,modified or supplemented from time to time in accordance with the termsthereof, the “Backstop Agreement”) which set forth the terms of a consensualfinancial restructuring of the Debtors;b. commenced, on October 17, 2024, a prepetition solicitation (the “Solicitation”)of votes on the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of IntrumAB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (asthe same may be further amended, modified and supplemented from time totime, the “Plan”), by causing the transmittal, through their solicitation andballoting agent, Kroll Restructuring Administration LLC (“Kroll”), to theholders of Claims entitled to vote on the Plan of, among other things: (i) the1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors' serviceaddress in these chapter 11 cases is 801 Travis Street, STE 2102, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.United States Bankruptcy CourtSouthern District of TexasENTEREDDecember 31, 2024Nathan Ochsner, ClerkCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 2 o of f1 133452Plan, (ii) the Disclosure Statement for Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate (as the same may befurther amended, modified and supplemented from time to time, the“Disclosure Statement”), and (iii) the Ballots and Master Ballot to vote on thePlan (the “Ballots”), (iv) the Affidavit of Service of Solicitation Materials[Docket No. 7];c. commenced on November 15, 2024 (the “Petition Date”), these chapter 11 cases(these “Chapter 11 Cases”) by filing voluntary petitions in the United StatesBankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (the “Bankruptcy Court”or the “Court”) for relief under chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code(the “Bankruptcy Code”);d. Filed on November 15, 2024, the Affidavit of Service of Solicitation Materials[Docket No. 7] (the “Solicitation Affidavit”);e. Filed, on November 16, 2024 the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code (Technical Modifications) [Docket No. 16] and theDisclosure Statement for Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Intrum AB andits Debtor Affiliate [Docket No. 17];f. Filed on November 16, 2024, the Declaration of Andrés Rubio in Support of ofthe Debtors' Chapter 11 Petitions and First Day Motions [Docket No. 14] (the“First Day Declaration”);g. Filed on November 17, 2024, the Declaration of Alex Orchowski of KrollRestructuring Administration LLC Regarding the Solicitation of Votes andTabulation of Ballots Case on the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code [Docket No. 18] (the “Voting Declaration,” andtogether with the Plan, the Disclosure Statement, the Ballots, and theSolicitation Affidavit, the “Solicitation Materials”);h. obtained, on November 19, 2024, the Order(I) Scheduling a Combined Hearingon (A) Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement and (B) Confirmation of the Plan,(II) Approving Solicitation Procedures and Form and Manner of Notice ofCommencement, Combined Hearing, and Objection Deadline, (III) FixingDeadline to Object to Disclosure Statement and Plan, (IV) Conditionally (A)Directing the United States Trustee Not to Convene Section 341 Meeting ofCreditors and (B) Waiving Requirement to File Statements of Financial Affairsand Schedules of Assets and Liabilities, and (V) Granting Related Relief[Docket No. 71] (the “Scheduling Order”), which, among other things: (i)approved the prepetition solicitation and voting procedures, including theConfirmation Schedule (as defined therein); (ii) conditionally approved theDisclosure Statement and its use in the Solicitation; and (iii) scheduled theCombined Hearing on December 16, 2024, at 1:00 p.m. (prevailing CentralCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 3 o of f1 133453Time) to consider the final approval of the Disclosure Statement and theconfirmation of the Plan (the “Combined Hearing”);i. served, through Kroll, on November 20, 2025, on all known holders of Claimsand Interests, the U.S. Trustee and certain other parties in interest, the Noticeof: (I) Commencement of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Cases; (II) Hearing on theDisclosure Statement and Confirmation of the Plan, and (III) Certain ObjectionDeadlines (the “Combined Hearing Notice”) as evidence by the Affidavit ofService [Docket No. 160];j. caused, on November 25 and 27, 2024, the Combined Hearing Notice to bepublished in the New York Times (national and international editions) and theFinancial Times (international edition), as evidenced by the Certificate ofPublication [Docket No. 148];k. Filed and served, on December 10, 2024, the Plan Supplement for the Debtors'Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization [Docket 165];l. Filed on December 10, 2024, the Declaration of Jeffrey Kopa in Support ofConfirmation of the Joint Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization of Intrum ABand its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code [DocketNo. 155];m. Filed on December 14, 2024, the:i. Debtors' Memorandum of Law in Support of an Order: (I) Approving, on aFinal Basis, Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement; (II) Confirming theJoint Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization; and (III) Granting Related Relief[Docket No. 190] (the “Confirmation Brief”);ii. Declaration of Andrés Rubio in Support of Confirmation of the JointPrepackaged Plan of Reorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate.[Docket No. 189] (the “Confirmation Declaration”); andiii. Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of Intrum AB and itsDebtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (FurtherTechnical Modifications) [Docket No. 191];n. Filed on December 18, 2024, the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code (Further Technical Modifications) [Docket No. 223];CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 3 4 o of f1 133454WHEREAS, the Court having, among other things:a. set December 12, 2024, at 4:00 p.m. (prevailing Central Time) as the deadlinefor Filing objection to the adequacy of the Disclosure Statement and/orConfirmation2 of the Plan (the “Objection Deadline”);b. held, on December 16, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. (prevailing Central Time) [andcontinuing through December 17, 2024], the Combined Hearing;c. heard the statements, arguments, and any objections made at the CombinedHearing;d. reviewed the Disclosure Statement, the Plan, the Ballots, the Plan Supplement,the Confirmation Brief, the Confirmation Declaration, the SolicitationAffidavit, and the Voting Declaration;e. overruled (i) any and all objections to approval of the Disclosure Statement, thePlan, and Confirmation, except as otherwise stated or indicated on the record,and (ii) all statements and reservations of rights not consensually resolved orwithdrawn, unless otherwise indicated; andf. reviewed and taken judicial notice of all the papers and pleadings Filed(including any objections, statement, joinders, reservations of rights and otherresponses), all orders entered, and all evidence proffered or adduced and allarguments made at the hearings held before the Court during the pendency ofthese cases;NOW, THEREFORE, it appearing to the Bankruptcy Court that notice of theCombined Hearing and the opportunity for any party in interest to object to the DisclosureStatement and the Plan having been adequate and appropriate as to all parties affected or to beaffected by the Plan and the transactions contemplated thereby, and the legal and factual bases setforth in the documents Filed in support of approval of the Disclosure Statement and Confirmationand other evidence presented at the Combined Hearing establish just cause for the relief grantedherein; and after due deliberation thereon and good cause appearing therefor, the BankruptcyCourt makes and issues the following findings of fact and conclusions of law, and orders for thereasons stated on the record at the December 31, 2024 ruling on plan confirmation;2 Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein have meanings given to them in the Plan and/or theDisclosure Statement. The rules of interpretation set forth in Article I.B of the Plan apply to this CombinedOrder.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 4 5 o of f1 133455I. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAWIT IS HEREBY FOUND AND DETERMINED THAT:A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.1. The findings and conclusions set forth herein and in the record of theCombined Hearing constitute the Bankruptcy Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law underRule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as made applicable herein by Bankruptcy Rules7052 and 9014. To the extent any of the following conclusions of law constitute findings of fact,or vice versa, they are adopted as such.B. Jurisdiction, Venue, Core Proceeding.2. This Court has jurisdiction over these Chapter 11 Cases pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1334. Venue of these proceedings and the Chapter 11 Cases in this district is properpursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409. This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 157(b)(2) and this Court may enter a final order hereon under Article III of the United StatesConstitution.C. Eligibility for Relief.3. The Debtors were and continue to be entities eligible for relief under section109 of the Bankruptcy Code and the Debtors were and continue to be proper proponents of thePlan under section 1121(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.D. Commencement and Joint Administration of the Chapter 11 Cases.4. On the Petition Date, the Debtors commenced the Chapter 11 Cases. OnNovember 18, 2024, the Court entered an order [Docket No. 51] authorizing the jointadministration of the Chapter 11 Case in accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 1015(b). The Debtorshave operated their businesses and managed their properties as debtors in possession pursuant toCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 5 6 o of f1 133456sections 1107(a) and 1108 of the Bankruptcy Code. No trustee, examiner, or statutory committeehas been appointed in these Chapter 11 Cases.E. Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement.5. The Disclosure Statement and the exhibits contained therein (i) containssufficient information of a kind necessary to satisfy the disclosure requirements of applicablenonbankruptcy laws, rules and regulations, including the Securities Act; and (ii) contains“adequate information” as such term is defined in section 1125(a)(1) and used in section1126(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code, with respect to the Debtors, the Plan and the transactionscontemplated therein. The Filing of the Disclosure Statement satisfied Bankruptcy Rule 3016(b).The injunction, release, and exculpation provisions in the Plan and the Disclosure Statementdescribe, in bold font and with specific and conspicuous language, all acts to be enjoined andidentify the Entities that will be subject to the injunction, thereby satisfying Bankruptcy Rule3016(c).F. Solicitation.6. As described in and evidenced by the Voting Declaration, the Solicitationand the transmittal and service of the Solicitation Materials were: (i) timely, adequate, appropriate,and sufficient under the circumstances; and (ii) in compliance with sections 1125(g) and 1126(b)of the Bankruptcy Code, Bankruptcy Rules 3017 and 3018, the applicable Local Bankruptcy Rules,the Scheduling Order and all applicable nonbankruptcy rules, laws, and regulations applicable tothe Solicitation, including the registration requirements under the Securities Act. The SolicitationMaterials, including the Ballots and the Opt Out Form (as defined below), adequately informedthe holders of Claims entitled to vote on the Plan of the procedures and deadline for completingand submitting the Ballots.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 6 7 o of f1 1334577. The Debtors served the Combined Hearing Notice on the entire creditormatrix and served the Opt Out Form on all Non-Voting Classes. The Combined Hearing Noticeadequately informed Holders of Claims or Interests of critical information regarding voting on (ifapplicable) and objecting to the Plan, including deadlines and the inclusion of release, exculpation,and injunction provisions in the Plan, and adequately summarized the terms of the Third-PartyRelease. Further, because the form enabling stakeholders to opt out of the Third-Party Release (the“Opt Out Form”) was included in both the Ballots and the Opt Out Form, every known stakeholder,including unimpaired creditors was provided with the means by which the stakeholders could optout of the Third-Party Release. No further notice is required. The period for voting on the Planprovided a reasonable and sufficient period of time and the manner of such solicitation was anappropriate process allowing for such holders to make an informed decision.G. Tabulation.8. As described in and evidenced by the Voting Declaration, (i) the holders ofClaims in Class 3 (RCF Claims) and Class 5 (Notes Claims) are Impaired under the Plan(collectively, the “Voting Classes”) and have voted to accept the Plan in the numbers and amountsrequired by section 1126 of the Bankruptcy Code, and (ii) no Class that was entitled to vote on thePlan voted to reject the Plan. All procedures used to tabulate the votes on the Plan were in goodfaith, fair, reasonable, and conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of theBankruptcy Code, the Bankruptcy Rules, the Local Rules, the Disclosure Statement, theScheduling Order, and all other applicable nonbankruptcy laws, rules, and regulations.H. Plan Supplement.9. On December 10, 2024, the Debtors Filed the Plan Supplement with theCourt. The Plan Supplement (including as subsequently modified, supplemented, or otherwiseCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 7 8 o of f1 133458amended pursuant to a filing with the Court), complies with the terms of the Plan, and the Debtorsprovided good and proper notice of the filing in accordance with the Bankruptcy Code, theBankruptcy Rules, the Scheduling Order, and the facts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases.All documents included in the Plan Supplement are integral to, part of, and incorporated byreference into the Plan. No other or further notice is or will be required with respect to the PlanSupplement. Subject to the terms of the Plan and the Lock-Up Agreement, and only consistenttherewith, the Debtors reserve the right to alter, amend, update, or modify the Plan Supplementand any of the documents contained therein or related thereto, in accordance with the Plan, on orbefore the Effective Date.I. Modifications to the Plan.10. Pursuant to section 1127 of the Bankruptcy Code, the modifications to thePlan described or set forth in this Combined Order constitute technical or clarifying changes,changes with respect to particular Claims by agreement with holders of such Claims, ormodifications that do not otherwise materially and adversely affect or change the treatment of anyother Claim or Interest under the Plan. These modifications are consistent with the disclosurespreviously made pursuant to the Disclosure Statement and Solicitation Materials, and notice ofthese modifications was adequate and appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the Chapter11 Cases. In accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 3019, these modifications do not require additionaldisclosure under section 1125 of the Bankruptcy Code or the resolicitation of votes under section1126 of the Bankruptcy Code, and they do not require that holders of Claims or Interests beafforded an opportunity to change previously cast acceptances or rejections of the Plan.Accordingly, the Plan is properly before this Court and all votes cast with respect to the Plan priorto such modification shall be binding and shall apply with respect to the Plan.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 8 9 o of f1 133459J. Objections Overruled.11. Any resolution or disposition of objections to Confirmation explained orotherwise ruled upon by the Court on the record at the Confirmation Hearing is herebyincorporated by reference. All unresolved objections, statements, joinders, informal objections,and reservations of rights are hereby overruled on the merits.K. Burden of Proof.12. The Debtors, as proponents of the Plan, have met their burden of provingthe elements of sections 1129(a) and 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code by a preponderance of theevidence, the applicable evidentiary standard for Confirmation. Further, the Debtors have proventhe elements of sections 1129(a) and 1129(b) by clear and convincing evidence. Each witness whotestified on behalf of the Debtors in connection with the Confirmation Hearing was credible,reliable, and qualified to testify as to the topics addressed in his testimony.L. Compliance with the Requirements of Section 1129 of the BankruptcyCode.13. The Plan complies with all applicable provisions of section 1129 of theBankruptcy Code as follows:a. Section 1129(a)(1) – Compliance of the Plan with Applicable Provisions of theBankruptcy Code.14. The Plan complies with all applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code,including sections 1122 and 1123, as required by section 1129(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.i. Section 1122 and 1123(a)(1) – Proper Classification.15. The classification of Claims and Interests under the Plan is proper under theBankruptcy Code. In accordance with sections 1122(a) and 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code,Article III of the Plan provides for the separate classification of Claims and Interests at each Debtorinto Classes, based on differences in the legal nature or priority of such Claims and Interests (otherCaCsaes e2 42-49-09507557 5 D oDcoucmumenetn 2t 9266-32 FFiilleedd iinn TTXXSSBB oonn 1021//3113//2245 PPaaggee 91 0o fo 1f 3143510than Administrative Claims, Professional Fee Claims, and Priority Tax Claims, which areaddressed in Article II of the Plan and Unimpaired, and are not required to be designated asseparate Classes in accordance with section 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code). Valid business,factual, and legal reasons exist for the separate classification of the various Classes of Claims andInterests created under the Plan, the classifications were not implemented for any improperpurpose, and the creation of such Classes does not unfairly discriminate between or among holdersof Claims or Interests.16. In accordance with section 1122(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, each Class ofClaims or Interests contains only Claims or Interests substantially similar to the other Claims orInterests within that Class. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of sections 1122(a),1122(b), and 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Codeii. Section 1123(a)(2) – Specifications of Unimpaired Classes.17. Article III of the Plan specifies that Claims and Interests in the classesdeemed to accept the Plan are Unimpaired under the Plan. Holders of Intercompany Claims andIntercompany Interests are either Unimpaired and conclusively presumed to have accepted thePlan, or are Impaired and deemed to reject (the “Deemed Rejecting Classes”) the Plan, and, ineither event, are not entitled to vote to accept or reject the Plan. In addition, Article II of the Planspecifies that Administrative Claims and Priority Tax Claims are Unimpaired, although the Plandoes not classify these Claims. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1123(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 101 o of f1 1334511iii. Section 1123(a)(3) – Specification of Treatment of Voting Classes18. Article III.B of the Plan specifies the treatment of each Voting Class underthe Plan – namely, Class 3 and Class 5. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1123(a)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code.iv. Section 1123(a)(4) – No Discrimination.19. Article III of the Plan provides the same treatment to each Claim or Interestin any particular Class, as the case may be, unless the holder of a particular Claim or Interest hasagreed to a less favorable treatment with respect to such Claim or Interest. Accordingly, the Plansatisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code.v. Section 1123(a)(5) – Adequate Means for Plan Implementation.20. The Plan and the various documents included in the Plan Supplementprovide adequate and proper means for the Plan's execution and implementation, including: (a)the general settlement of Claims and Interests; (b) the restructuring of the Debtors' balance sheetand other financial transactions provided for by the Plan; (c) the consummation of the transactionscontemplated by the Plan, the Lock-Up Agreement, the Restructuring Implementation Deed andthe Agreed Steps Plan and other documents Filed as part of the Plan Supplement; (d) the issuanceof Exchange Notes, the New Money Notes, and the Noteholder Ordinary Shares pursuant to thePlan; (e) the amendment of the Intercreditor Agreement; (f) the amendment of the FacilityAgreement; (g) the amendment of the Senior Secured Term Loan Agreement; (h) theconsummation of the Rights Offering in accordance with the Plan, Rights Offering Documentsand the Lock-Up Agreement; (i) the granting of all Liens and security interests granted orconfirmed (as applicable) pursuant to, or in connection with, the Facility Agreement, the ExchangeNotes Indenture, the New Money Notes Indenture, the amended Intercreditor Agreement and theCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 112 o of f1 1334512Senior Secured Term Loan Agreement pursuant to the New Security Documents (including anyLiens and security interests granted or confirmed (as applicable) on the Reorganized Debtors'assets); (j) the vesting of the assets of the Debtors' Estates in the Reorganized Debtors; (k) theconsummation of the corporate reorganization contemplated by the Plan, the Lock-Up Agreement,the Agreed Steps Plan and the Master Reorganization Agreement (as defined in the RestructuringImplementation Deed); and (l) the execution, delivery, filing, or recording of all contracts,instruments, releases, and other agreements or documents in furtherance of the Plan. Accordingly,the Plan satisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Codevi. Section 1123(a)(6) – Non-Voting Equity Securities.21. The Company's organizational documents in accordance with the SwedishCompanies Act, Ch. 4, Sec 5 and the Plan prohibit the issuance of non-voting securities as of theEffective Date to the extent required to comply with section 1123(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code.Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code.vii. Section 1123(a)(7) – Directors, Officers, and Trustees.22. The manner of selection of any officer, director, or trustee (or any successorto and such officer, director, or trustee) of the Reorganized Debtors will be determined inaccordance with the existing organizational documents, which is consistent with the interests ofcreditors and equity holders and with public policy. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies therequirements of section 1123(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code.b. Section 1123(b) – Discretionary Contents of the Plan23. The Plan contains various provisions that may be construed as discretionarybut not necessary for Confirmation under the Bankruptcy Code. Any such discretionary provisionCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 123 o of f1 1334513complies with section 1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and is not inconsistent with the applicableprovisions of the Bankruptcy Code. Thus, the Plan satisfies section 1123(b).i. Section 1123(b)(1) – Impairment/Unimpairment of Any Class of Claims orInterests24. Article III of the Plan impairs or leaves unimpaired, as the case may be,each Class of Claims or Interests, as contemplated by section 1123(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.ii. Section 1123(b)(2) – Assumption and Rejection of Executory Contracts andUnexpired Leases25. Article V of the Plan provides for the assumption of the Debtors' ExecutoryContracts and Unexpired Leases as of the Effective Date unless such Executory Contract orUnexpired Lease: (a) is identified on the Rejected Executory Contract and Unexpired Lease List;(b) has been previously rejected by a Final Order; (c) is the subject of a motion to reject ExecutoryContracts or Unexpired Leases that is pending on the Confirmation Date; or (4) is subject to amotion to reject an Executory Contract or Unexpired Lease pursuant to which the requestedeffective date of such rejection is after the Effective Date. Thus, the Plan satisfies section1123(b)(2).iii. Compromise and Settlement26. In accordance with section 1123(b)(3)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code andBankruptcy Rule 9019, and in consideration for the distributions and other benefits provided underthe Plan, the provisions of the Plan constitute a good-faith compromise of all Claims, Interests,and controversies relating to the contractual, legal, and subordination rights that all holders ofClaims or Interests may have with respect to any Allowed Claim or Interest or any distribution tobe made on account of such Allowed Claim or Interest. Such compromise and settlement is theproduct of extensive arm's-length, good faith negotiations that, in addition to the Plan, resulted inCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 134 o of f1 1334514the execution of the Lock-Up Agreement, which represents a fair and reasonable compromise ofall Claims, Interests, and controversies and entry into which represented a sound exercise of theDebtors' business judgment. Such compromise and settlement is fair, equitable, and reasonableand in the best interests of the Debtors and their Estates.27. The releases of the Debtors' directors and officers are an integral componentof the settlements and compromises embodied in the Plan. The Debtors' directors and officers: (a)made a substantial and valuable contribution to the Debtors' restructuring, including extensive preandpost-Petition Date negotiations with stakeholder groups, and ensured the uninterruptedoperation of the Debtors' businesses during the Chapter 11 Cases; (b) invested significant timeand effort to make the restructuring a success and maximize the value of the Debtors' businessesin a challenging operating environment; (c) attended and, in certain instances, testified atdepositions and Court hearings; (d) attended and participated in numerous stakeholder meetings,management meetings, and board meetings related to the restructuring; (e) are entitled toindemnification from the Debtors under applicable non-bankruptcy law, organizationaldocuments, and agreements; (f) invested significant time and effort in the preparation of the Lock-Up Agreement, the Plan, Disclosure Statement, all supporting analyses, and the numerous otherpleadings Filed in the Chapter 11 Cases, thereby ensuring the smooth administration of the Chapter11 Cases; and (g) are entitled to all other benefits under any employment contracts existing as ofthe Petition Date. Litigation by the Debtors or other Releasing Parties against the Debtors'directors and officers would be a distraction to the Debtors' business and restructuring and woulddecrease rather than increase the value of the estates. The releases of the Debtors' directors andofficers contained in the Plan have the consent of the Debtors and the Releasing Parties and are inthe best interests of the estates.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 145 o of f1 1334515iv. Debtor Release28. The releases of claims and Causes of Action by the Debtors, ReorganizedDebtors, and their Estates described in Article VIII.C of the Plan in accordance with section1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code (the “Debtor Release”) represent a valid exercise of the Debtors'business judgment under Bankruptcy Rule 9019. The Debtors' or the Reorganized Debtors' pursuitof any such claims against the Released Parties is not in the best interests of the Estates' variousconstituencies because the costs involved would outweigh any potential benefit from pursuingsuch claims. The Debtor Release is fair and equitable and complies with the absolute priority rule.29. The Debtor Release is (a) an integral part of the Plan, and a component ofthe comprehensive settlement implemented under the Plan; (b) in exchange for the good andvaluable consideration provided by the Released Parties; (c) a good faith settlement andcompromise of the claims and Causes of Action released by the Debtor Release; (d) materiallybeneficial to, and in the best interests of, the Debtors, their Estates, and their stakeholders, and isimportant to the overall objectives of the Plan to finally resolve certain Claims among or againstcertain parties in interest in the Chapter 11 Cases; (e) fair, equitable, and reasonable; (f) given andmade after due notice and opportunity for hearing; and (g) a bar to any Debtor asserting any claimor Cause of Action released by the Debtor Release against any of the Released Parties. Theprobability of success in litigation with respect to the released claims and Causes of Action, whenweighed against the costs, supports the Debtor Release. With respect to each of these potentialCauses of Action, the parties could assert colorable defenses and the probability of success isuncertain. The Debtors' or the Reorganized Debtors' pursuit of any such claims or Causes ofAction against the Released Parties is not in the best interests of the Estates or the Debtors' variousCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 156 o of f1 1334516constituencies because the costs involved would likely outweigh any potential benefit frompursuing such claims or Causes of Action30. Holders of Claims and Interests entitled to vote have overwhelmingly votedin favor of the Plan, including the Debtor Release. The Plan, including the Debtor Release, wasnegotiated before and after the Petition Date by sophisticated parties represented by able counseland advisors, including the Consenting Creditors. The Debtor Release is therefore the result of ahard fought and arm's-length negotiation process conducted in good faith.31. The Debtor Release appropriately offers protection to parties thatparticipated in the Debtors' restructuring process, including the Consenting Creditors, whoseparticipation in the Chapter 11 Cases is critical to the Debtors' successful emergence frombankruptcy. Specifically, the Released Parties, including the Consenting Creditors, madesignificant concessions and contributions to the Chapter 11 Cases, including, entering into theLock-Up Agreement and related agreements, supporting the Plan and the Chapter 11 Cases, andwaiving or agreeing to impair substantial rights and Claims against the Debtors under the Plan (aspart of the compromises composing the settlement underlying the revised Plan) in order tofacilitate a consensual reorganization and the Debtors' emergence from chapter 11. The DebtorRelease for the Debtors' directors and officers is appropriate because the Debtors' directors andofficers share an identity of interest with the Debtors and, as previously stated, supported and madesubstantial contributions to the success of the Plan, the Chapter 11 Cases, and operation of theDebtors' business during the Chapter 11 Cases, actively participated in meetings, negotiations, andimplementation during the Chapter 11 Cases, and have provided other valuable consideration tothe Debtors to facilitate the Debtors' successful reorganization and continued operation.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 167 o of f1 133451732. The scope of the Debtor Release is appropriately tailored under the factsand circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases. In light of, among other things, the value provided bythe Released Parties to the Debtors' Estates and the critical nature of the Debtor Release to thePlan, the Debtor Release is appropriate.v. Release by Holders of Claims and Interests33. The release by the Releasing Parties (the “Third-Party Release”), set forthin Article VIII.D of the Plan, is an essential provision of the Plan. The Third-Party Release is: (a)consensual as to those Releasing Parties that did not specifically and timely object or properly optout from the Third-Party Release; (b) within the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1334; (c) in exchange for the good and valuable consideration provided by theReleased Parties; (d) a good faith settlement and compromise of the claims and Causes of Actionreleased by the Third-Party Release; (e) materially beneficial to, and in the best interests of, theDebtors, their Estates, and their stakeholders, and is important to the overall objectives of the Planto finally resolve certain Claims among or against certain parties in interest in the Chapter 11Cases; (f) fair, equitable, and reasonable; (g) given and made after due notice and opportunity forhearing; (h) appropriately narrow in scope given that it expressly excludes, among other things,any Cause of Action that is judicially determined by a Final Order to have constituted actual fraud,willful misconduct, or gross negligence; (i) a bar to any of the Releasing Parties asserting anyclaim or Cause of Action released by the Third-Party Release against any of the Released Parties;and (j) consistent with sections 105, 524, 1123, 1129, and 1141 and other applicable provisions ofthe Bankruptcy Code.34. The Third-Party Release is an integral part of the agreement embodied inthe Plan among the relevant parties in interest. Like the Debtor Release, the Third-Party ReleaseCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 178 o of f1 1334518facilitated participation in both the Debtors' Plan and the chapter 11 process generally. The Third-Party Release is instrumental to the Plan and was critical in incentivizing parties to support thePlan and preventing significant and time-consuming litigation regarding the parties' respectiverights and interests. The Third-Party Release was a core negotiation point in connection with thePlan and instrumental in developing the Plan that maximized value for all of the Debtors'stakeholders and kept the Debtors intact as a going concern. As such, the Third-Party Releaseappropriately offers certain protections to parties who constructively participated in the Debtors'restructuring process—including the Consenting Creditors (as set forth above)—by, among otherthings, facilitating the negotiation and consummation of the Plan, supporting the Plan and, in thecase of the Backstop Providers, committing to provide new capital to facilitate the Debtors'emergence from chapter 11. Specifically, the Notes Ad Hoc Group proposed and negotiated thepari passu transaction that is the basis of the restructuring proposed under the Plan and provideda much-needed deleveraging to the Debtors' business while taking a discount on their Claims (inexchange for other consideration).35. Furthermore, the Third-Party Release is consensual as to all parties ininterest, including all Releasing Parties, and such parties in interest were provided notice of thechapter 11 proceedings, the Plan, the deadline to object to confirmation of the Plan, and theCombined Hearing and were properly informed that all holders of Claims against or Interests inthe Debtors that did not file an objection with the Court in the Chapter 11 Cases that included anexpress objection to the inclusion of such holder as a Releasing Party under the provisionscontained in Article VIII of the Plan would be deemed to have expressly, unconditionally,generally, individually, and collectively consented to the release and discharge of all claims andCauses of Action against the Debtors and the Released Parties. Additionally, the release provisionsCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 189 o of f1 1334519of the Plan were conspicuous, emphasized with boldface type in the Plan, the DisclosureStatement, the Ballots, and the applicable notices. Except as set forth in the Plan, all ReleasingParties were properly informed that unless they (a) checked the “opt out” box on the applicableBallot or opt-out form and returned the same in advance of the Voting Deadline, as applicable, or(b) timely Filed an objection to the releases contained in the Plan that was not resolved beforeentry of this Confirmation Order, they would be deemed to have expressly consented to the releaseof all Claims and Causes of Action against the Released Parties.36. The Ballots sent to all holders of Claims and Interests entitled to vote, aswell as the notice of the Combined Hearing sent to all known parties in interest (including thosenot entitled to vote on the Plan), unambiguously provided in bold letters that the Third-PartyRelease was contained in the Plan.37. The scope of the Third-Party Release is appropriately tailored under thefacts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases, and parties in interest received due and adequatenotice of the Third-Party Release. Among other things, the Plan provides appropriate and specificdisclosure with respect to the claims and Causes of Action that are subject to the Third-PartyRelease, and no other disclosure is necessary. The Debtors, as evidenced by the VotingDeclaration and Certificate of Publication, including by providing actual notice to all knownparties in interest, including all known holders of Claims against, and Interests in, any Debtor andpublishing notice in international and national publications for the benefit of unknown parties ininterest, provided sufficient notice of the Third-Party Release, and no further or other notice isnecessary. The Third-Party Release is designed to provide finality for the Debtors, theReorganized Debtors and the Released Parties regarding the parties' respective obligations underthe Plan. For the avoidance of doubt, and notwithstanding anything to the contrary, anyparty who timely opted-out of the Third-Party Release is not bound by the Third-PartyRelease.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 290 o of f1 133452038. The Third-Party Release is specific in language, integral to the Plan, andgiven for substantial consideration. The Releasing Parties were given due and adequate notice ofthe Third-Party Release, and thus the Third-Party Release is consensual under controllingprecedent as to those Releasing Parties that did not specifically and timely object. In light of,among other things, the value provided by the Released Parties to the Debtors' Estates and theconsensual and critical nature of the Third-Party Release to the Plan, the Third-Party Release isappropriatevi. Exculpation.39. The exculpation described in Article VIII.E of the Plan (the “Exculpation”)is appropriate under applicable law, including In re Highland Capital Mgmt., L.P., 48 F. 4th 419(5th Cir. 2022), because it was supported by proper evidence, proposed in good faith, wasformulated following extensive good-faith, arm's-length negotiations with key constituents, and isappropriately limited in scope.40. No Entity or Person may commence or continue any action, employ anyprocess, or take any other act to pursue, collect, recover or offset any Claim, Interest, debt,obligation, or Cause of Action relating or reasonably likely to relate to any act or commission inconnection with, relating to, or arising out of a Covered Matter (including one that alleges theactual fraud, gross negligence, or willful misconduct of a Covered Entity), unless expresslyauthorized by the Bankruptcy Court after (1) it determines, after a notice and a hearing, such Claim,Interest, debt, obligation, or Cause of Action is colorable and (2) it specifically authorizes suchEntity or Person to bring such Claim or Cause of Action. The Bankruptcy Court shall have soleand exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether any such Claim, Interest, debt, obligation or Causeof Action is colorable and, only to the extent legally permissible and as provided for in Article XI,CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 201 o of f1 1334521shall have jurisdiction to adjudicate such underlying colorable Claim, Interest, debt, obligation, orCause of Action.vii. Injunction.41. The injunction provisions set forth in Article VIII.F of the Plan are essentialto the Plan and are necessary to implement the Plan and to preserve and enforce the discharge,Debtor Release, the Third-Party Release, and the Exculpation provisions in Article VIII of thePlan. The injunction provisions are appropriately tailored to achieve those purposes.viii. Preservation of Claims and Causes of Action.42. Article IV.L of the Plan appropriately provides for the preservation by theDebtors of certain Causes of Action in accordance with section 1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code.Causes of Action not released by the Debtors or exculpated under the Plan will be retained by theReorganized Debtors as provided by the Plan. The Plan is sufficiently specific with respect to theCauses of Action to be retained by the Debtors, and the Plan and Plan Supplement providemeaningful disclosure with respect to the potential Causes of Action that the Debtors may retain,and all parties in interest received adequate notice with respect to such retained Causes of Action.The provisions regarding Causes of Action in the Plan are appropriate and in the best interests ofthe Debtors, their respective Estates, and holders of Claims or Interests. For the avoidance of anydoubt, Causes of Action released or exculpated under the Plan will not be retained by theReorganized Debtors.c. Section 1123(d) – Cure of Defaults43. Article V.D of the Plan provides for the satisfaction of Cure Claimsassociated with each Executory Contract and Unexpired Lease to be assumed in accordance withsection 365(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code. Any monetary defaults under each assumed ExecutoryCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 212 o of f1 1334522Contract or Unexpired Lease shall be satisfied, pursuant to section 365(b)(1) of the BankruptcyCode, by payment of the default amount in Cash on the Effective Date, subject to the limitationsdescribed in Article V.D of the Plan, or on such other terms as the parties to such ExecutoryContracts or Unexpired Leases may otherwise agree. Any Disputed Cure Amounts will bedetermined in accordance with the procedures set forth in Article V.D of the Plan, and applicablebankruptcy and nonbankruptcy law. As such, the Plan provides that the Debtors will Cure, orprovide adequate assurance that the Debtors will promptly Cure, defaults with respect to assumedExecutory Contracts and Unexpired Leases in accordance with section 365(b)(1) of theBankruptcy Code. Thus, the Plan complies with section 1123(d) of the Bankruptcy Code.d. Section 1129(a)(2) – Compliance of the Debtors and Others with the ApplicableProvisions of the Bankruptcy Code.44. The Debtors, as proponents of the Plan, have complied with all applicableprovisions of the Bankruptcy Code as required by section 1129(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code,including sections 1122, 1123, 1124, 1125, 1126, and 1128, and Bankruptcy Rules 3017, 3018,and 3019.e. Section 1129(a)(3) – Proposal of Plan in Good Faith.45. The Debtors have proposed the Plan in good faith, in accordance with theBankruptcy Code requirements, and not by any means forbidden by law. In determining that thePlan has been proposed in good faith, the Court has examined the totality of the circumstancesfiling of the Chapter 11 Cases, including the formation of Intrum AB of Texas LLC (“IntrumTexas”), the Plan itself, and the process leading to its formulation. The Debtors' good faith isevident from the facts and record of the Chapter 11 Cases, the Disclosure Statement, and the recordof the Combined Hearing and other proceedings held in the Chapter 11 CasesCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 223 o of f1 133452346. The Plan (including the Plan Supplement and all other documents necessaryto effectuate the Plan) is the product of good faith, arm's-length negotiations by and among theDebtors, the Debtors' directors and officers and the Debtors' key stakeholders, including theConsenting Creditors and each of their respective professionals. The Plan itself and the processleading to its formulation provide independent evidence of the Debtors' and such other parties'good faith, serve the public interest, and assure fair treatment of holders of Claims or Interests.Consistent with the overriding purpose of chapter 11, the Debtors Filed the Chapter 11 Cases withthe belief that the Debtors were in need of reorganization and the Plan was negotiated and proposedwith the intention of accomplishing a successful reorganization and maximizing stakeholder value,and for no ulterior purpose. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1129(a)(3) of the BankruptcyCode are satisfied.f. Section 1129(a)(4) – Court Approval of Certain Payments as Reasonable.47. Any payment made or to be made by the Debtors, or by a person issuingsecurities or acquiring property under the Plan, for services or costs and expenses in connectionwith the Chapter 11 Cases, or in connection with the Plan and incident to the Chapter 11 Cases,has been approved by, or is subject to the approval of, the Court as reasonable. Accordingly, thePlan satisfies the requirements of section 1129(a)(4).g. Section 1129(a)(5)—Disclosure of Directors and Officers and Consistency with theInterests of Creditors and Public Policy.48. The identities of or process for appointment of the Reorganized Debtors'directors and officers proposed to serve after the Effective Date were disclosed in the PlanSupplement in advance of the Combined Hearing. Accordingly, the Debtors have satisfied therequirements of section 1129(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 234 o of f1 1334524h. Section 1129(a)(6)—Rate Changes.49. The Plan does not contain any rate changes subject to the jurisdiction of anygovernmental regulatory commission and therefore will not require governmental regulatoryapproval. Therefore, section 1129(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code does not apply to the Plan.i. Section 1129(a)(7)—Best Interests of Holders of Claims and Interests.50. The liquidation analysis attached as Exhibit D to the Disclosure Statementand the other evidence in support of the Plan that was proffered or adduced at the CombinedHearing, and the facts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases are (a) reasonable, persuasive,credible, and accurate as of the dates such analysis or evidence was prepared, presented orproffered; (b) utilize reasonable and appropriate methodologies and assumptions; (c) have not beencontroverted by other evidence; and (d) establish that each holder of Allowed Claims or Interestsin each Class will recover as much or more value under the Plan on account of such Claim orInterest, as of the Effective Date, than the amount such holder would receive if the Debtors wereliquidated on the Effective Date under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code or has accepted the Plan.As a result, the Debtors have demonstrated that the Plan is in the best interests of their creditorsand equity holders and the requirements of section 1129(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code are satisfied.j. Section 1129(a)(8)—Conclusive Presumption of Acceptance by UnimpairedClasses; Acceptance of the Plan by Certain Voting Classes.51. The classes deemed to accept the Plan are Unimpaired under the Plan andare deemed to have accepted the Plan pursuant to section 1126(f) of the Bankruptcy Code. EachVoting Class voted to accept the Plan. For the avoidance of doubt, however, even if section1129(a)(8) has not been satisfied with respect to all of the Debtors, the Plan is confirmable becausethe Plan does not discriminate unfairly and is fair and equitable with respect to the Voting Classesand thus satisfies section 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code with respect to such Classes as describedCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 245 o of f1 1334525further below. As a result, the requirements of section 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code are alsosatisfied.k. Section 1129(a)(9)—Treatment of Claims Entitled to Priority Pursuant to Section507(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.52. The treatment of Administrative Claims, Professional Fee Claims, andPriority Tax Claims under Article II of the Plan satisfies the requirements of, and complies in allrespects with, section 1129(a)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code.l. Section 1129(a)(10)—Acceptance by at Least One Voting Class.53. As set forth in the Voting Declaration, all Voting Classes overwhelminglyvoted to accept the Plan. As such, there is at least one Voting Class that has accepted the Plan,determined without including any acceptance of the Plan by any insider (as defined by theBankruptcy Code), for each Debtor. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1129(a)(10) of theBankruptcy Code are satisfied.m. Section 1129(a)(11)—Feasibility of the Plan.54. The Plan satisfies section 1129(a)(11) of the Bankruptcy Code. Thefinancial projections attached to the Disclosure Statement as Exhibit D and the other evidencesupporting the Plan proffered or adduced by the Debtors at or before the Combined Hearing: (a)is reasonable, persuasive, credible, and accurate as of the dates such evidence was prepared,presented, or proffered; (b) utilize reasonable and appropriate methodologies and assumptions; (c)has not been controverted by other persuasive evidence; (d) establishes that the Plan is feasibleand Confirmation of the Plan is not likely to be followed by liquidation or the need for furtherfinancial reorganization; (e) establishes that the Debtors will have sufficient funds available tomeet their obligations under the Plan and in the ordinary course of business—including sufficientamounts of Cash to reasonably ensure payment of Allowed Claims that will receive CashCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 256 o of f1 1334526distributions pursuant to the terms of the Plan and other Cash payments required under the Plan;and (f) establishes that the Debtors or the Reorganized Debtors, as applicable, will have thefinancial wherewithal to pay any Claims that accrue, become payable, or are allowed by FinalOrder following the Effective Date. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1129(a)(11) of the Bankruptcy Code.n. Section 1129(a)(12)—Payment of Statutory Fees.55. Article XII.C of the Plan provides that all fees payable pursuant to section1930(a) of the Judicial Code, as determined by the Court at the Confirmation Hearing inaccordance with section 1128 of the Bankruptcy Code, will be paid by each of the applicableReorganized Debtors for each quarter (including any fraction of a quarter) until the Chapter 11Cases are converted, dismissed, or closed, whichever occurs first. Accordingly, the Plan satisfiesthe requirements of section 1129(a)(12) of the Bankruptcy Code.o. Section 1129(a)(13)—Retiree Benefits.56. Pursuant to section 1129(a)(13) of the Bankruptcy Code, and as provided inArticle IV.K of the Plan, the Reorganized Debtors will continue to pay all obligations on accountof retiree benefits (as such term is used in section 1114 of the Bankruptcy Code) on and after theEffective Date in accordance with applicable law. As a result, the requirements of section1129(a)(13) of the Bankruptcy Code are satisfied.p. Sections 1129(a)(14), (15), and (16)—Domestic Support Obligations, Individuals,and Nonprofit Corporations.57. The Debtors do not owe any domestic support obligations, are notindividuals, and are not nonprofit corporations. Therefore, sections 1129(a)(14), 1129(a)(15), and1129(a)(16) of the Bankruptcy Code do not apply to the Chapter 11 Cases.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 267 o of f1 1334527q. Section 1129(b)—Confirmation of the Plan Over Nonacceptance of VotingClasses.58. No Classes rejected the Plan, and section 1129(b) is not applicable here,but even if it were, the Plan may be confirmed pursuant to section 1129(b)(1) of the BankruptcyCode because the Plan is fair and equitable with respect to the Deemed Rejecting Classes. ThePlan has been proposed in good faith, is reasonable, and meets the requirements and all VotingClasses have voted to accept the Plan. The treatment of Intercompany Claims and IntercompanyInterests under the Plan provides for administrative convenience does not constitute a distributionunder the Plan on account of suc

Have you heard of the up coming vote on Amendment 2? (Preserve the Right to Fish & Hunt in Florida). Then if not this is your chance to make a difference! Amendment two "RIGHT TO FISH AND HUNT. — Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution to preserve forever fishing and hunting, including by the use of traditional methods, as a public right and preferred means of responsibly managing and controlling fish and wildlife. Specifies that the amendment does not limit the authority granted to the Fish and WildlifeConservation Commission under Section 9 of Article IV of the State Constitution." MORE INFORMATION VoteYesOn2 - https://voteyeson2florida.com/

This fourth part of our series on the Formula of Concord address the relationship between good works and salvation.

Article IV, Section 3 of the United States Constitution establishes guidelines by which the United States Congress can admit new states to the American Union. It clearly states that “no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State…without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.” Five states have been formed from pre-existing states: Vermont, Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Maine. How did the process of forming a state from a pre-existing state work? Why would territories within a state want to declare their independence from their home state? Joshua Smith, the interim director of the American Merchant Marine Museum in Kings Point, New York, and author of the book Making Maine: Statehood and the War of 1812, leads us on an exploration of Maine's journey to statehood. Show Notes:https://www.benfranklinsworld.com/384 Sponsor Links Colonial Williamsburg Foundation Juneteenth at Colonial Williamsburg Complementary Episodes Episode 030: Northern New England's Religious Geography Episode 057: Money and the American State Episode 098: Birth of the American Tax Man Episode 103, James Monroe and & His Estate Highland Episode 134: Pulpit and Nation Episode 309: Merchant Ships of the Eighteenth Century Listen! Apple Podcasts Spotify Google Podcasts Amazon Music Ben Franklin's World iOS App Ben Franklin's World Android App Helpful Links Join the Ben Franklin's World Facebook Group Ben Franklin's World Twitter: @BFWorldPodcast Ben Franklin's World Facebook Page Sign-up for the Franklin Gazette Newsletter

This week it's all about the economy (outside of a bit of Sail GP chat of course), after the release of the GDP data for Q4 last year confirmed we're officially back in a recession, the second time in a year for the classic double dip. What does it all mean though and what does the more timely NZAC tell us about how 2024 has started?Kelvin also speaks about the CoreLogic release of the monthly chart pack, where the property investor situation was a core focus. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) also paid a visit to the CoreLogic offices recently, as part of their usual fact finding mission to put together their latest Article IV report. Taxes once again were a topic of interest - with housing in the spotlight. The lingering question though is how and when could we really see a fundamental shift in the NZ tax system? Following the leader of the opposition, Chris Hipkins opening the door on capital gains/wealth/land taxes again over the weekend though, perhaps it's sooner than we'd originally thought?Sign up for news and insights or contact on LinkedIn, Twitter @NickGoodall_CL or @KDavidson_CL and email nick.goodall@corelogic.co.nz or kelvin.davidson@corelogic.co.nz

Formula of Concord - Article IV - Good Works--------------------------------After the death of Martin Luther in 1546, controversies arose in the Lutheran Church that began to question, compromise and erode the foundation upon which he stood  and built his church.     Written in 1577, Lutheran leaders faced those controversies head on by continuing to stand on the Word of God and continuing to put their faith in the clear message of Scripture.  They produced a document, divided into twelve articles that we know today as the Formula of Concord.Follow along with us as we read through and discuss each article of the Formula and make applications to the lives of 21st Century Christians.   You can read along with the Formula or just join in on the discussion.The best way to find the Formula of Concord is in the Book of Concord.   Would you like to own your own copy?  It's an inexpensive way to have the Formula and other beautiful confessional Lutheran writings at your fingertips and use them educationally and devotionally.  Below are links to two different versions that we are recommending.     Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions - A Reader's Edition of the Book of ConcordBook of Concord : Kolb Wengert EditionThere's a free edition of the Book of Concord online at: www.bookofconcord.org We hope that you can join us for the fun and that you can grow along with us.  If you have any questions about this series or our Most Certainly True Podcast, please reach out to Pastor Hackmann at bhackmann@gracedowntown.org.  If you'd like to learn more about Grace Lutheran Church, check out our website www.gracedowntown.org.  Make sure to find the other titles in this series or check out a different series or one of our sermons from Grace on our Most Certainly True Podcast channel.  We'd love to have you grow even more with us.  Thanks for listening!

Hi everyone! Here is our bonus episode on chapter 9 from Xaden's POV! P.S. Samantha had some audio issues this time around. Sorry! Bonus Chapter: https://www.rebeccayarros.com/fourth-wing-bonus-chapters/ Email - readersquadpod@gmail.com Instagram - @readersquadrantpodcast Discord - https://discord.gg/xuDZAjWHPh The Pyre Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

In this special report, I'm covering everything you need to know about the current border dispute between the Biden Administration and Texas.(0:00) Intro(0:56) Operation Lone Star(1:57) Relevant Legal Battles(5:10) Recent Supreme Court Decision(6:35) Post-Decision Remarks By Gov. Abbott(10:38) Support Letter Signed By 25 Republican Governors(12:37) Article IV, Section IV (Guarantee Clause)(13:30) Article I, Section X, Clause III (Compact's Clause)(13:51) Texas' Constitutional Argument(14:27) Supreme Court Precedent Re: Immigration (Arizona vs. US)(16:39) Textual Analysis of 'Invasion'(19:26) Democratic Lawmakers' Responses(20:40) ConclusionIf you enjoyed this episode, please leave me a review and share it with those you know that also appreciate unbiased news!Watch this episode on YouTube.Subscribe to Jordan's weekly free newsletter featuring hot topics in the news, trending lawsuits, and more.Follow Jordan on Instagram and TikTok.All sources for this episode can be found here. 

This week we are sharing an episode from our companion podcast, Live at the National Constitution Center. In this episode, prize-winning historians Kate Masur, author of Until Justice Be Done: America's First Civil Rights Movement, from the Revolution to Reconstruction, and Dylan Penningroth, author of the new book Before the Movement: The Hidden History of Black Civil Rights, explore the central role of African Americans in the struggle for justice and equality long before the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates.   Resources:  Kate Masur, Until Justice Be Done: America's First Civil Rights Movement, from the Revolution to Reconstruction (2022)  Dylan Penningroth, Before the Movement: The Hidden History of Black Civil Rights (2023)  Article IV, Section 2: Movement Of Persons Throughout the Union, Privileges and Immunities Clause, National Constitution Center's Interactive Constitution  14th Amendment Privileges or Immunities Clause, National Constitution Center's Interactive Constitution  Dylan Penningroth, The Claims of Kinfolk: African American Property and Community in the Nineteenth-Century South (2003)  Kate Masur, An Example for All the Land: Emancipation and the Struggle over Equality in Washington, D.C (2010)  Brief of Professors of History and Law as Amici Curia in Support of Respondents, Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard and UNC    Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library.

Join us as we continue our series titled WE BELIEVE: STATEMENT OF FAITH.

Prize-winning historians Kate Masur, author of Until Justice Be Done: America's First Civil Rights Movement, from the Revolution to Reconstruction, and Dylan Penningroth, author of the new book Before the Movement: The Hidden History of Black Civil Rights, explore the central role of African Americans in the struggle for justice and equality long before the social movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. Additional Resources Kate Masur, Until Justice Be Done: America's First Civil Rights Movement, from the Revolution to Reconstruction Dylan Penningroth, Before the Movement: The Hidden History of Black Civil Rights National Constitution Center Interactive Constitution, Article IV, Section 2: Movement Of Persons Throughout the Union, Privileges and Immunities Clause National Constitution Center Interactive Constitution,14th Amendment Privileges or Immunities Clause Dylan Penningroth, The Claims of Kinfolk: African American Property and Community in the Nineteenth-Century South Kate Masur, An Example for All the Land: Emancipation and the Struggle over Equality in Washington, D.C Brief of Professors of History and Law as Amici Curia in Support of Respondents Stay Connected and Learn More Continue the conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. Please subscribe to Live at the National Constitution Center and our companion podcast We the People on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app.

The Roman Catechism of Trent {RCT} p. 61-63 The Creed, Article IV, Part D. *** The Most Destructive Line in the New Catechism: https://www.padreperegrino.org/2023/07/destructive/  

This session of the radio show shares the Town Council meeting held in Council Chambers on Wednesday, July 19, 2023. All 9 members of the Council were present in the Council Chambers.Quick recap:APPOINTMENTSa. Agricultural Commission i. Nick Capocciab. Cultural District Committee i. Sue Cass ii. Patrick Conlanc. Design Review Commission i. Amy Adams ii. Jim Bartrod. Finance Committee i. Lauren Nagele. Franklin Cultural Council i. Carol Fletcher ii. John Ristaino iii. Jean WolfLegislative Delegation visit: Senator Rebecca Rausch, Representative Jeffrey RoyBylaw Amendment 23-900R: Chapter 170, Vehicles and Traffic, Article IV, Stopping, Standing and Parking, §170-15 Parking Prohibitions and Limitations , D. Parking Prohibited, Downtown Parking Map Amendment - Second Reading Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)b. Zoning Bylaw Amendment 23-894: To Amend Chapter 185, Section 3 of the Code of the Town of Franklin to add Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Definition - Second Reading c. Zoning Bylaw Amendment 23-895R (As Further Revised): To Amend Chapter 185, Attachment 8, Use Regulations Schedule Part VII: Accessory Uses of the Franklin Town Code to Add Accessory Dwelling Residential Units - Second Readingd. Zoning Bylaw Amendment 23-896: To Amend Chapter 185, Section 19 of the Code of the Town of Franklin to Add on Accessory Dwelling Unit Setbacks - Second Reading Resolution 23-45: Authorization for Intermunicipal Agreement with County of Norfolk for County of Norfolk to Provide Sealer of Weights and Measures Services to Town of Franklin Resolution 23-46: Acceptance of and Authorization for Town Administrator to Execute Conservation Restriction on Two Open Space Parcels at Brookview Condominium located off Pond Street Resolution 23-47: Gift Acceptance - Veterans' Services Dept. ($600), Fire Dept. ($300) The recording runs about 2 hours and 50 minutes. Let's listen to the Town Council meeting on July 19, 2023. --------------The agenda doc can also be found on the Town of Franklin page -> https://www.franklinma.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif10036/f/agendas/july_19_2023_tc_agenda.pdfMy notes in one PDF file -> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nt4hKCkbmVavbV-XCPyr9d1lJTpsF3pK/view?usp=drive_linkFranklin TV meeting video -> https://youtu.be/O8_1FbZyKJI--------------We are now producing this in collaboration with Franklin.TV and Franklin Public Radio (wfpr.fm) or 102.9 on the Franklin area radio dial. This podcast is my public service effort for Franklin but we can't do it alone. We can always use your help.How can you help?If you can use the information that you find here, please tell your friends and neighborsIf you don't like something here, please let me knowThrough this feedback loop we can continue to make improvements. I thank you for listening.For additional information, please visit Franklinmatters.org/ or www.franklin.news/If you have...

This shares my conversation with Town Council Chair Tom Mercer in our Town Council Quarterbacking session. This is one of the series of conversations meant to provide a recap of the prior night's Town Council meeting. Akin to one of the many sports post-game analysis broadcasts we are familiar with in New England, this would be a discussion focused on the Franklin Town Council meeting of July 19, 2023: ok, what just happened? What does it mean for Franklin residents and taxpayers?We cover the following key topicsAPPOINTMENTSa. Agricultural Commission i. Nick Capocciab. Cultural District Committee i. Sue Cass ii. Patrick Conlanc. Design Review Commission i. Amy Adams ii. Jim Bartrod. Finance Committee i. Lauren Nagele. Franklin Cultural Council i. Carol Fletcher ii. John Ristaino iii. Jean WolfLegislative Delegation visit: Senator Rebecca Rausch, Representative Jeffrey RoyBylaw Amendment 23-900R: Chapter 170, Vehicles and Traffic, Article IV, Stopping, Standing and Parking, §170-15 Parking Prohibitions and Limitations, D. Parking Prohibited, Downtown Parking Map Amendment - Second Reading Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)b. Zoning Bylaw Amendment 23-894: To Amend Chapter 185, Section 3 of the Code of the Town of Franklin to add Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Definition - Second Reading c. Zoning Bylaw Amendment 23-895R (As Further Revised): To Amend Chapter 185, Attachment 8, Use Regulations Schedule Part VII: Accessory Uses of the Franklin Town Code to Add Accessory Dwelling Residential Units - Second Readingd. Zoning Bylaw Amendment 23-896: To Amend Chapter 185, Section 19 of the Code of the Town of Franklin to Add on Accessory Dwelling Unit Setbacks - Second Reading Resolution 23-45: Authorization for Intermunicipal Agreement with County of Norfolk for County of Norfolk to Provide Sealer of Weights and Measures Services to Town of Franklin Resolution 23-46: Acceptance of and Authorization for Town Administrator to Execute Conservation Restriction on Two Open Space Parcels at Brookview Condominium located off Pond Street Resolution 23-47: Gift Acceptance - Veterans' Services Dept. ($600), Fire Dept. ($300) Links to the meeting agenda and associated documents released for this meeting are included in the show notes. Our conversation runs about 42 minutes. Let's listen to the Town Council Quarterbacking session recorded July 20, 2023--------------The agenda doc can also be found on the Town of Franklin page -> https://www.franklinma.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif10036/f/agendas/july_19_2023_tc_agenda.pdfMy notes in one PDF file -> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nt4hKCkbmVavbV-XCPyr9d1lJTpsF3pK/view?usp=drive_linkFranklin TV meeting video -> https://youtu.be/O8_1FbZyKJI--------------We are now producing this in collaboration with Franklin.TV and Franklin Public Radio (wfpr.fm) or 102.9 on the Franklin area radio dial. This podcast is my public service effort for Franklin but we can't

July 16, 2023 The theological constitution of our congregation asserts: “Our churches teach that people cannot be justified before God by their own strength, merits, or works. People are freely justified for Christ's sake, through faith, when they believe that they are received into favor and that their sins are forgiven for Christ's sake. By His death, Christ made satisfaction for our sins. God counts this faith for righteousness in His sight (Romans 3 and 4 [3:21–26; 4:5].” (Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions, Augsburg Confession, Article IV, 33) --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/stjohnrandomlake/support

Is America a democracy? Is America a republic? Is America Atlantis? Is Atlantis underneath the pyramids? Of all the rights protected by the Constitution, there is only ONE THING that is guaranteed. People love saying "We're a republic" and "We're not a democracy, we're a republic." Both of those statements are WRONG! And that's not my opinion (my opinion doesn't matter), that's the plain text of the Constitution! Do y'all know how much freer we'd be if people actually READ the Constitution they claim to revere and actually READ the Federalist Papers they snatch quotations from? Imagine everybody knowing what the Constitution means by "a republican form of government." What is a republic? I lose MY MIND (I know, not a great loss) when people call the United States a "nation," too. That's another thing that we aren't. Nope. Not a nation. It's so easy to know these things if people knew what the word "Congress" means, if they read Federalist No. 39, 45, and 46. The problem, of course, is that from the time you are four or five years old, you're taught that the United States is "one nation" and the flag stands for "the republic." And guess what: NOT TRUE! And guess what else: I clear all of it up by drinking from the sources and leaving the mucky downstream water for other podcasts. If we knew the true intended constitutional relationship between the states and the federal government, we would be so much freer and so much more peaceful. But, maybe there are people that don't want us peaceful and free. Hmmmm. Join me as we explore the concept of a republican form of government guaranteed to each state and the crucial role the Federalist Papers played in defining the United States as a confederation of sovereign republics rather than a consolidated nation. As we journey through these sources, we'll uncover the vision of the Founding Fathers and the rationale behind ensuring the sovereignty of the states. We'll discuss how the Founders carefully crafted the Constitution, incorporating mechanisms to safeguard individual liberties and limit the power of the federal government. Central to this idea is the guarantee in Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution, which mandates that every state be provided a republican form of government. Drawing upon the wisdom of James Madison in the Federalist Papers, I'll explore their arguments against a consolidated national government. These influential essays were instrumental in shaping public opinion and securing the ratification of the Constitution. I'll highlight key Federalist Papers, such as numbers 10, and 39, that discuss the importance of maintaining a confederation of sovereign republics to prevent tyranny and protect the diverse interests of individual states. I'll address debates surrounding the balance of power between the states and the federal government and the ignorance about the power and purpose of the Tenth Amendment. And what about the GUARANTEE? Why is that guarantee not being enforced by the states? Probably because no one knows what it even means anymore because for the most part people don't get taught the truth about the Constitution and the history of the Founding of the United States. OOH! Which reminds me: "For" or "of." You should comment whether your pocket Constitution has "For" or "of" on the cover. And if you don't think "for" or "of" matters, let me ask you this: would you rather have a million dollars FOR you or a million dollars OF you? Think about it. It matters and it's just so infuriating because these publishers -- and the dadgum NATIONAL ARCHIVES could just look down to the last line of the Preamble and find the correct word! C'mon! And, I mean, do you know another podcast where James Madison shows up just to hang out and talk and just chill? No. You don't. I have him on exclusive contract. He gets a little annoyed that I touch his ponytail, but I mean, it's a dude with a ponytail. And he's 272 years old. You'd touch it, too! Like, share, and subscribe to my channel to stay informed and engage in stimulating discussions about the ideas that form the foundation of our country and Western civilization! Nobody has signed up for a rap battle. I don't know why people are so afraid of my freestyle skillz. Yeah, I spelled it with a z because that's how FRESH my freestyle rhymes are! I wonder if anybody would be interested in a little personal library? You see, if you get this far you'll know that whoever becomes the 1,000 subscriber will get a starter library of Founders Recipe books from me as a gift. The easy way to make sure it is you is to get everybody you know to subscribe and make sure it's someone YOU recommended becomes the 1,000th subscriber.

The Roman Catechism of Trent {RCT} p. 57-61. The Creed, Article IV, Part C. *** - My site: www.padreperegrino.org - Rumble Channel: https://rumble.com/c/c-1209063

In this session Bro. Derrick continued with Article IV. of the Baptist Faith and Message, Salvation. We covered parts C & D, Sanctification and GlorificationC. Sanctification is the experience, beginning in regeneration, by which the believer is set apart to God's purposes, and is enabled to progress toward moral and spiritual maturity through the presence and power of the Holy Spirit dwelling in him. Growth in grace should continue throughout the regenerate person's life.D. Glorification is the culmination of salvation and is the final blessed and abiding state of the redeemed.Genesis 3:15; Exodus 3:14-17; 6:2-8; Matthew 1:21; 4:17; 16:21-26; 27:22-28:6; Luke 1:68-69; 2:28-32; John 1:11-14,29; 3:3-21,36; 5:24; 10:9,28-29; 15:1-16; 17:17; Acts 2:21; 4:12; 15:11; 16:30-31; 17:30-31; 20:32; Romans 1:16-18; 2:4; 3:23-25; 4:3ff.; 5:8-10; 6:1-23; 8:1-18,29-39; 10:9-10,13; 13:11-14; 1 Corinthians 1:18,30; 6:19-20; 15:10; 2 Corinthians 5:17-20; Galatians 2:20; 3:13; 5:22-25; 6:15; Ephesians 1:7; 2:8-22; 4:11-16; Philippians 2:12-13; Colossians 1:9-22; 3:1ff.; 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24; 2 Timothy 1:12; Titus 2:11-14; Hebrews 2:1-3; 5:8-9; 9:24-28; 11:1-12:8,14; James 2:14-26; 1 Peter 1:2-23; 1 John 1:6-2:11; Revelation 3:20; 21:1-22:5.

Bro. Derrick continues with part 2 of Article IV. of the Baptist Faith & Message, "Salvation". IV. SalvationSalvation involves the redemption of the whole man, and is offered freely to all who accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, who by His own blood obtained eternal redemption for the believer. In its broadest sense salvation includes regeneration, justification, sanctification, and glorification. There is no salvation apart from personal faith in Jesus Christ as Lord.A. Regeneration, or the new birth, is a work of God's grace whereby believers become new creatures in Christ Jesus. It is a change of heart wrought by the Holy Spirit through conviction of sin, to which the sinner responds in repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Repentance and faith are inseparable experiences of grace. Repentance is a genuine turning from sin toward God. Faith is the acceptance of Jesus Christ and commitment of the entire personality to Him as Lord and Saviour.B. Justification is God's gracious and full acquittal upon principles of His righteousness of all sinners who repent and believe in Christ. Justification brings the believer into a relationship of peace and favor with God.Genesis 3:15; Exodus 3:14-17; 6:2-8; Matthew 1:21; 4:17; 16:21-26; 27:22-28:6; Luke 1:68-69; 2:28-32; John 1:11-14,29; 3:3-21,36; 5:24; 10:9,28-29; 15:1-16; 17:17; Acts 2:21; 4:12; 15:11; 16:30-31; 17:30-31; 20:32; Romans 1:16-18; 2:4; 3:23-25; 4:3ff.; 5:8-10; 6:1-23; 8:1-18,29-39; 10:9-10,13; 13:11-14; 1 Corinthians 1:18,30; 6:19-20; 15:10; 2 Corinthians 5:17-20; Galatians 2:20; 3:13; 5:22-25; 6:15; Ephesians 1:7; 2:8-22; 4:11-16; Philippians 2:12-13; Colossians 1:9-22; 3:1ff.; 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24; 2 Timothy 1:12; Titus 2:11-14; Hebrews 2:1-3; 5:8-9; 9:24-28; 11:1-12:8,14; James 2:14-26; 1 Peter 1:2-23; 1 John 1:6-2:11; Revelation 3:20; 21:1-22:5.

The Roman Catechism of Trent {RCT} p. 53-57. The Creed, Article IV, Part B. Where does donor-money go? https://www.padreperegrino.org/2023/05/donormoney/

Bro. Derrick presented his observations after returning from the Southern Baptist Convention Annual Meeting. This week's study in the Baptist Faith & Message was on the Introduction and Section A of Article IV. Salvation.IV. SalvationSalvation involves the redemption of the whole man, and is offered freely to all who accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, who by His own blood obtained eternal redemption for the believer. In its broadest sense salvation includes regeneration, justification, sanctification, and glorification. There is no salvation apart from personal faith in Jesus Christ as Lord.A. Regeneration, or the new birth, is a work of God's grace whereby believers become new creatures in Christ Jesus. It is a change of heart wrought by the Holy Spirit through conviction of sin, to which the sinner responds in repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Repentance and faith are inseparable experiences of grace. Repentance is a genuine turning from sin toward God. Faith is the acceptance of Jesus Christ and commitment of the entire personality to Him as Lord and Saviour.Genesis 3:15; Exodus 3:14-17; 6:2-8; Matthew 1:21; 4:17; 16:21-26; 27:22-28:6; Luke 1:68-69; 2:28-32; John 1:11-14,29; 3:3-21,36; 5:24; 10:9,28-29; 15:1-16; 17:17; Acts 2:21; 4:12; 15:11; 16:30-31; 17:30-31; 20:32; Romans 1:16-18; 2:4; 3:23-25; 4:3ff.; 5:8-10; 6:1-23; 8:1-18,29-39; 10:9-10,13; 13:11-14; 1 Corinthians 1:18,30; 6:19-20; 15:10; 2 Corinthians 5:17-20; Galatians 2:20; 3:13; 5:22-25; 6:15; Ephesians 1:7; 2:8-22; 4:11-16; Philippians 2:12-13; Colossians 1:9-22; 3:1ff.; 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24; 2 Timothy 1:12; Titus 2:11-14; Hebrews 2:1-3; 5:8-9; 9:24-28; 11:1-12:8,14; James 2:14-26; 1 Peter 1:2-23; 1 John 1:6-2:11; Revelation 3:20; 21:1-22:5.

Last week, in their so-called Article IV report on their member countries, the International Monetary Fund spelt out the dangers facing the South African economy and made a number of policy proposals. The advice comes right out of the textbook but doesn't really help us now. This episode is supported by Economic Research Southern Africa and the NWU Business School. Errors and omissions are my own.

The Roman Catechism of Trent {RCT} p. 51-53. The Creed, Article IV, Part A. - Donate: https://www.padreperegrino.org/donate/ - Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-1209063 https://rumble.com/embed/v2n5kum/?pub=e5jg1

Did you know there's such a thing as a fake legislative day? Ok, maybe that's not the official term, but that colloquialism has grown up around a practice at the Legislature in Bismarck which sees lawmakers protracting their session despite the 80-day limit that's in Article IV of the state constitution. You see, if the lawmakers don't gavel in for a floor session, they can still meet in their various committees, and still get paid, without the day counting against their limit. Why are they doing this? And should they be allowed to? My co-host Ben Hanson and I discussed it on this episode of Plain Talk. Also on this episode, Brian Lundeen, a Jamestown resident who is one of the organizers behind the effort to build the Bison World attraction in that city, talks about what the project needs from state lawmakers to make it happen. Want to be notified when new episodes of Plain Talk publish? Search for the show on services like Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or Stitcher, or click here to learn how to subscribe on the podcast platform of your choice.

April 17, 2023 Rockingham County Commissioners MeetingAGENDA1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER BY CHAIRMAN RICHARDSON2. INVOCATION3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Aubree Herndon, 8 years old, Monroeton Elementary, Avery Herndon, 6 years old, Monroeton Elementary4. RESOLUTION - Lance Metzler, County ManagerApproval - Resolution honoring the work of Robert "Bob" Wray Carter, County Historian for his lifetime work in genealogy and Rockingham County history.5. APPROVAL OF APRIL 17, 2023 AGENDA6. CONSENT AGENDA (Consent items as follows will be adopted with a single motion, second and vote, unless a request for removal from the Consent Agenda is heard from a Commissioner)A. Pat Galloway, Finance DirectorApproval - Transfer the June 2023 outstanding principal balance of the 2020B (NTE Reidsville Energy Center) debt in the amount of $961,000 from a Water Sewer Enterprise Fund debt classification to a General Government debt classification. The project was suspended prior to construction of an enterprise system asset and is more appropriately classified as a General Government debt type as discussed during the February 2023 annual bUdget planning retreat.2 Approval - Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Audit Contract and Engagement Letter with audit firm Thompson, Price, Scott, Adams & Co. PA The audit fees are $50,500 for the County audit and $2,625 for the Tourism Development Authority audit. The County fee "is $2,000 less than the prior fiscal year due to transitioning the writing of the annual financial report from the audit firm to the County Finance Department.3. Approval - Appropriate $22,000 of Northwest Fire District restricted fund balance that is due to Northwest Fire Department.4. Approval - Transfer funds of $2,208 to install an awning at the entrance of the Board of Elections Building. Funding will be provided by eXisting budget appropriations as follows:Board of Elections Building Repair line $1,000 Public Buildings - All County Buildings Repair $1,2085. Approval - Appropriate $12,845 of fund balance restricted for the Sheriff Department to purchase rifles and related equipment in order to assign a patrol rifle to sworn personnel who currently are not issued a county owned rifle. B. Todd Hurst, Interim Tax AdministratorApproval- Tax collection and reconciliation reports for March including refunds for March 22, 2023 thru April 4, 2023.C. Susan Washburn, Clerk to the BoardApproval - Recessed Board minutes for February 10, 2023 and Regular meeting minutes for April 3, 2023.D. Ben Curtis, Rockingham County Register of DeedsApproval - Resolution authorizing the Rockingham County Register of Deeds, to temporarily transfer records to an off-site or out-of-County location for reproduction, repair or preservation.7. PUBLIC COMMENT8. PUBLIC HEARINGS:A. Hiriam "Marzy" Marziano, Community Development Director1. Case 2023-03 - Zoning Amendment: Rezoning from Residential Protected (RP) and Residential Agricultural (RA) to Residential Agricultural (RA) Applicant: Elizabeth Suzanne Knight - Tax PINs: 7903-01-48-7699 -Address: 466 Eden Church Rd. - Huntsville Township.2. Case 2023-04 - Zoning Amendment: Rezoning from Highway Commercial Conditional District (HC-CD) to Highway Commercial (HC) - Applicant: George Daniel Carter, 111- Tax PINs: 7923-01-18-2000 -Address: 2804 US Highway 220 - Huntsville Township.3. Case 2023-05 - Zoning Amendment: Rezoning from Residential Protected (RP) to Residential Agricultural (RA) - Applicant: Trent Prater, Clayton Homes - Tax PINs: 7061-09-25-4439 - Address: Odie Ln (Parcel # 175179) Leaksville Township.4. Case 2023-07 - A text amendment request to the UDO Permitted Use Table and Supplemental Regulations to permit Religious Schools and Places of Worship in the Residential Protected (RP) district when located on the same parcel - Applicant: Corey Engebretson, Floyd Missionary Baptist Church UDO Amendments Permitted use Table, Article IV, Section 41.04; Supplemental Regulations Article VI, Section 62.79.5. Case 2023-08 - A request to amend various sections of the UDO related to the following:i. Manufactured Homes on Individual Lotsii. Landscape Design Standardsiii. Major Subdivision Reviewiv.. Wireless Telecommunication Towersv. Accessory Dwelling Unit/Guesthousevi. Shipping ContainersApplicant: Rockingham County Community Development Department, UDO Amendments: Article III, Section 3401, Article IV, Section 41.04; Article V, Section 54.01; Article VI, Section 62.01, Section 62.39, Section 62.66, Section 62.79, Section 62.81, Section 62.88.B. Lance Metzler, County ManagerResolution requesting establishment of a "No Wake Zone" for Belews Lake at the Carolina Marina.9. PRESENTATION: Victoria Whitt, Sandhills CenterSandhills Center County General Budget funding request and program update.10. PRESENTATION: Lance Metzler, County ManagerApproval - Adoption of a resolution and approve a budget amendment for NC Opioid Settlement funding to establish a Behavioral Health Urgent Care (BHUC) in Rockingham County.11. NEW BUSINESS12. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS13. CLOSED SESSION:Pursuant to: N.C.G.S. 143-318.11 (a)(1) Approve Closed Session Minutes; and N.C.G.S. 143-31811(a)(5) Instruct Negotiating Agents14. ADJOURN###

Miklo 1%er tells the story of getting blessings and why his club chose not to go that route in his book, "Spirit of the 1%er Article IV." Check it out and let us know what you think, as Black Dragon reads his account on this podcast.Help us get to 10,000 subscribers on www.instagram.com/BlackDragonBikerTV on Instagram. Thank you! Follow us on TikTok www.tiktok.com/@blackdragonbikertv Subscribe to our new discord server https://discord.gg/dshaTST Get 20% off Gothic biker rings by using my special discount code: blackdragon go to http://gthic.com?aff=147 Subscribe to our online news magazine www.bikerliberty.com Buy Black Dragon Merchandise, Mugs, Hats, T-Shirts Books: https://blackdragonsgear.com Donate to our cause with Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/BlackDragonNP Donate to our cause with PayPal https://tinyurl.com/yxudso8z Subscribe to our Prepper Channel “Think Tactical”: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-WnkPNJLZ2a1vfis013OAg SUBSCRIBE TO Black Dragon Biker TV YouTube https://tinyurl.com/y2xv69bu KEEP UP ON SOCIAL MEDIA: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/blackdragonbikertv Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/jbunchii Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/blackdragonbiker Get my new Audio Book Prospect's Bible from these links: United States https://adbl.co/3OBsfl5 United Kingdom https://adbl.co/3J6tQxT France https://bit.ly/3OFWTtf Germany https://adbl.co/3b81syQ

In this episode we continue our study of Article IV of the Apostles Creed focusing on the death and burial of Christ. Additionally we read two articles from The Summa Theologica addressing the "whether it was fitting that Christ should die?" (ST IIIa, Q. 50, A. 1) and "Was it fitting for Christ to be buried?" (ST IIIa. Q. 51 A. 1)

Antariksh Matters #1: Can India and the US Head into Space Together?— Aditya RamanathanIndia and the United States have taken a modest leap towards greater cooperation in space.Last week, the two countries' national security advisers, Ajit Doval and Jake Sullivan, kicked off the first meeting of the initiative on Critical and Emerging Technology or iCET. First set up in 2022, the focus of iCET was to enhance technological cooperation in defence as well as other sectors. A fact sheet released after the meeting outlined new avenues of India-US cooperation in defence technology, semiconductor supply chains, 5G, and space.  We'll be providing our take on some aspects of the iCET soon, but in this Technopolitik entry, I'll focus on the bits about space.Three steps outlined in the factsheet stand out. One, the two sides have agreed to train an Indian at the NASA Johnson Space Center, the main facility for training American astronauts. Two, both countries have also agreed to figure out how Indian companies can participate in NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) programme. Three, the factsheet outlines initiatives to increase commercial space cooperation and interaction between academics and experts. Let's start with human spaceflight. On India's Independence Day in 2018, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced that the Indians would be launched into space on an indigenous mission in 2022 named Gaganyaan. That ambitious plan fell behind schedule, largely thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic. At present, the first Indians are not scheduled to go into orbit only in the last quarter of 2024. Two uncrewed launches will precede the mission to send Indians into orbit to test various parameters of the human-rated spacecraft.. Starting in 2020, four Indian Air Force (IAF) officers also began training at Russia's Yuri Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Centre for the Gaganyaan mission. While their training was spectacularly ill-timed - starting right at the onset of the pandemic - they nevertheless completed the course in a year. However, with Russia's space programme financially constrained and heavily sanctioned because of the country's ongoing war with Ukraine, India is clearly looking to diversify. While the agreement to train Indian spacefarers in the United States may have come too late to speed up the schedule for the first Gaganyaan launch, it is an important step in India's hunt for a reliable partner to train its ‘vyomanauts' as ISRO has called them. India and the US have also inched closer towards cooperating on lunar exploration. The fact sheet commits ISRO and NASA to bring together Indian private sector space companies and American companies involved in the CLPS programme. CLPS is part of America's expansive plans to return to the Moon sustainably. While NASA is to focus on some of the big-ticket projects like sending humans to the lunar surface, CLPS allows private companies to take scientific payloads from NASA and others to the Moon on uncrewed spacecraft. NASA's goal is to act as a primary customer for these private missions until they become commercially viable and self-sustaining.  By engaging India with CLPS, the US appears to have two goals. One is to find Indian customers for the American CLPS companies. The other is to involve India in the US-led multinational effort to return to the Moon. Much of this comes under the rubric of what the US calls the Artemis programme. Countries that want to join the Artemis programme are required to sign the Artemis Accords, a series of ten principles governing lunar activity. While most of these principles are innocuous aspects of existing international law, a few, like those that allow the use of lunar resources and call for ‘deconfliction,' raise concerns about the creation of de facto private real estate or even de facto sovereign territory on the Moon. By last count, 23 states including the US were part of the Artemis Accords. India has not signed up, evidently because it is concerned that the accords create a parallel legal framework that is designed to primarily serve US interests and impinge on India's own lunar ambitions.  If Indian companies decide to become customers or even partners in the CLPS, it will be interesting to see if they are implicitly or even explicitly expected to agree to some of the Artemis principles. The third important aspect of space cooperation outlined in the factsheet is a handful of steps to encourage greater commercial space cooperation and interaction between experts on both sides. India's Department of Space and the US' Department of Commerce are to lead a new initiative under the existing Civil Space Joint Working Group or CSJWG to “foster U.S.-India commercial space engagement and enable growth and partnerships between U.S. and Indian commercial space sectors.” While such initiatives may seem minor, they can help pave the way for Indian and American space companies to forge productive partnerships in a heavily regulated sector. Finally, the fact sheet also announces steps to make “talent exchanges” easier and increase interaction between ISRO and NASA personnel. While these initiatives don't address some of the gripes Indian private space companies have with visa rules, they are obviously intended to build trust between the two countries' national space agencies, which have long looked at each other warily. Biopolitik: The Promise of Gene Drive— Saurabh TodiGene drives are genetic elements of an organism that are transmitted to progeny at higher than mendelian frequencies (>50%). Gene editing techniques such as CRISPR–Cas9 have made gene drives extremely efficient in laboratory settings and have shown the potential to reduce the prevalence of vector-borne diseases, crop pests, and non-native invasive species. Research in gene drives, especially on mosquitoes, is being carried out by scientists at the University of California, San Diego, Texas A&M University, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, among others. However, concerns have been raised regarding the potential unintended consequences, especially in terms of the ecological impact of gene-drive systems.Reducing the incidence of vector-borne diseases has become a technology demonstrator for gene drive technology. Mosquitoes engineered with gene drive systems can pass specific genes to the next generation at higher than Mendelian inheritance rates (>50%). This ensures that the target gene spreads through the wild-type mosquito population, despite some associated fitness costs. Gene-drive mosquito techniques work in two major ways: They reduce the population of mosquitos (population suppression); or modify (population replacement) a given vector population.Population suppression involves the release of modified male mosquitoes to suppress vector populations to a level which makes it difficult to sustain malaria transmission. Population suppression strategies are based on the inactivation, or knock-out, of genes which aim to reduce fertility or production of female progeny or are biased towards higher production of male progeny (which do not bite). In a small study, gene drive mosquitoes wiped out captive populations of mosquitoes in just eight to twelve generations. In contrast, the population replacement method aims to reduce the ability of a mosquito to transmit the malaria pathogen. Population replacement strategies are based on the inactivation of genes that enable mosquitoes to be effective vectors. For example, many potential effector genes have been identified to impair the development of Plasmodium parasites (that cause malaria) by Anopheles mosquitoes (the vector).The use of either population replacement or population suppression would depend on their relative strengths and challenges in the given situation. For example, population replacement can provide a level of environmental safety because it would not result in the elimination of an ecological niche that an opportunistic invasive species could occupy. However, it is a risky approach because the genetic modification will remain in the environment forever, increasing the likelihood of unintended consequences. To address these concerns, scientists are working on ways to reduce the risk of the unintentional spread of a gene drive mosquito and to ensure researchers hold much more control over their safe manipulation. Scientists at the University of California, San Diego, may have found a way to reduce this risk. They have created a flexible genetic "hacking" system for converting split gene drives (sDGs) into full gene drives (fGDs) while reducing the risk of using the latter.Although gene drive technology to eliminate vector-borne diseases such as Malaria hasn't been commercialised yet, it holds promise to reduce the scourge of this disease, which causes upwards of 600,000 deaths annually, predominantly in Africa.Antariksh Matters #2: Reducing Space Threats, Round 3— Pranav R SatyanathIn the previous edition of Technopolitiik, we covered the recommendations from our discussion document for our OEWG. On a positive note, that version of the document was published as a working paper for the OEWG. But not all was positive in the third round, as we shall see.Disagreements among states must not shock us. It is exactly what was expected of the group. It seems, however, that the OEWG is widening the divide between some member-states rather than bridging them. More prevailingly, the third meeting of the OEWG also revealed that states do not agree on the working procedures of the group, something that could eventually threaten to derail the entire OEWG process. I identified two issues that could cause deadlocks in the final round of the OEWG, which will be held in August this year.1. Consensus about consensus: The first major issue that occupied the minds of the member-states was regarding the procedure of the OEWG. The issue of consensus arose when Russia and China protested the participation of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) during the formal session of the OEWG. They argued that since members disagree on the status of NGOs, no consensus can be reached; therefore, agreeing on the participation of NGOs is invalid. The Chair, on his part, ruled the participation of NGOs in the formal sessions as valid since no consensus could be reached.Russia, China and other states interpreted the Chair's move as divergence from the OEWG's mandate and, therefore, an abuse of the Chair's power. Russia protected the participation of NGOs into the second day, arguing that the lack of consensus about consensus threatens the future of OEWG, including the adoption of a final outcome paper.2. International Humanitarian Law: The status of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) was already a contested issue in the opening meeting of the OEWG. The contest over the status of IHL grew all the more intense in the third round. China, for its part, argued that invoking IHL would mean accepting outer space as a domain of armed conflict since IHL deals with customary laws of armed conflict. Therefore, applying IHL would mean that states automatically classify outer space as a domain for warfighting. Russia echoed these sentiments while also arguing that Article IV of the Outer Space Treaty (OST) already enables the partial demilitarisation of space. Accepting the applicability of IHL in space, in Russia's logic, would overturn the principles of the OST.Of course, the issue of the need for pure legally-binding instruments and the status of non-legally-binding measures persist between states. These matters might sound mundane to many, including veterans of the space sector. However, it is important to note that with no common principles for governing space, we may end up in a situation where no advancements are made to govern the use of dual-use technologies or the deployment of space-based conventional armaments. Resolving the debates about the founding principles of outer space security, safety, and sustainability is essential to achieve stable, universally-applicable treaties. Our Reading Menu[Twitter Thread] Why does chatGPT make up fake academic papers? by David Smerdon[Report] Controlling the innovation chain: China's strategy to become a science & technology superpower[Paper] Digital Power China This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hightechir.substack.com

Representative-elect for California's 43rd congressional district, Robert Garcia, plans to use a 1939 vintage Superman comic book as the text for his oath of office. The other two items he will use are a photo of his parents, who he said were lost to COVID-19, and his citizenship certificate. The use of the comic book is not illegal, according to Article IV of the US Constitution, which states that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States”. Throughout history, newly elected members of Congress have used different texts, including Hebrew scripture, the Quran, and the Bhagavad Gita. -------------------- *Check Out All Our Podcasts!* Geek Freaks Podcast: https://linktr.ee/GeekFreaks Pushing Buttons: https://linktr.ee/PushingButtonsPodcast TrekFreaks: https://linktr.ee/TrekFreaks Headlines: https://tinyurl.com/2p8bvu6d Geek Freaks Interviews: https://linktr.ee/GeekFreaksInterviews Outlast Podcast: https://linktr.ee/OutlastPodcast Round Three: https://linktr.ee/RoundThree Disney Moms Gone Wrong: https://linktr.ee/disneymomsgonewrong Sloop: https://www.patreon.com/GeekFreakspodcast -------------------- *Hang Out With Us!* Discord: https://discord.gg/6Jrvyb2 Twitter: twitter.com/geekfreakspod Facebook: facebook.com/groups/227307812330853/ Instagram: instagram.com/geekfreakspodcast E-mail: thegeekfreakspodcast@gmail.com Twitch: twitch.tv/geekfreakspodcast Site: thegeekfreakspodcast.com --------------------- *Support Us!* Patreon: https://patreon.com/GeekFreakspodcast Store: redbubble.com/people/GeekFreaks

By Pastor Brad Watson

Series: Firm Foundations Speaker: Michael Baines

[Hey there! This blog will always be free to read, but it's also how I pay my bills. So, if you like what you read, please consider a paid subscription.]This Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer will bring the Respect for Marriage Act to the floor for a vote — the piece of legislation meant to protect marriage equality in the event that this current Supreme Court eventually decides to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges, the landmark case that legalized same-sex marriage in 2015.This past July, the House overwhelmingly passed their version of the bill, with 47 Republicans joining the full Democratic caucus (and seven GOP members not voting).Action on the Senate version of the bill was delayed until after the midterm election in what was seen as a clear effort to garner necessary GOP support in exchange for the issue not being weaponized against them in the final stretch of campaigning.So, here we are: on Monday, Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), the bill's leader, and Kyrsten Sinema (who caucuses with the Democrats) were joined by GOP Senators Rob Portman (OH), Susan Collins (ME), and Thom Tillis (NC) in a statement describing how the bill addresses the controversy of this issue and urging their colleagues to support its passage.The vote on Weds. is for cloture, the part of this whole process in which the full Senate advances a piece of legislation to a final vote by moving to restrict debate (otherwise known as overcoming the filibuster threshold of 60 votes). That cloture vote will set a time limit of 30 hours for consideration on the bill, and then, a final vote can be taken on whether or not to pass it. (Obviously, successful cloture votes almost always lead to final passage.)So, by the end of Friday, unless we're due for some big, unforeseen surprise, millions of families will have an additional layer of protection against marriage discrimination.Sounds great, right? Not so fast.You've probably heard about this bill along with the word “codify”, as in: this bill will codify marriage equality into federal law.It will not. The word “codify” has been used very fast and loose by much of political media over the past 24 hours in describing this bill, and it's just plain wrong and deeply misleading.Here's what the bill does specifically regarding marriage licenses: 1. It requires the federal government to recognize same-sex marriage licenses. If Obergefell should fall, the federal government would still protect those marriages in every aspect under its purview (everything from Social Security benefits to military families).2. It requires states that would not issue same-sex marriage licenses to recognize those licenses issued in states where legal. If you read the senators' statement, this is what they meant by “the bill would guarantee that valid marriages between two individuals are given full faith and credit, regardless of the couple's sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin”. That's referencing Article IV, Section I of the Constitution. Basically, a same-sex marriage license issued in California would be honored in Texas, even if Obergefell is overturned and Texas bans same-sex marriage licenses from being issued under its state authority.This is problematic for many reasons, one of the more obvious of which is that not every family living in an anti-LGBTQ state can travel to a pro-LGBTQ state to procure a marriage license. (You know those periodic reminders about why people can't simply move out of hurricane zones because it costs money to move and restart somewhere else? Same principle here. Many folks can't afford this nonsense.)Currently, the constitutions of thirty states—in some way, shape, or form—ban same-sex marriage, and have only been prevented from being enforced by Obergefell. If that precedent should fall, all of those state constitutional bans would be enforceable unless repealed before then.In 2020, Nevada became the first (and so far, only) state to repeal its constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Here, I'll make it a bit easier with a visual I shamelessly stole from Wikipedia. Do you see all that red and black? Those are various degrees of bans (some just marriages, some both marriages and civil unions, and some go further than that). Everyone living in those parts of the country will be unable to procure a same-sex marriage license where they reside.Some of these would certainly be repealed before then (California and Oregon) and some would not (Mississippi, Arkansas, etc.)So, why not pass a bill that guarantees full marriage equality throughout the United States? That's where this gets upsetting and complicated.First, the bill would get challenged and probably thrown out for legal reasons that are too complicated to get into here within space constraints and which I, frankly, don't feel qualified to convey with 100% accuracy.Bigger to me is the most immediate problem: even with marriage equality more popular than ever (Gallup reported 71% support for it among Americans this past June), we simply cannot reach 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. There are not ten Republican senators who would support full marriage equality.You might be thinking: gee, if Americans overwhelmingly support this, wouldn't GOP senators face consequences at the ballot box for failing to support it?Some would! Most would not — at least not enough to be the deciding factor. We just don't have ten Republican senators who are vulnerable enough — or, perhaps, feel vulnerable enough — to be pressured into supporting a full marriage equality bill.This is not unique. Last year, Gallup reported 55 percent of Americans identify as pro-choice, the highest rate taken by the survey since 1996, and yet, despite recent electoral losses that were clearly due to the Dobbs decision, the vast majority of Republican elected officials clearly do not feel much pressure to change their policy views on abortion access.The GOP, true to form, would rather take their chances with their base on this issue in an election. They think it's worth the risk.I'd like to believe most of them are wrong, and it'd be great if we could assume this will be enough of an issue that gets enough of them defeated in 2024 to make the difference. But that scenario is an entanglement of assumptions that risks everything.Start here: the 2024 Senate map is brutal for Democrats. 33 seats will be up, 23 of them ours. We know that we *will* have tight Democratic incumbent seats to defend in Arizona, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, Ohio, PA, and West Virginia. That's at least eight seats.The GOP has maybe three: Florida, Missouri, and Indiana. And I'm being generous to us by saying those are "maybe" tight seats. I'm also being generous by not including Virginia for us because Sen. Tim Kaine is a strong incumbent. But that seat is far from guaranteed.But we're not done yet. Some of our incumbents may retire or decline to run again. Possible are Jon Tester (Montana) and Angus King (Maine, who caucuses with Democrats). We could lose a critical incumbency advantage in Maine and Montana.Then there's ticket-splitting. That's a significant disadvantage in swing states for a president's party. Enough voters could decide to keep Pres. Biden but vote for a GOP senator.I don't think that folks realize that we are already at steep odds against holding the Senate in 2024. The odds are definitely against us. It's partly why getting Rev. Warnock (D-GA) reelected next month is so important. He could be the seat that makes the difference for the long haul.It's quite possible we barely break even in 2024 (and honestly, that feels overly optimistic), and the Reverend's seat wounds up keeping us at 50-50.And if Manchin, who is up for reelection in 2024, does win and is part of that 50-50, we may not get a chance to revisit legislation like this, anyway.I think it is very foolish to assume that we'll be able to put full protections in place after the 2024 election if Obergefell is overturned. It could very well happen that we somehow do way better-than-expected, reelect Pres. Biden in a landslide, and still fall just short of holding the Senate. What then?No, I think it is completely ridiculous to risk everything on a hope and a prayer that we outperform against bad Senate odds in 2024. In the meantime, we can considerably shore up protections with this bill.I'm not happy with it. I'm angry, and I'm worried. I think these Republicans are hypocritical bigots, and it infuriates me that they're encouraging and leveraging hatred for their own bottom line. I am enraged at their cynical pandering. This bill pisses me off.But it's not about me being happy. It's about survival. It's about putting up a wall of protection that could shield millions of families from state-sanctioned discrimination.We don't have any other reasonable options here. But if we do pass this, we'll have protections for millions of families that otherwise wouldn't have had them, and then, we'll keep fighting for more. It's painfully slow, incremental progress. Disheartening and exhausting and necessary.Every senator needs to vote for this bill.Charlotte's Web Thoughts is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Hi, I'm Charlotte Clymer, and this is Charlotte's Web Thoughts, my Substack. It's completely free to access and read, but it's also how my bills! So, please do kindly consider upgrading to a paid subscription: just $7/month or save money with the $70/annual sub. You can also go way above and beyond by becoming a Lifetime Member at $210. Get full access to Charlotte's Web Thoughts at charlotteclymer.substack.com/subscribe

Co-Hosts: Adam Sommer, Rachel ParkerGuest: Reece Ellishttps://heartlandpod.com/Sign Up  at Heartland POD  Patreon For Extras!“”Change The Conversation.”All Ballot Measures: https://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/petitions/2022BallotMeasuresAmendment 1: This one comes to us FROM the Missouri general assembly, in other words Republicans wanted to put this on in order to add it to the constitution. The question: Do you want to amend the Missouri Constitution to:allow the General Assembly to override the current constitutional restrictions of state investments by the state treasurer; andallow state investments in municipal securities possessing one of the top five highest long term ratings or the highest short term rating?This basically shifts greater discretion to the State Treasurer to make decisions on how to invest money. It COULD have a monetary benefit to the state of a couple million dollars, but that is not a guarantee. The reality here is that there is a huge push by the GOP to end what they call “woke” investments - basically divest all public money from anything that looks like green energy or touches a company that might be friendly to equity and equal rights. This one is an EASY NO for me, we don't need this change. It's a political move - not a public benefit move. Just another way for the GOP to fight a culture war that they have invented. Current Text of Constitution in question: https://ballotpedia.org/Article_IV,_Missouri_Constitution#:~:text=Section%2015,-Text%20of%20Section&text=The%20state%20treasurer%20shall%20be,by%20the%20department%20of%20revenue.Proposed Change: https://house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills211/hlrbillspdf/0587H.03T.pdfAmendment 4:  this one is really simple - yet again we have the missouri GOP majority trying to take over local control wherever they can to keep democrats from having any say in policy - Amendment 4 would change a current provision of law that requires the city of Kansas City to provide 20% of its city budget to the city policy department by requiring that be a 25% allocation. Why? Because the KC City counsel, a local government body made up of locally elected official took money from the budget and that made people made. It's really that simple. Republicans from hours away want to tell the folks in KC how to spend their money. Another very easy NO vote for me. Amendment 5: This amendment moves the control of the national guard into amore direct line from the Governor's office. I've seen democrats opposed to this one, I've also talked to folks involved with the national guard and overall this amendment seems to make Missouri's set up similar to nearly every other state - I understand the argument from some Democrats that this is just a political power move here, I'm not so sure that argument holds water. That being said, I'm also not sure I see the point of this amendment OTHER than to give the Governor more power. And for that reason alone, Im a NO vote on amendment 5, but I'm not sure in the end it truly matters which way this goes. Constitutional Convention: Missouri law requires that every 20 years the voters have a chance to vote to have a constitutional convention. The law provides for procedures and, in reality, would be quite a show. It would be interesting, but unlikely to be worth much. Even IF the convention came up with proposals, all of those proposals would then have to go to the voters for ratification. I've seen a handful of Dems pushing this issue as a chance to use the ballot box for issues - in a reliance that MO voters continue our streak of supporting more progressive measures when they are not tied to a political party - but I think that is a drastic miscalculation of how the parties will interact with proposed amendments. I'm a  NO  on this one. Amendment 3:Perfect or good? https://empowermissouri.org/amendment-3/Reece Ellis very smart thread on twitter: https://twitter.com/TheReeceEllis/status/1587421773624229892 Emerson college pollWhen it comes to Missouri Amendment 3, legalizing the recreatiooters-back-marijuana-legalization-ballot-initiative-in-new-poll-but-support-is-tightening-a-week-before-election-day/nal use of marijuana, 47% of the respondents plan to support the measure. Meanwhile, 39% plan to oppose it, and 14% are still unsure.https://emersoncollegepolling.com/missouri-2022-republican-eric-schmitt-maintains-double-digit-lead-over-democrat-trudy-busch-valentine/Summary Articles:https://missouriindependent.com/2022/11/01/st-louis-mayor-tishaura-jones-announces-opposition-to-missouri-marijuana-amendment/https://www.kcur.org/politics-elections-and-government/2022-11-02/missouri-amendment-3-legalize-marijuana-recreational-pot-cannabis-election-2022https://www.marijuanamoment.net/missouri-v

Co-Hosts: Adam Sommer, Rachel ParkerGuest: Reece Ellishttps://heartlandpod.com/Sign Up  at Heartland POD  Patreon For Extras!“”Change The Conversation.”All Ballot Measures: https://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/petitions/2022BallotMeasuresAmendment 1: This one comes to us FROM the Missouri general assembly, in other words Republicans wanted to put this on in order to add it to the constitution. The question: Do you want to amend the Missouri Constitution to:allow the General Assembly to override the current constitutional restrictions of state investments by the state treasurer; andallow state investments in municipal securities possessing one of the top five highest long term ratings or the highest short term rating?This basically shifts greater discretion to the State Treasurer to make decisions on how to invest money. It COULD have a monetary benefit to the state of a couple million dollars, but that is not a guarantee. The reality here is that there is a huge push by the GOP to end what they call “woke” investments - basically divest all public money from anything that looks like green energy or touches a company that might be friendly to equity and equal rights. This one is an EASY NO for me, we don't need this change. It's a political move - not a public benefit move. Just another way for the GOP to fight a culture war that they have invented. Current Text of Constitution in question: https://ballotpedia.org/Article_IV,_Missouri_Constitution#:~:text=Section%2015,-Text%20of%20Section&text=The%20state%20treasurer%20shall%20be,by%20the%20department%20of%20revenue.Proposed Change: https://house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills211/hlrbillspdf/0587H.03T.pdfAmendment 4:  this one is really simple - yet again we have the missouri GOP majority trying to take over local control wherever they can to keep democrats from having any say in policy - Amendment 4 would change a current provision of law that requires the city of Kansas City to provide 20% of its city budget to the city policy department by requiring that be a 25% allocation. Why? Because the KC City counsel, a local government body made up of locally elected official took money from the budget and that made people made. It's really that simple. Republicans from hours away want to tell the folks in KC how to spend their money. Another very easy NO vote for me. Amendment 5: This amendment moves the control of the national guard into amore direct line from the Governor's office. I've seen democrats opposed to this one, I've also talked to folks involved with the national guard and overall this amendment seems to make Missouri's set up similar to nearly every other state - I understand the argument from some Democrats that this is just a political power move here, I'm not so sure that argument holds water. That being said, I'm also not sure I see the point of this amendment OTHER than to give the Governor more power. And for that reason alone, Im a NO vote on amendment 5, but I'm not sure in the end it truly matters which way this goes. Constitutional Convention: Missouri law requires that every 20 years the voters have a chance to vote to have a constitutional convention. The law provides for procedures and, in reality, would be quite a show. It would be interesting, but unlikely to be worth much. Even IF the convention came up with proposals, all of those proposals would then have to go to the voters for ratification. I've seen a handful of Dems pushing this issue as a chance to use the ballot box for issues - in a reliance that MO voters continue our streak of supporting more progressive measures when they are not tied to a political party - but I think that is a drastic miscalculation of how the parties will interact with proposed amendments. I'm a  NO  on this one. Amendment 3:Perfect or good? https://empowermissouri.org/amendment-3/Reece Ellis very smart thread on twitter: https://twitter.com/TheReeceEllis/status/1587421773624229892 Emerson college pollWhen it comes to Missouri Amendment 3, legalizing the recreatiooters-back-marijuana-legalization-ballot-initiative-in-new-poll-but-support-is-tightening-a-week-before-election-day/nal use of marijuana, 47% of the respondents plan to support the measure. Meanwhile, 39% plan to oppose it, and 14% are still unsure.https://emersoncollegepolling.com/missouri-2022-republican-eric-schmitt-maintains-double-digit-lead-over-democrat-trudy-busch-valentine/Summary Articles:https://missouriindependent.com/2022/11/01/st-louis-mayor-tishaura-jones-announces-opposition-to-missouri-marijuana-amendment/https://www.kcur.org/politics-elections-and-government/2022-11-02/missouri-amendment-3-legalize-marijuana-recreational-pot-cannabis-election-2022https://www.marijuanamoment.net/missouri-v

Joined by Andrew Sullivan, Committee Member & Dan Trabucco, Selectperson to discuss the importance of voting at the upcoming town meeting for Article IV appropriating additional funds for the Community Center Project.   Podcast & Live Radio Show on WATD 95.9 McNamara Broker Team Boston Connect Real Estate Sharon McNamara | Mary Baker | Melissa Wallace Facebook Live every Tuesday at 6:15 pm @ facebook.com/McNamaraBrokerTeam Follow our team on Instagram @McNamaraBrokerTeam

If you've been following our discussion over the last few weeks about each article of the U.S. Constitution, you know the Founders created the legislative, executive and federal judiciary with Articles 1-3.  But it took far more than just organization at the federal level to create our government.  Enter Article 4, which guarantees republicanism to every state.  Why is that so important and vital in creating a long-lasting peaceful system in which we have both a federal government alongside 50 state governments and what is a regime? Join our panel and returning guest, Will Morrisey, Professor Emeritus at Hillsdale College to find out!

Have you heard of the State of Jefferson movement? Are you distressed about the loss of liberty and the economic & cultural devastation in California? Should Inland California be perpetually abused and taken advantage of by the coastal "elites" and Sacramento politicians? Are you familiar with Article IV, Section III, of the United States Constitution? Don't miss this fascinating discussion. The guest for this episode is Mark Baird, who has been active in the State of Jefferson movement for several years. Send feedback and questions via email: californialibertyproject@protonmail.com. Make sure to subscribe to and rate the California Liberty Project on Apple, Spotify, and Google podcasts. Follow California Liberty Project on Instagram. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/californialibertyproject/message

Welcome back to the Law School Toolbox podcast! Today, we're discussing how to identify and work through Privileges and Immunities Clause issues on a law school exam. In this episode we discuss: Distinguishing between the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV of the Constitution and the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment What steps to take to identify whether the Privileges and Immunities Clause applies The Dormant Commerce Clause The two requirements that must be met for a state to pass a law violating the Privileges and Immunities Clause Analyzing two hypos, from the February 2005 and July 2018 California bar exams Resources: “Listen and Learn” series (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/law-school-toolbox-podcast-substantive-law-topics/#listen-learn) Tutoring for Law School Success (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/tutoring-for-law-school-success/) California Bar Examination – Essay Questions and Selected Answers, February 2005 (https://nwculaw.edu/pdf/bar/February%202005%20Essays%20and%20Sample%20Answers.pdf) California Bar Examination – Essay Questions and Selected Answers, July 2018 (https://www.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/0/documents/admissions/Examinations/July2018_CBX.pdf) Podcast Episode 298: Listen and Learn – The Dormant Commerce Clause (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/podcast-episode-298-listen-and-learn-the-dormant-commerce-clause/) Download the Transcript  (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/episode-350-listen-and-learn-privileges-and-immunities-clause-con-law/) If you enjoy the podcast, we'd love a nice review and/or rating on Apple Podcasts (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/law-school-toolbox-podcast/id1027603976) or your favorite listening app. And feel free to reach out to us directly. You can always reach us via the contact form on the Law School Toolbox website (http://lawschooltoolbox.com/contact). If you're concerned about the bar exam, check out our sister site, the Bar Exam Toolbox (http://barexamtoolbox.com/). You can also sign up for our weekly podcast newsletter (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/get-law-school-podcast-updates/) to make sure you never miss an episode! Thanks for listening! Alison & Lee

Readings* Psalm 119:41–48* Psalm 73* Proverbs 31:10–31* John 21:1–25* Augsburg Confession, XX, 1–18CommemorationToday we commemorate the Presentation of the Augsburg Confession. Presented to the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V at Augsburg, Germany, on 25 June 1530, the Augsburg Confession presents the theology of the Lutheran Church and of the Reformation. At the heart of the Confession is justification by grace alone through faith alone for the sake of Christ alone — presented primarily in Article IV, often called the ‘article on which the Church stands or falls'. Through the Augsburg Confession, the Lutheran Reformers began the arduous task of removing the corruption that had crept into the Church over centuries and restoring to its rightful place the true core of Christianity: Justificatio Sola Gratia Sola Fide Solo Christo — justification by grace alone through faith alone by and through Christ alone.ReaderCorey J. MahlerCopyright NoticesUnless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are from the Holy Bible, English Standard Version®, copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.Unless otherwise indicated, all quotations from the Lutheran Confessions are from Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions, copyright © 2005, 2006 by Concordia Publishing House. Used by permission. All rights reserved. To purchase a copy of Concordia, call 800-325-3040.Support the show

In June of 1973, The leader of the Soviet Union, Leonid Brezhnev arrived in the United States and for ten days even the Watergate investigation stopped as Richard Nixon finished an agreement that called for the prevention of Nuclear War. It read: “The United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, hereinafter referred to as the Parties…Guided by the objectives of strengthening world peace and international security; conscious that nuclear war would have devastating consequences for mankind; proceeding from the desire to bring about conditions in which the danger of an outbreak of nuclear war anywhere in the world would be reduced and ultimately eliminated;Proceeding from their obligations under the Charter of the United Nations regarding the maintenance of peace, refraining from the threat or use of force and the avoidance of war, and in conformity with the agreements to which either Party has subscribed…Reaffirming that the development of relations between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is not directed against other countries and their interests… have agreed as follows:Article I. The United States and the Soviet Union agree that an objective of their policies is to remove the danger of nuclear war and of the use of nuclear weapons. Accordingly, the Parties agree that they will act in such a manner as to prevent the development of situations capable of causing a dangerous exacerbation of their relations, as to avoid military confrontations, and as to exclude the outbreak of nuclear war between them and between either of the Parties and other countries.Article II. The Parties agree, in accordance with Article I… to proceed from the premise that each Party will refrain from the threat or use of force against the other Party, against the allies of the other Party and against other countries, in circumstances which may endanger international peace and security. The Parties agree that they will be guided by these considerations in the formulation of their foreign policies and in their actions in the field of international relations.Article III. The Parties undertake to develop their relations with each other and with other countries in a way consistent with the purposes of this Agreement.Article IV. If at any time relations between the Parties or between either Party and other countries appear to involve the risk of a nuclear conflict, or if relations between countries not parties to this Agreement appear to involve the risk of nuclear war between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or between either Party and other countries, the United States and the Soviet Union, acting in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, shall immediately enter into urgent consultations with each other and make every effort to avert this risk.Article V. Each Party shall be free to inform the Security Council of the United Nations, the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the Governments of allied or other countries of the progress and outcome of consultations initiated in accordance with Article IV of this Agreement…” (Courtesy of the website Alpha History)In this episode we follow the two leaders as they work together to create a much safer World, and we see the developing personal friendship between the two men. A friendship that paid dividends for every living thing on planet Earth. This show will leave you wondering just what might have been if the Democrats and the media elites plot to remove the greatest strategist of the age from office had not succeeded. Btw... The guys in the submarine trapped off the Florida Keys were rescued. Just so you know 

Welcome back to the Bar Exam Toolbox podcast! Today, we're discussing how to identify and work through Privileges and Immunities Clause issues on the bar exam. In this episode, we discuss: Distinguishing between the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV of the Constitution and the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment What steps to take to identify whether the Privileges and Immunities Clause applies The Dormant Commerce Clause The two requirements that must be met for a state to pass a law violating the Privileges and Immunities Clause Analyzing two hypos, from the February 2005 and July 2018 California bar exams Resources: “Listen and Learn” series (https://barexamtoolbox.com/bar-exam-toolbox-podcast-archive-by-topic/bar-exam-toolbox-podcast-explaining-individual-mee-and-california-bar-essay-questions/#listen-learn) Private Bar Exam Tutoring (https://barexamtoolbox.com/private-bar-exam-tutoring/) The Brainy Bar Bank: Streamlining Bar Study (https://barexamtoolbox.com/brainy-bar-bank/) California Bar Examination – Essay Questions and Selected Answers, February 2005 (https://nwculaw.edu/pdf/bar/February%202005%20Essays%20and%20Sample%20Answers.pdf) California Bar Examination – Essay Questions and Selected Answers, July 2018 (https://www.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/0/documents/admissions/Examinations/July2018_CBX.pdf) Podcast Episode 44: Tackling a California Bar Exam Essay: Constitutional Law (https://barexamtoolbox.com/podcast-episode-44-tackling-a-california-bar-exam-essay-constitutional-law/) Podcast Episode 76: Tackling an MEE Con Law Essay Question (https://barexamtoolbox.com/podcast-episode-76-tackling-an-mee-con-law-essay-question/) Podcast Episode 135: Listen and Learn – The Dormant Commerce Clause (https://barexamtoolbox.com/podcast-episode-135-listen-and-learn-the-dormant-commerce-clause/) Download the Transcript (https://barexamtoolbox.com/episode-174-listen-and-learn-privileges-and-immunities-clause-con-law/) If you enjoy the podcast, we'd love a nice review and/or rating on Apple Podcasts (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/bar-exam-toolbox-podcast-pass-bar-exam-less-stress/id1370651486) or your favorite listening app. And feel free to reach out to us directly. You can always reach us via the contact form on the Bar Exam Toolbox website (https://barexamtoolbox.com/contact-us/). Finally, if you don't want to miss anything, you can sign up for podcast updates (https://barexamtoolbox.com/get-bar-exam-toolbox-podcast-updates/)! Thanks for listening! Alison & Lee

Our greatest reality and hope is that, by grace alone, we have been made beloved children of God and inheritors of God's eternal kingdom. GRACE is the final word I leave with this church family. Grace was the first word that I preached on September 10, 2000, and the final word I left with the family of St. Paul's Lutheran in Maumee, Ohio on August 20, 2000.   Article IV of the Augsburg Confession on Justification teaches that we cannot be justified before God by our own strength, merits or works, but are freely justified for Christ's sake through faith, when we believe that we are received into favor and that our sins are forgiven for Christ's sake, who by His death has made satisfaction for our sins. This faith God accounts as righteousness in His sight. Martin Luther said that this is the article of faith upon which the Church stands or falls. Indeed, the reality of God's grace in Christ is the hope upon which we stand or fall.   Relentlessly trust that your primary reality and hope is in the grace of God present in your life in Jesus Christ - alone.  This podcast is Pastor Steve Brown's final sermon as Senior Pastor at St Luke Lutheran Church, his Release from Call, and his final Blessing.  Subscribe to stay updated with the latest content. Follow St Luke Lutheran Church: YouTube Instagram Facebook Website

There are over 7.9 billion people on the planet, an orbital body that moves around the sun at a speed of 66,660 miles per hour. On any given day there are so many human actions as we all go about our individual lives. Is there a number to capture a snapshot of what’s happening in any given moment, or is it best to focus on a handful of stories at a time? Charlottesville Community Engagement seeks to make sense of some of the activity across an increasingly expanded geographic space. I’m the host, Sean Tubbs. The program is free, but your financial support will help Town Crier Productions grow and expand! On today’s fast-moving program:Area transportation officials learn about how a mobile app is seeking to make using transit in Dallas easier and more cost-effectiveA new climate change report has been published by the IPCCCharlottesville announces a campaign to increase energy efficiency and save water in public buildings The Virginia General Assembly convenes to begin finalization of the budget, consider suspension of Virginia gas tax Need a tree? Charlottesville Area Tree Steward sale is this Saturday! In today’s first Patreon-fueled public service announcement, the Charlottesville Area Tree Stewards are preparing to hold their first in-person tree sale since 2019. On April 9 from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., Charlottesville Area Tree Stewards will open up their tree nursery at the Fontaine Research Park and will sell saplings of native trees, some of which are hard to find from commercial sources for between $5 and $15. There will be large trees from Birch to Sycamore, smaller trees from Blackgum to Witch Hazel, and shrubbery! Visit charlottesvilleareatreestewards.org to learn more!Governor Youngkin’s gas tax holiday is before the Virginia General Assembly Both Houses of the Virginia General Assembly met very briefly in special session on Monday to complete work begun earlier this year. Governor Glenn Youngkin issued a proclamation in late March convening the session, as read by the clerks of both the House of Delegates and the Senate. “A proclamation that in accordance with the provisions of Article IV, Section VI and Article V, Section V of the Constitution of Virginia and the powers thereby invested in the Governor to call a special session of the General Assembly, I, Glenn Youngkin, Governor of Virginia do hereby summon the members of the Senate and the House of Delegates constituting the General Assembly of Virginia, to meet in Special Session commencing the Fourth Day of April of 2022 for the purpose of completion of the 2023-2024 biennial budget.”Both the House of Delegates and Senate adopted bills to establish the rules for the special session. Delegate Terry Kilgore (R-1) explains House Joint Resolution 6001.“Basically it allows us to consider House Bill 29 and House Bill 30 and any other conference reports that were continued and still ongoing as we adjourned the 2022 regular session,” Kilgore said. “It would also allow legislation as may be communicated from the Governor.”Some Senators objected to the Governor’s ability to suggest legislation. “It’s up to us to decide what we want to consider in special sessions, not the Governor,” said Senator Scott Surovell (D-36). “I think that’s been the prerogative of our chambers forever. I think it’s important to protect that prerogative not only for this session but the for the future.”Surovell made an amendment to ban this, but later withdrew this request. Memorials and commendations are allowed, as well as confirmation of judges. Any legislation sent down to the legislature from the executive branch would need to go through the committee process in both Chambers. So far, Governor Youngkin has introduced one bill to eliminate the statewide gas tax from May 1 to July 31, as well as other provisions. This has been referred to the House Finance Committee. (HB6001). The Virginia Senate received the resolution from the House of Delegates, as confirmed by Lieutenant Governor Winsome Earle-Sears. “Senator Saslaw, the senior Senator from Fairfax County, is ordered to inform the House of Delegate that the Senate is duly organized and ready to proceed to business,” said the Lieutenant Governor. Budget conferees met immediately after the meeting. Delegate Barry Knight (R-81) gave an update from the House’s perspective. “Budget negotiations are ongoing,” Knight said. “We are talking to them a little bit back and forth. They are kind of taking their time and we are ready to meet any time they are.” Both Houses can reconvene by giving 48 hours notice. Stay tuned!IPCC releases new report seeking quick action on greenhouse gas emissionsA new report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change indicates that production of greenhouse gas emissions across planet Earth were at their highest levels in recorded history, but suggests the rate may be slowing. “Without immediate and deep emissions reductions across all sectors, limiting global warming to 1.5°C is beyond reach,” reads the press release to mark the approval yesterday of an IPCC working group’s report called Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change.The report states an 85 percent drop in the costs of solar and wind energy, as well as a push in many countries for laws and policies to reduce energy efficiency, limit deforestation, and create new forms of renewable energy. The report encourages creation of compact, walkable cities, a transition to electric fleets for public transportation, and further development of technologies to capture carbon from the atmosphere and store it.According to the release, the IPCC’s overall strategy is to reduce warming to 1.5°C requires the greenhouse gas emissions to peak before 2025, and to begin to have them reduced 43 percent by 2030. View a message from the IPCC on YouTube:What are local governments doing?Charlottesville Charlottesville City Council will have a work session on April 18 to discuss efforts by city staff toward a climate action plan. (visit the city’s website)This morning, the city announced the hiring of a company to review over forty public buildings to see how energy and water use can be reduced. CMTA Energy Solutions will perform the audit, which includes city schools. “The Technical Energy Audits currently underway are part of the first phase of an Energy Saving Performance Contract (ESPC) process that aligns directly with fulfilling the City of Charlottesville’s commitment to climate action and reducing its greenhouse gas emissions,” reads the news release that went out today. The city’s public buildings cover an area of 1.7 million square feet. The audit will inform plans to upgrade heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems, upgrade lighting, and install new plumbing. AlbemarleThe Albemarle Board of Supervisors adopted a Climate Action Plan on October 7, 2020. The Facilities and Environmental Services Department releases a quarterly report that includes updates on steps Albemarle is taking to reduce its contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. Here’s some highlights from the latest report:The grounds crew that takes care of county buildings are switching to all electric tools and vehicles. Albemarle will launch an “environmental stewardship hub” online to collect county resources for community members on county programs to promote biodiversity, clean water, climate action, and reduced waste. This should happen around Earth Day, or April 22Solar powered lights have been installed at electric vehicle charging stations at the McIntire Road County Office Building. County staff in the Environmental Services Division have developed a mapping resource to assist property owners with flooding issues, sinkholes, poor water quality. There’s a whole article in the report about how collecting this information in one place can identify causes to specific problems such as blocked drainage pipes. University of VirginiaThe University of Virginia’s reductions emission plans are documented in the 2020-2030 UVA Sustainability Plan. The UVA Sustainability Office’s report to the Board of Visitors is available for review in the March meeting packet for the Buildings and Grounds Committee. (page 20 of this document)Some examples:Student programs include the Zero Waste Ambassadors program which seeks to increase composting across UVA Grounds, the Cville Solar Project, and something called the Shut the Sash ChallengeProfessor Ben Laugelli has a course this spring called Science, Technology, and Contemporary Issues: Designing for a Sustainable World that will seek to direct further ways UVA can reach its goals Other recent courses include Professor Kate Stephenson’s Writing about Food Justice, and Designing a Carbon-Neutral Future, Sustainability Leadership: From the Grounds Up, and Write ClimateSecond shout-out: RCA wants your photographs for a new contest!In today’s second Patreon-fueled shout-out, the Rivanna Conservation Alliance wants wildlife and nature photographers to enter their first-ever photography contest! They want high-resolution photos related to the Rivanna watershed and the winning entries will be displayed at the 2022 Riverfest Celebration on May 1. The two categories are 16 and under, and those over the age of 17. You can send in two entries, and the work may be used to supplement Rivanna Conservation Alliance publications. For more information, visit rivannariver.org.Dallas transit official briefs transit partnership on mobile app trip planningThe Jefferson Area Regional Transit Partnership was created a few years ago to serve as a clearinghouse to improve the efficiency of public transit in a community with multiple service providers. At their recent meeting in March, they learned about how Dallas Area Rapid Transit has benefited from having an office of innovation. “We now have the largest on-demand offering in North America,” said, Greg Elsborg, who has been Chief Innovation Officer since 2019 Since that time, he has focused on a few areas. “One was to try and drive a culture of innovation across the agency and pull ideas from our employers and from communities and us, and that’s been an exciting activity set,” Elsborg said. “But another area has been the continued development and scalability of a mobile trip-planning and management application that we have for our transit providers.”Dallas Area Rapid Transit covers 760 square miles including Dallas, and twelve other cities. On-demand service is available in a third of the service area. Part of their funding comes through a one cent sales tax, an idea that has been floated in this community but is not authorized by the General Assembly.  (view the presentation on the GoPass Mobility Platform)The DART system includes light rail and community rail, as well as a large bus fleet. The first mobile application was created in 2013 to help make it easier for people to travel across multiple transit systems. There is a regional fare. “So I can pay to travel across the entire region and pay a reduced fare to travel through the commuter rail and to get point to point in Fort Worth, as well as in Denton County in the north, as well as DART’s 13 cities,” Elsborg said. To unite it all, DART built its first mobile app in 2013. There have been several iterations of the GoPass Mobility Platform to add more capabilities over time. In 2018, they added a feature to allow riders to transfer cash to their mobile phones at local retailers.“So if I’m an individual that doesn’t have a debit card or a credit card but I’d like to use the mobile app, then I could use trip finding in the app and some of the other features, but to buy tickets, I could go and load cash at a retailer,” Elsborg said. “They would scan a barcode on the app and then this loads the funds into the app directly.”In 2018, DART also introduced a fare-capping system where an individual user would no longer be charged after they’d paid a certain amount. The app tracks this information. “And there’s a really nice tracker inside the app that shows you how much you spent to get toward that fare cap total,” Elsborg said. The next year, DART introduced Multimodal Microtransit to the system which introduced on-demand services that can be used in conjunction with fixed routes. Soon there will be a new feature.“We have a partnership that we’re working on with Uber so that we can direct people to Uber rides as on-demand mode through our app without having to have an Uber account or pay for your ticket through Uber,” Elsborg said. “You do it throughout our app. And that will be an industry first when that comes out.” Elsborg said DART is seeking to add other transit agencies so that there can continue to be more investment into the platform. Currently they are running the mobile app functions for over 50 cities, including Charlotte, North Carolina. One of the agencies is the one for Tulsa, Oklahoma, which until recently was run by Jaunt CEO director Ted Rieck. “I kind of call this the Swiss army knife for mobile apps,” Rieck said. “I think as we look for ways to bring our region together on transit, a mobile app like this could be a starting point.” The platform also has connections to e-scooter services as well as bike-sharing programs. To learn more about the app, view the March meeting on YouTube. Four people have viewed it so far. Will you give it a watch on YouTube and demonstrate the power of the CCE bump? Support Town Crier Productions!Special announcement of a continuing promo with Ting! Are you interested in fast internet? Visit this site and enter your address to see if you can get service through Ting. If you decide to proceed to make the switch, you’ll get:Free installationSecond month of Ting service for freeA $75 gift card to the Downtown MallAdditionally, Ting will match your Substack subscription to support Town Crier Productions, the company that produces this newsletter and other community offerings. So, your $5 a month subscription yields $5 for TCP. Your $50 a year subscription yields $50 for TCP! The same goes for a $200 a year subscription! All goes to cover the costs of getting this newsletter out as often as possible. Learn more here! This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit communityengagement.substack.com/subscribe

A reader sent me an email about the influx of illegal aliens on our souther border. The question of whether or not this constituted an invasion and thereby requiring a response by the federal government under Article IV, Section 4 is one worth taking a closers look at. Not only the question of does this constitution an invasion or not, but what are the consequences of such a point of view?

Will Poland evoke Article IV of the North Atlantic Treaty due to tensions on the Belarus border? I don't know, but we'll discuss what these articles actually mean today --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

A reading of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Article IV.If you find this helpful, buy me a coffee:https://ko-fi.com/whatfreshl