Podcasts about federal authority

Today's discussion dives into a heated political exchange over immigration enforcement, state-level “tracking” initiatives, and accusations of judicial and institutional bias. The hosts react to claims surrounding Illinois Governor JB Pritzker's alleged database tracking ICE agents, concerns about future prosecutions, and broader arguments about law enforcement authority, political rhetoric, and public perception. The conversation escalates into a wider debate over immigration law, jury influence, and the dangers of politicized narratives shaping real-world outcomes.

The crew discusses the White House missing its offshore wind appeal deadline, France’s 12 GW tender with restrictions on Chinese permanent magnets, and WOMA 2027 planning. Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly newsletter on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on YouTube, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us! The Uptime Wind Energy Podcast brought to you by Strike Tape, protecting thousands of wind turbines from lightning damage worldwide. Visit strike tape.com. And now your hosts. Allen Hall: Welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. I’m your host, Allen. I’m here with Rosemary Barnes, who is in Australia, and our newest guest is Nikki Briggs, who is the new CCO of Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Welcome to the show, Nikki.  Nikki Briggs: Thank you. Nice to, nice to be here.  Allen Hall: So there’s the full docket, and Nikki’s gonna get indoctrinated today to the podcast, and she’s gonna be holding on tight because we have a really, uh, very controversial podcast. I think once Rosemary gets in here and starts talking about. Offshore wind. And I wanna lead off this week ’cause it is a big deal, although not many people are talking about it, that, uh, the White House missed a deadline to file an [00:01:00] appeal against all the offshore wind farms in the United States. And the feeling was, is that there was gonna be an appeal and they’re gonna push to slow down those projects or cancel those projects. And obviously, uh, one of the purchasers of one of the sites decided to sell it back to the US for about a. Billion US dollars, but the administration missed a key deadline for appeals, uh, which may indicate that they have other things to do besides fight offshore wind Now. The question really remains is, is this going to continue on that nothing is going to happen. Uh, hopefully all the wind projects that are being built at the moment will complete and we’ll be providing power to all the onshore locations, particularly up and down along the East coast. But, uh, there’s still a long way to go here. Rosemary, I know there’s been a lot of concern about what’s happened in the United States on offshore [00:02:00] wind for several months now. You think this is gonna be just a change of direction because there’s other things happening in the world.  Rosemary Barnes: To me, it just sounded like too hard to, unlikely to actually succeed and kind of keeps on drawing attention back to the issue. So better to just kind of let it quietly fade away and not talk about it anymore. Allen Hall: And there is a financial emphasis for those companies that have these wind farms because if they can get their projects done. They get paid sooner. They can produce power, obviously they’re gonna get paid sooner. So there is a big incentive to push, push, push, push. And a lot of the projects are delivering power right now. And I think the, the biggest one, which is uh, dominion Energy’s Project of Coastal Virginia, offshore Wind is doing that. So. All these wind projects that are kinder in a way I think are going to finish, which is gonna be a, a big relief to a lot of the states.  Rosemary Barnes: I don’t wanna talk about us, um, politics because I am not living there. But don’t you have midterms coming up and potential [00:03:00] for the situation to dramatically change? Like, my understanding is that the expectation is that there will be. More, um, democratic involvement in, in decision making after the midterms. And so surely, you know, like if they don’t, if they’re not acting now, then things are likely to be easier from here on out. Is that, is that a correct interpretation of what’s going on over there?  Allen Hall: Not correct. And Nikki, you can jump in here too. Congress can change and does every two years there’s elections in the US and so the full House of Representatives is voted in or out. So all 435 members of the House of Representatives have an election, but about a third of the Senate has an election. So the Senate doesn’t change as dramatically as the House does, but, uh, for everything that’s been codified into law, which happened a year and a half ago, uh, the executive branch can kind of do what they [00:04:00] want there. So there will be very little that Congress can do. Once a law is a pass and the executive branch can continue on,  Rosemary Barnes: it’s two year terms for your house of reps. Allen Hall: Yeah. It’s two years terms. Yeah.  Rosemary Barnes: That’s not very long. That’s not very good job security.  Allen Hall: It was never meant to be  Rosemary Barnes: in school. About a thousand years ago, I learned that, um, the Australian government is, is, is largely based on a combination of um, UK and. US government basically. But I think it’s a lot closer to the us. Um, and yeah, we have, I, I think we have not, we haven’t got fixed terms, but it’s usually about every three years and yeah, you lose a few, a few months, but we don’t, we don’t do the big song and dance about it that you do with all of the, um, pre-selection and all that stuff. We don’t do that. So our, our system is a lot quicker. Um, so yeah, I just wonder like how, how do you actually govern when you have to spend half of your time worried about, um, getting in and then you can only make plans for basically one year [00:05:00] ahead or two years ahead, like at the absolute maximum.  Allen Hall: That’s the problem with House of Representative is you nailed it right on the head, which is they’re constantly fundraising and trying to get to the next election. Two years is a short amount of time anymore. They didn’t used to do it like that, where the last six months, maybe a year were campaign time, but pretty much once they get an election over, which happens in November, they’re already campaigning for the next one. So it does lead to a lot of chaos where things don’t happen in the House of Representatives like. They used to maybe 20, 25 years ago. It’s changed dramatically and I don’t think Australia has that same issue weirdly enough. Although I would say you’re becoming more like the US in a lot of ways. That’s not one of them.  Rosemary Barnes: We’ve got some, there’s some things in place, like one of the advantages of basing our system on other countries as we could take. Take the bits that worked and see what, what we could already see what didn’t really work and um, you know, try to, try to take it, um, try to take care of that, ensure that it couldn’t happen. [00:06:00] So  Allen Hall: the offshore wind piece in America rolls into other offshore wind, uh, across Europe in that, uh, although US is reconsidering offshore wind in some sense. Europe is not. In fact, uh, France is getting very active. So you remember the France has been trying to launch, uh, offshore wind tenders for about two years. So you keep hearing France is gonna go to offshore wind, and then it didn’t really happen. Well, that political gridlock is, uh, over really how to pay for the renewables, uh, and how they’re gonna try to finance this thing. Meanwhile, uh, France has, uh. Less than what? Two gigawatts of offshore wind operating against a, a national target of about 15 gigawatts by 2035. Uh, so there’s a lot of catching up to do the 12. They just had a 12 gigawatt package. They announced where, uh, they, they’re [00:07:00] attempting to really catch up all at once, uh, but buried inside of this tender. Is a supply chain rule, which is very unique. So coming outta Scotland and all the things that happen with Ming Yang in Scotland, France is doing something very similar. France is limiting the percentage or the quantity of permanent magnets that can come from China. So France is saying, Hey, they don’t wanna get locked into an offshore, offshore wind supply chain that involves China specifically for, but they’re probably the most important ingredient, which is. Permanent magnets. The Netherlands is moving ahead also and has offered two one gigawatt offshore wind farms, and it’ll be permitting those pretty quickly. So all of a sudden, the offshore wind effort for some of the countries that have been quiet in Netherlands in particular, and then France, all of a sudden probably ’cause of what’s happening in the. The straight in the Middle East have decided to speed up their offshore wind [00:08:00] projects. Is this gonna be the right move? Do you think they’re gonna stick with this process of, of completing these projects or is this a spur of the moment decision that they’re gonna change their minds later on in the next year or two once things calm down to the Middle East? Rosemary Barnes: Yeah. I mean, if it is a, a knee jerk response to the. Specific right now problem and doesn’t seem very well advised because it’s gonna be years before they actually see any electricity entering their grid. I mean, France is a bit different to other European countries ’cause they’ve got so much nuclear and in general, uh, I think with the exception of like the year before last, they had that summer where it was really hot. They had heat waves and they had to shut down a lot of. Nuclear power plants because the cooling water was too hot. They, they couldn’t, they couldn’t put it back into the river. And, um, yeah, uh, river levels were too low in some cases. So in, in that year, they did have to import energy. Um, but in general, their energy exporters. So I don’t, I, I would be surprised if this [00:09:00] was in direct response to, you know, that I don’t think they have an electricity crisis right now. Um, and, uh, yeah, I think it’s probably more of a long-term plan.  Allen Hall: Are they gonna force the OEMs to build product in country? GE already has an offshore wind blade factory in France. And, uh, they can get a lot of components in Europe for sure. You could actually dictate what percentage of the wind turbine is built in France and what is built in Europe and what’s gonna be left to be imported in from China. You think this is where everybody is headed?  Rosemary Barnes: Yeah. I mean, I think it is. Smart move to make sure that you don’t have one single country locking down any critical part of your supply chain. So I’ll agree with that. I haven’t seen the exact wording, but it’s not like it’s just banned that anything comes from China. I mean, that would be a good way to make sure that you didn’t ever get a timely, uh, a project completed in time. Um. So, you know, that makes sense. But, you know, if no one [00:10:00] project can use a hundred percent Chinese magnets or I, I don’t know the wording, maybe they’re allowed to buy, um, the rare Earth materials from China and then turn them into magnets locally. I don’t, I don’t know what the wording is, but, um, it is going to require that, you know, some new manufacturers start up and I just wonder what kind of support they’re gonna provide for that and what kind of guarantees, because it’s not, um. So straightforward to just start up a new manufacturing facility for something that has never been made in that, in that area before. Um, you know, there’s a lot of risk and hard to get financing. They’re gonna want to have some, um, guarantees from the government or some support to, you know, make sure that the risk benefit is worth it.  Allen Hall: I think that’s probably the most important part of this, is the business aspect. You can’t spool up a 20 year business. In a year that’s hard to do and you’re not gonna do it if the supply chain can willy-nilly switch to an external supply chain to China, for example. So if you do set up [00:11:00] something complicated in France, I would almost bet that they would have to pass something in law and lock it in before you see a lot of investment happening that way. Similar things happen in the UK really is uh, with all the offshore wind growth and wanting to build turbines in the country. They’re gonna have to put some barriers in to keep the Chinese out, which they’re obviously doing  Rosemary Barnes: or provide direct support. They don’t necessarily need to make it a law. I think like the way we would do it in Australia is that the government would either co-invest or they would, you know, underride a loan or um, you know, guarantee revenue or something, something like that, to make all the pieces fall into place. I don’t think, um, law is the only way to do it.  Allen Hall: France obviously is gonna be able to choose from a couple of wind OEMs. Where do you think they’ll go is It’s pretty much right now, I guess it’s Siemens and Vestas for sure. I’m not even sure GE is offering a offshore wind turbine at the moment. Does France [00:12:00] have a Siemens or Vestas stake at the minute? Rosemary Barnes: Not that I know of, but what’s happening to the um, Bel Factory? The GE Blade Factory? That was. They were making blades for hall aids, which is the troubled platform that kind of turned them off. Offshore wind altogether. Um, yeah, I don’t, I don’t know what’s happened to that one.  Allen Hall: Remember that GE sold the LM factory, what up in Poland and Vestas ended up buying that? I wonder if something similar happened here.  Rosemary Barnes: Uh, yeah. I dunno. I need to, we should have, we should have looked it up before we started recording.  Allen Hall: The thing about this podcast is that we start putting the puzzle pieces together. Before the, the pieces are out on the table. And when you see the way that GE has really slowed down offshore, obviously they talked about it a number of times that they don’t like the offshore business and would like to finish vineyard wind and all the commitments they have and then pause until they can make sure they’re gonna make money on offshore wind. Vestas is going crazy and has made a lot of sales, [00:13:00] and I know Siemens is trying to get back into that offshore market. So you really have two players. If you are not gonna choose a Chinese turbine, you see image and you have Vestas. But onshoring, that work is an obvious, uh, French move, I think just like it was in the uk. Rosemary Barnes: I mean, assuming that they are not gonna be choosing, uh, Chinese manufacturers, given that they’re trying to move away from that, um, yeah. Complete dominance, but I mean, why couldn’t Ming Yang or someone supply turbines but just, you know, get their, their magnets from a local supplier instead? I mean, it’s very common that, you know, like European manufacturers, if they wanna sell in India, then they have to have a certain local, um, you know, amount of local manufacturing. So. Why wouldn’t a, a Chinese company do the same thing? So, yeah, I don’t think they’ve only got two choices, but. Those will be the obvious ones.  Allen Hall: As wind energy professionals, staying informed is crucial, and let’s face it difficult. That’s why the Uptime podcast [00:14:00] recommends PES Wind Magazine. PES Wind offers a diverse range of in-depth articles and expert insights that dive into the most pressing issues facing our energy future. Whether you’re an industry veteran or new to wind, PES Wind has the high quality content you need. Don’t miss out. Visit PES wind.com today. So Rosemary, after the successful WMA 2026 event in Melbourne, in which I know I mispronounced, but you’re just gonna have to let it go. There’s been a a ton of inquiries about WMA 2027 and I. I’m thinking, man, we just finished moment 2026. You ready for 2027? The answer is yes, we need to go.  Rosemary Barnes: I think it’s because the, um, certain other Australian wind energy events are spamming everyone’s inboxes with like multiple emails a day, months out. It’s got everyone thinking, gee, this conference is super annoying. Thought about that [00:15:00] non annoying conference that I went to.  Nikki Briggs: Yeah. Well I’m not pestering people, but if anybody wants to, you know, get signed up to be a sponsor for WMA 2027, reach out to me because, you know, we’re that not annoying conference. So, um, we gotta have good sponsors. And  Rosemary Barnes: that is true. That is one thing about, about Wilmar is we keep it really cheap for attendees, but it is still a high quality conference. And the main way that we’re able to do that is because we have really good sponsors that. Um, yeah, they, they provide money obviously, to pay for, uh, a large chunk of the event, but they also don’t expect to be allowed to get up and sell at people. Um, yeah, I, I don’t even know how we managed to get such great sponsors that are, you know, happy with that trade off, but I guess that, yeah, they’ve figured out that it isn’t actually that beneficial to get up and give a sales pitch to people who. Receptive to it. It is much better to just get up and talk about all the things that you know, and then the people who have problems that can be solved by what you [00:16:00] do will naturally get in touch with you. I mean. I think it works better. That’s, that’s my entire sales sales approach. And I guess everybody at the, at the conference, that’s what, yeah, that’s what we’re relying on. I think it’s a better way  Nikki Briggs: and we’re here to help and save you money.  Allen Hall: Yeah. And the Woma 2027 website is up. Just Google. It’s, and we’re looking for sponsors, although a number of sponsors, pretty much everybody from 26 who wants to be back into twenties. 27. So we’ll be, uh, reaching out to all of you and making sure that happens. But the conference is probably gonna get bigger in 2027 just because of the demand. So we’ll be looking for a, a couple of more key sponsors. We want you to get involved as soon as possible. You should do that by, in the us. You can do that by getting a hold of, of Nikki. It’s Nikki, N-I-K-K-I dot Briggs, B-R-I-G-G s@wglightning.com. Or you can just go to Nikki’s LinkedIn page and send her an InMail and, uh, get ahold of her that way or [00:17:00] connect with her on LinkedIn and she’d be glad to help you. Now, Rosemary, I know one of the things we talked about was, uh, some of the expansion of topics for 2027. There was a lot of feedback and we are paying close attention. And thanks to everybody who sent us feedback on the conference, uh, the number of five star reviews are really high, and I, I’m, I’m still a little shocked and um, maybe embarrassed by like, wow. Uh, that’s awesome. But we wanna expand on some of the topics for next year, and we’re talking about doing a blade masterclass and that which would involve rosemary. Maybe some others talking about some of the blade issues that exist around the world. And Rosemary, what are you thinking about?  Rosemary Barnes: Yeah, describing how the process works. ’cause that’s the, that’s probably one of the main things, or the main value that I bring to Australia is the time that I spent working at a, um, um. Wind turbine blade manufacturer, and you know, how does the design process work? What kind of testing do they do? What [00:18:00] does certification mean? Um, all those sorts of things. Uh, they, you might think, oh, I don’t really care about that ’cause I just use the blade once I’ve got it. But anytime you run into a problem, you do need to kind of know how all that stuff works, basically. So, um, yeah, we’ll give a, a masterclass on that topic and so you can come and get. You know, a bit of an understanding about how that works. Ask whatever questions that you’ve got that relate to your specific problems, but then, you know, even if you don’t have a problem now in the future when something comes up, you’ll have that knowledge to fall back on. And it just really helps to be able to know when something’s not right, um, when something wasn’t done right. Um, yeah, I mean there are always at some point an argument about, you know, who’s gonna pay. So it is really helpful to know if things have been done the way that they said that they would be. The way they should be. Um, yeah, but I’m also. I’m really keen to hear about what to include in the main conference. ’cause you know, it can’t be the same every year. Um, I’m super focused on, on blades and I, I think we, I [00:19:00] mean, blades is the biggest, the biggest topic in wind turbine o and m, so it makes sense that we would be focused on that and we’re, we will, but I have less of, um, yeah, in depth knowledge about what non blade issues people are really struggling with at the moment. So definitely be keen to hear from. Viewers about, um, sorry, I’ll say that again. Definitely be keen to hear about potential attendees about what topics they would wanna see covered to make sure that, yeah, it’s interesting and fresh every year.  Allen Hall: Can I circle back on the masterclass a little bit because I had my own little, little mini masterclass this past week looking at the IE specification for wind turbine blades, and I don’t know what prompted me to read that document. I thought it was gonna be a lot thicker than it was, and I was shocked at the lack of detail that on the requirement side, I always think the blade people must have millions of requirements to go [00:20:00] do. And it’s gonna be very technical and a lot of check boxes there, but turns out maybe not as many as I thought there would be. Rosemary Barnes: Oh yeah. That’s interesting that you’re, you’re surprised. Um. I mean, I haven’t worked with it closely since when I was doing my PhD, uh, the PhD was on, there was a, yeah, design of a family, family of wind turbine blades. And so, you know, I was looking at the standard to see what, um, load cases that you had to consider, you know, like the 50 year extreme gust is one of the big ones. And then, you know, various operational loads and that sort of thing. Um, it’s never gonna cover absolutely everything. But I, yeah. What, what, what issues do you see that are, are missing from it?  Allen Hall: Well, when, when I look at the airplane world and we qualify an airplane with the Federal Authority, whoever that could be, it could be Yasa in Europe, could be the FAA in the United States, there’s a pages, there are books of requirements and [00:21:00] guidance materials and details of things you must do to show that the airplane is. Safe to go fly. I figured the wind turbine world would’ve adapted that to some level to have very specific requirements on design margins and, and maybe they’re there as an electrical engineer. I can’t suss all that out, but I can usually tell how rigorous the requirements are by the weight of the document. Usually those documents make a lot of noise when you drop ’em on the desk. This was, uh, a very soft whimper. I thought, well, okay, maybe there’s a lot here I’m missing. I’m sure that I am. I’m an electrical guy. I’m gonna admit it. Right now, I don’t understand all the structural things, but on the airplane side, I know that the airplanes have a lot to do and the requirements are crazy hard, but maybe there’s a lot more tolerance in wind. Rosemary Barnes: They do include safety margins, and there is, uh. A lot more, a lot more tolerance in wind as [00:22:00] there should be because people aren’t flying and wind turbines. You know, like if there was somebody like physically seated inside every blade 24 7, then I think that you would see that the, the standard would be, would be tightened up because you know, like every tightening of the standard is going to result in an increase in cost. So I mean, the biggest difference that I. I I see between, um, arrow and wind, aside from the, the safety issue is the maintenance. There is annual maintenance and they are maintained more than that. They’re, they’re constantly doing stuff, but like if it’s possible to design it to last for 20 or 30 years without needing maintenance, and that’s the way that you want it to be. In general, blades are not supposed to be maintained until there’s a problem. Um, you know, it’s not like. Places where you know that you’re gonna be replacing grease or, um, you know, anything, anything like that that’s built for accessibility. The blades are certainly, certainly not. So yeah, I mean, [00:23:00]you’re definitely not maintaining in the same way as you are with, um, aerospace or Yeah, just aviation. Allen Hall: Howard Pinrose has the, for motor dock, has the Chaos and Caffeine podcast. Which is on YouTube and I watch that. Typically Saturday morning, I think that’s when it comes out. It’s on the weekend. And his last, uh, podcast was about the studies about general maintenance. Back to Rosemary, your point that performing general maintenance, regardless of how much there is, is less costly than trying to fix it on the fly. And that if you devote. Sufficient resources to keeping the equipment maintained in the, in the way it was intended to. You’re gonna have significantly less problems. Uh, and lower costs, but it’s surprising. Wind doesn’t do that  Rosemary Barnes: well, but I mean, the difference is that wind is designed to not be maintained. So it’s, it’s not easier engineering, or not [00:24:00] engineering. It’s not like lazy. It’s actually the opposite. It’s actually really hard to design something that won’t need to be maintained for 30 years. I mean, think about another machine that is not supposed to be looked at for 30 years and you know, that will go through the stress that a wind turbine blade does. But you know, if you think of. Yeah, anything that’s inside your blade, like think about, um, the lightning cable in a blade. Um, you know, like the, if it, if it breaks, you have to cut open the blade to get into it. And, um, most of the length of the blade, that would be, that would be what you would do. It’s huge, huge, huge repair. Um, so, you know, you design it so that that will very rarely happen in theory, you know, if everything’s working well, maybe the lightning cable is a bad example because, um, the lightning protection system is. Almost certainly the, the least well-functioning part of a, a wind turbine, I’d say. But you know, like you think about in every other part of the blade structure, you know, you design it so that it will last for 30 years easily. Um, and then [00:25:00] it’s only when several things go wrong that you would end up having to go in and do that. Um, that maintenance.  Allen Hall: This should be kind of a woma topic actually, because is it even conceivable that you could have minimal maintenance on such a. Heavy industrial piece of equipment for 30 years versus every other machine in human operation that can’t do that. What other machine, I’m sure somebody will write in about that. And if you, if you know what, a machine will operate for 30 years with no maintenance, please send us a note because I don’t know what that is.  Rosemary Barnes: No, I, I think Brent turbines are really, are really special and I think that it is, uh, like commonly misunderstood that, um, you know. Not maintaining for 30 years is, you know, somehow not in engineering correctly or making the engineering easier, but it’s the opposite. You’re making the engineering harder. The same with manufacturing of, um, the blades specifically or anything made out of composite materials. Like the tolerances are huge, but the fact is that that makes the engineering harder, not easier because it has to work at [00:26:00] any, you know, if the web is here or if it’s a hundred millimeters this way, it’s still has to work exactly the same for the exact same amount of time. So to make it low cost and reliable for that amount of time with that little maintenance is a huge job. Um, and you know, one world record that I know that wind turbines have is that the blades are the largest, like single piece component of any human made structure. There is nothing, there’s nothing bigger than, um, a wind turbine blade. Like a bridge is made of multiple different members and a airplane. Has, you know, two, two wings that don’t even, even the span of most airplanes isn’t, um, both wings together isn’t the same as the longest wind turbine blades. Like, there’s not, there’s no one big single component that’s bigger than a wind turbine blade. Not to mention the strain. Um, they bend a lot that they, they really, they really bend a lot. That’s a very. Difficult operating environment. They do millions of, of fatigue cycles in their [00:27:00] lifetime. Uh, it’s just like, you know, they’re, they’re breaking records all over the place. It’s a, it’s a super cool thing to mark on as an engineer, to be honest. Allen Hall: Okay. So at Walmart 2026, I know that was one of the discussions that popped up, uh, on the panel, was what should we expect for a lifetime? Or sort of a less re a reduced level of maintenance on a wind turbine. And the answer was maybe a year. And I thought that was a very Australian way of answering that question. It’s, it’s a real answer. I think, uh, the people that operate wind turbines know that that probably is true. You got about a year and then you gotta get on it. But financial investors don’t necessarily have that opinion about it. They think you just turn it on, let it run 30 years and collect all this money and. What we’re learning is it’s, it’s a complicated problem. And Rosemary, I think you’re 100% right. All the variables that happen during the manufacturing and the design of a wind turbine have to incorporate safety features that keep that operating for 30 years. That’s really hard to do, [00:28:00] and you’d have no way to really verify it once you shove it out the door, especially the first thousand you make. It’s almost an impossible task.  Rosemary Barnes: Yeah, I mean there obviously there is heaps of maintenance that needs to be done to, to wind turbines, even if it is incredibly low maintenance compared to other kinds of machines. And if you are skipping that kind of maintenance or doing it incorrectly, then that is definitely a very um, Australia relevant issue. You know, everyone’s on these full service agreements. Sometimes not for the full lifetime of the the turbine. So you can imagine if you’re kind of like half-assing your maintenance for the, those first 10 years, then you’re just sending a, you know, time bomb to the next person to take over that contract. So. That’s a real challenge, but I’d see it with blades where it’s like, oh, they’re just quietly fixing, um, damages. They get the same damage over and over again and they just quietly fix it and not say anything and, or, you know, not really raise it like maybe you’re technically getting the reports, but it’s never flagged that, you know, Hey, this is a serial issue and no one’s ever investigating. What’s the [00:29:00] real root cause of this? It might be that, you know, they’re fixing it well enough to last to the end of the FSA period. And then, yeah. Oh hey. Turns out your whole fleet has a serial issue that you need to take care of now with, without the backing of the manufacturer, which, um, you know, obviously makes it about 10 times harder. Allen Hall: And that’s why you want to go to Wilma 2027 because we’re gonna to talk about that issue in a. About 20 others during the two day event. At least that’s what it’s scheduled for right now. Maybe it’ll go to a third day. Rosemary, maybe we need to add a third day because of all the topics  Rosemary Barnes: we need to move to a beach location. If we’re gonna start going for multiple days,  Allen Hall: Rosemary wants to have it in Fiji or was it Tahiti? What was the other place you were saying you would like to go to?  Rosemary Barnes: Tahiti would be fine. Um, Maldives is what I was saying, but yeah, I will accept that. It’s not that. Logical to run Australia. Um, win o and m event offshore. Allen Hall: We wanna send a congratulations to Yolanda and [00:30:00]Manuel as they have gotten married down in Mexico, uh, with all friends and family, several hundred attendees as I have learned. So congratulations to those two. And Yolanda will be back on the podcast. In the next week or two, that wraps up another episode of the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. If today’s discussion sparked any questions or ideas, we’d love for to hear from you, just reach out to us on LinkedIn and don’t forget to subscribe. So if you never miss an episode. And if you found value in today’s conversation, please leave us a review. It helps other wind energy professionals discover the show. For Rosie and Nikki, I’m Allen Hall, and we’ll see you here next week on the Uptime Wind Energy [00:31:00] Podcast.

-DHS is offering a training program for LEO to participate in ICE activities -A video of a Semi-Truck going the wrong way near Highway 61 in Missouri, so why is it so difficult to verify basic details on what's being claimed? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This podcast is made possible by our listeners and viewers. If this show has brought you value, you can support it by becoming a member of The Way Forward, our platform designed to help you find the health and freedom community (people, practitioners, schools, farms, and more) near you. Your membership directly supports the podcast and the work we do: www.thewayfwrd.com/joinIt's time to re-evaluate the commonly accepted narratives about MLK, civil rights and the KKK…In this episode, I sit down with Chad O. Jackson for a long-form conversation about Martin Luther King Jr. and why his legacy still provokes such strong emotional and political reactions. Chad is an independent filmmaker and researcher whose work returns to primary sources and overlooked voices, and that lens shapes everything we talk about here.He recently participated in an MLK debate that ran for hours, creating space for historical context instead of sound bites and patience instead of performative rebuttals. That debate opens the door into a much larger conversation about history, memory, and how certain narratives become culturally untouchable.We dig into how the Civil Rights Movement is taught, celebrated, and reinforced from an early age, often without room for deeper examination. Chad draws from archival research, period publications, and primary documents, showing how interpretation influences public memory just as much as the facts themselves.This episode is for listeners who value critical thinking and aren't afraid to sit with uncomfortable questions.You'll Learn:[00:00] Introduction[08:52] What triggered Chad to investigate the MLK narrative[17:13] Challenging northern propaganda about slavery[27:40]  Life for black Americans prior to the Civil Rights Movement[44:45] King's upbringing: born into wealthy black elite family, Daddy King's social gospel, and rejecting Christ's divinity by age 12[01:03:13] Why both the FBI and communists wanted the civil rights movement [01:09:38] The aftermath of the Civil Rights Movement [01:17:03] The MLK docuseries structure[01:34:42] The century-long project to separate blacks from Western civilization[01:49:41] Why classism is just another victimization trap[02:08:55] How hip hop culture has negatively impacted the black community[02:22:40] Malcom X and the Civil Rights Movement[02:42:02] The notion that fascism is a reaction to hyper liberalismResources Mentioned:Hatred and Profits: Getting Under the Hood of the Ku Klux Klan by Fryer G. R. and Levitt D. S. | ArticleChristianity and the Social Crisis by Walter Rauschenbusch | BookMiss Anne in Harlem by Carla Kaplan | BookMovers and Shakers by Mabel Dodge Luhan | Book Find more from Chad:Chad O. Jackson | Website Chad O. Jackson | InstagramChad O. Jackson | YouTubeChad O. Jackson | XThe MLK Project | VimeoThe MLK Project | IMDb Find more from Alec:Alec Zeck | InstagramAlec Zeck | XThe Way Forward | InstagramThe Way Forward is Sponsored By:Designed for deep focus and well-being. 100% blue light and flicker free. For $50 off your Daylight Computer, use discount code: TWF50RMDY Academy & Collective: Homeopathy Made AccessibleHigh-quality remedies and training to support natural healing.Enroll hereExplore hereNew Biology Clinic: Redefine Health from the Ground UpExperience tailored terrain-based health services with consults, livestreams, movement classes, and more. Visit www.NewBiologyClinic.com and use code THEWAYFORWARD (case sensitive) for $50 off activation. Members get the $150 fee waived

The FBI's move to execute a warrant at voting offices in Fulton County, Georgia, and the presence of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard have ignited a fierce debate over election security and federal authority. Geoff Bennett discussed more with Rick Hasen, professor of law and political science at UCLA and author of "A Real Right to Vote." PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

In this January 30, 2026 episode of Badlands Daily, CannCon and Chris Paul break down the latest developments surrounding federal enforcement, border operations, and the shifting tone coming from official channels. The discussion focuses on recent statements and actions tied to border security, jurisdictional authority, and how enforcement priorities are being communicated to the public. CannCon and Chris examine inconsistencies in media coverage, the gap between rhetoric and execution, and why enforcement narratives often lag behind operational reality. The episode also touches on timing, coordination across agencies, and how public expectations can become distorted when information is selectively emphasized or withheld. Throughout the conversation, the hosts stress discernment, patience, and understanding how authority actually functions within federal systems. This episode offers a grounded overview of enforcement-related developments and why perception management plays a central role in shaping public response.

The FBI's move to execute a warrant at voting offices in Fulton County, Georgia, and the presence of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard have ignited a fierce debate over election security and federal authority. Geoff Bennett discussed more with Rick Hasen, professor of law and political science at UCLA and author of "A Real Right to Vote." PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

In today's episode of The Right Side with Doug Billings, we examine a growing national tension: what happens when the enforcement of federal law becomes a political flashpoint.From Minnesota to Washington, debates over immigration enforcement, federal authority, and local resistance are no longer just policy disagreements — they are tests of constitutional order, sovereignty, and public trust.Doug breaks down how law, legitimacy, and narrative collide in moments of national stress, why selective enforcement erodes civic stability, and what history shows happens when legal authority becomes negotiable.This is not about headlines. It's about the structure underneath them.Believe it. For the Republic! Cheers.Support the show

Explore how recent immigration enforcement actions act as a test balloon for federal intrusion into local governance and the implications for state sovereignty. Delve into high-profile operations and key legal rulings that have sparked a national debate over immigration policy and individual rights.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/conspiracy-theories-exploring-the-unseen--5194379/support.

This week, we look at how language shapes power — from the words we use in our own routines to the phrases officials use to blur responsibility. We break down a single news clip to show how euphemisms sanitize state violence, how “plain speaking” can hide distortion, and why civic illiteracy makes people vulnerable to confident spin. Drawing on George Orwell's Politics and the English Language, we trace how vague language becomes a tool for control, especially in conversations about policing, immigration, and federal authority. Clarity isn't cosmetic; it's a form of resistance.Thank you for stopping by. Please visit our website: All About The Joy and add, like and share. You can now watch the livestream version of the show on YouTube at @CarmenLezeth You can also support us by shopping at our STORE - We'd appreciate that greatly. Also, if you want to find us anywhere on social media, please check out the link in bio page. Music By Geovane Bruno, Moments, 3481Editing by Team A-JHost, Carmen Lezeth DISCLAIMER: As always, please do your own research and understand that the opinions in this podcast and livestream are meant for entertainment purposes only. States and other areas may have different rules and regulations governing certain aspects discussed in this podcast. Nothing in our podcast or livestream is meant to be medical or legal advice. Please use common sense, and when in doubt, ask a professional for advice, assistance, help and guidance.

An ICE agent is hospitalized with internal bleeding, a criminal illegal immigrant is still at large, and now the agent and his family are in hiding.

In this gripping episode, investigative journalists ⁠⁠Mandy Matney⁠⁠ and⁠ ⁠Liz Farrell⁠⁠ and attorney⁠ Eric Bland, confront a week that forces an uncomfortable but urgent question: what happens when power escalates faster than accountability? First, Liz Farrell reports firsthand from the federal arraignment of JP Miller—an appearance marked not just by legal gravity, but by a visible public demand for accountability. What she witnessed was extraordinary: 52 U.S. Marshals on duty, federal prosecutors flooding the jury box, and bombshell revelations that paint JP as both a flight risk and danger to the community. Then through dual lenses of investigative journalism and constitutional law, our hosts unpack a deadly ICE encounter in Minnesota, interrogating how rapidly escalating law enforcement tactics collide with due process, civil rights, and public trust. This is not a partisan conversation. It's a journalistic one. A legal one. And ultimately, a civic one.  Because justice doesn't survive on authority alone... it survives with scrutiny and accountability. ☕ Cups Up! ⚖️ Episode References Walk for Peace Facebook Page ☸️

In Part II of his hard-hitting analysis, Andrew Parker continues his examination of how Minnesota has gone from a model of good governance to the epicenter of national outrage and unrest.This episode centers on the fatal shooting of a woman during a federal immigration enforcement operation in Minnesota and the political fallout that followed. Andrew breaks down the legal realities surrounding federal law enforcement authority, the dangers of state and local officials interfering with federal law, and how inflammatory rhetoric from progressive leadership has contributed to an increasingly volatile and lawless environment.Andrew challenges the narrative that enforcement itself is the problem, arguing instead that elections, the rule of law, and democratic processes are being undermined in favor of chaos, street politics, and selective outrage. He addresses the real human consequences of illegal immigration, the misuse of tragedy for political messaging, and the growing breakdown of order in Minneapolis.The episode also expands to foreign policy, comparing Democratic and Republican leadership on the world stage, with a sharp focus on Iran, the Middle East, Israel, and the stark contrast between Trump-era deterrence and decades of failed Democratic foreign policy.This is an unfiltered discussion about law, accountability, leadership, and the consequences of abandoning democratic norms—both at home and abroad.Support the showThe Andrew Parker Show - Politics, Israel & The Law. Follow us on Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube and X. Subscribe to our email list at www.theandrewparkershow.com Copyright © 2025 The Andrew Parker Show - All Rights Reserved.

This Badlands Media special coverage features President Donald Trump delivering remarks addressing recent developments involving Venezuela, U.S. energy policy, and federal authority. President Trump discusses the situation surrounding Nicolás Maduro, U.S. actions related to oil sanctions and enforcement, and the administration's position on sovereignty, interim governance, and international pressure. He outlines priorities related to domestic energy production, economic leverage, and national security while responding to questions on immigration enforcement, federal investigations, and public safety. The remarks also touch on trade, border security, and the administration's broader strategy for maintaining American strength at home and abroad. The event concludes with additional comments on ongoing investigations, interagency coordination, and expectations moving forward.

Joshua Philipp, senior investigative journalist for The Epoch Times, joins Steve to break down why Venezuela is the tip of a dangerous geopolitical iceberg. The capture of Nicolás Maduro exposed a narco-state fueled by oil, cocaine, communism, and foreign adversaries using chaos as a weapon. That same contempt for the rule of law is now echoing at home, from the Minnesota shooting to the reckless and legally questionable rhetoric of Governor Tim Walz suggesting the National Guard could confront federal agents.

Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul joins John Williams to discuss investigations into state employees who improperly received PPP loans during the pandemic. The conversation also explores immigration enforcement, concerns over federal agents operating in Illinois communities, and recent court rulings involving the National Guard and the balance of power between state and federal government

Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul joins John Williams to discuss investigations into state employees who improperly received PPP loans during the pandemic. The conversation also explores immigration enforcement, concerns over federal agents operating in Illinois communities, and recent court rulings involving the National Guard and the balance of power between state and federal government

Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul joins John Williams to discuss investigations into state employees who improperly received PPP loans during the pandemic. The conversation also explores immigration enforcement, concerns over federal agents operating in Illinois communities, and recent court rulings involving the National Guard and the balance of power between state and federal government

A ship is wrecked off the coast of Western Australia. It’s cargo sank with it. Many of those on board perished in the tragedy. Who owns what remains on board the ship at the bottom of the Ocean? Back in the 1970s, one man decided to find out.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Marc Cox and Dan Buck talk with Hans von Spakovsky about James Comey's legal troubles, the statute of limitations, and federal authority to protect ICE agents. They also touch on historical conflicts between state and federal power.

Shannon Bream joins Marc Cox to discuss the recent school shooting, the debate over gun control vs. mental health, and D.C.'s sharp drop in carjackings after a federal officer surge. She also weighs in on Elizabeth Warren's criticism of Lisa Cook's firing from the Fed board and the broader question of presidential firing authority.

Marc Cox talks with Hans von Spakovsky about Trump's authority to deploy the National Guard in Washington, D.C. versus other cities. They discuss constitutional limits, the 10th Amendment, and questions around federal intervention in places like Chicago. Hans explains how 800 Guard troops filled gaps left by D.C.'s defunded police force, leading to zero murders in over a week, sharp drops in carjackings, and hundreds of backlogged arrest warrants cleared.

Marc brings on Hans von Spakovsky from Heritage to cut through the media spin on Texas redistricting. While Democrats cry foul, Hans points out that Republicans are redrawing four districts only because a federal court ruled the original Democrat-pushed maps were unconstitutional racial gerrymanders. Marc and Hans torch the hypocrisy, citing states like Massachusetts and Connecticut where Republicans make up 35–40% of voters yet hold zero congressional seats thanks to Democrat gerrymandering. They also pivot to Trump's federal takeover of D.C., clarifying that while his unique authority there doesn't extend to other cities, he can still deploy ICE, FBI, and even the National Guard to crack down on lawlessness elsewhere. The two highlight how staged “anti-ICE” protests—like those inside Home Depot—expose the left's alliance with illegal hiring practices and professional protest machines.

In this raw and real episode of Culture Uncut, DJ Nova Fresh and the crew dive deep into everything from dating preferences and hip-hop misogyny to deadbeat parenting, political redistricting, and celebrity activism.

Tonight's rundown: Hey BillOReilly.com Premium and Concierge Members, welcome to the No Spin News for Thursday, July 10, 2025. Stand Up for Your Country.  Talking Points Memo: Opposition from anti-Trump groups continues to grow. Bill looks at recent statements from left-wing critics.  The Supreme Court denies Florida's request to enforce immigration crackdown. A look at how Chicago and Los Angeles are actively undermining federal law enforcement. Will Massachusetts pass the new bill that stops ICE agents from wearing masks while on the job? An update on Dr. Kevin O'Connor, physician to former President Biden. Final Thought: Bill highlights a clip from Jeff Ahern's “News of the Day” show about lifeguard salaries. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this special Fourth of July episode, we're talking about The Big Beautiful Bill—yes, it passed, and yes, it's time to get on board. While I normally support smaller, single-issue legislation (so we can actually see what's in these bills), there's still a lot to be excited about here. From major investments in border security to a strong push toward deporting illegal immigrants, this bill takes some long-overdue steps in the right direction.Sure, there are parts that could've been better—and no surprise, Elon Musk isn't thrilled because it didn't personally benefit him as much as he hoped—but overall, I agree with the majority of what's in it.Tune in as we break down the good and the bad inside The Big Beautiful Bill—and what it means for the future of our country.Happy Fourth of July, and let's keep America strong.

A former Democratic congressman who led the Illinois National Guard talks about the legality, politics, and practicality of calling in the National Guard to push back against protestors.  

In this episode of Passing Judgment, we examine the legal showdown in Los Angeles as President Trump sends the National Guard against California's wishes. Host Jessica Levinson analyzes the president's broad—though not unlimited—authority under Title 10 and California's legal case challenging the move on grounds of state sovereignty and the Tenth Amendment. Jessica explains how federal law and the Posse Comitatus Act restrict the National Guard's role, and why courts are usually hesitant to overrule presidential decisions on national security. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Presidential Authority to Federalize the National Guard Jessica Levinson breaks down the Trump administration's decision to send the National Guard into Los Angeles, despite objections from California officials. She explains that under federal law (Title 10), presidents have broad—though not unlimited—powers to federalize state National Guard troops. This authority can be exercised when there is a “rebellion or danger of rebellion” against federal authority, even if the state's governor disagrees.State Sovereignty vs. Federal Power California, led by Governor Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta, challenges Trump's move, arguing it infringes on state sovereignty. Levinson examines the legal conflict between state autonomy (protected by the Tenth Amendment) and federal authority as outlined in Title 10. However, she concludes that the statute grants the president clear authority in these situations, making California's legal challenge an uphill battle.The Limitations of National Guard Powers (Posse Comitatus Act) Another key theme is what the National Guard can—and cannot—do once federalized. The Posse Comitatus Act generally prohibits the military from acting as domestic law enforcement. Levinson clarifies that under Title 10, the National Guard cannot directly enforce domestic law (like making arrests or searches), unless additional powers are invoked (e.g., via the Insurrection Act).Follow Our Host: @LevinsonJessica

In this episode, Alex talks about why Trump deploying the military into Los Angeles is meant to create a pretext to crack down on local power in blue states. This is intended to cripple local politics, federalize law enforcement, and potentially find ways to keep republicans in power if it is threatened. 

To discuss President Trump's deployment of the National Guard in California, Geoff Bennett spoke with Juliette Kayyem, a former assistant secretary at the Department of Homeland Security. She’s now at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

Three of our favorite segments from the week, in case you missed them.Historian Jefferson Cowie offers a history White backlash to federal authority (First) | Filmmakers Julian Brave NoiseCat and Emily Kassie discuss their Oscar-nominated documentary "Sugarcane" and the long history of abuse at residential schools in Canada (Starts at 22:20) | Shiori Itō, director of "Black Box Diaries," talks about her Oscar-nominated documentary about her investigation of her own sexual assault case (Starts at 39:35)If you don't subscribe to the Brian Lehrer Show on iTunes, you can do that here.

As our centennial series continues, Jefferson Cowie, historian at Vanderbilt University and the author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning book, Freedom's Dominion: A Saga of White Resistance to Federal Power (Basic Books, 2022), reviews the history of white Americans fighting the federal government over civil rights legislation and more.

Send us a textWant to know more? Book your complimentary call: 

During a February 2023 lecture at Harvard Law School, Professor Daphna Renan, a scholar of presidential power and administrative governance, argued that the judiciary should not always have the final word on the Constitution. Instead, Renan believes the U.S. should move toward a more political constitutionalism, which would wrest some of the power from the Supreme Court and share it with democratically elected bodies like Congress.

2/5/24:  Northampton Mayor G.L. Sciarra's on Opioid Settlement funds & school budget deficits. Senator Jo Comerford explains the financial burden on school districts. WNEU Law Prof Bruce Miller on TX Gov Abbott's usurpation of the federal authority on the border. Megan Zinn & Anne Pinkerton, local author of Were You Close?; a sister's quest to know the brother she lost.

“The Federal Government is the problem, not the solution.” So said President Ronald Reagan. Karen Bracken is the Founder of Tennessee Citizens for State Sovereignty (TNCSS). (www.tncss.weebly.com) (www.tncss.substack.com) . TNCSS intends to be a ‘watchdog' group at the state level in Tennessee, which then intends to expand state by state nationwide. TNCSS is supporting a ‘Nullification Bill' now before Tennessee's legislature. Karen reminds us that our Federal Government and the Supreme Court are not the final arbiters of the Constitution. The proposed nullification bill intends to manage the overreach of the federal government. She claims the Federal Government is “out of its lane” and has overreached into too many areas, that the Constitution does not authorize their oversight of. For example, the Department of Education is not mandated to exist under our Constitution. Karen directs us to Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S.Constitution. She points to the 18 enumerated powers of the federal government. “If it's not listed there it falls to the state,” she says. SHE'S RIGHT! Before “Common Core”, before the Clinton Administration, education was a successful laboratory process, where states were not required to have common standards across the nation. “Federalizing education has proven to be a national disaster,” she says. The money coming in to colleges from the federal government, superseded the implementation of good education standards. Federal money distracted our politicians from good education system standards, she claims. Studies show a historic drop in national reading and math scores since the adoption of national Common Core curriculum standards. She now wants to invoke nullification when such federal actions are an ‘overreach'. Karen Bracken supports this notion of nullification to remove the State of Tennessee from federal oversight by the U.S. Department of Education. She claims the federal government has no Constitutional right or obligation to impose oversight in education. In this interview, education is just one focus. The concept of nullification was born from the notion that instead of taking up arms and fighting another ‘civil war', we can fix federal government overreach at the state levels first. Reaching U.S. Representatives and U.S. Senators and seeking their support for this HB 0726 is essential. If Tennessee gets behind Karen Bracken and TNCSS in 2024, look for this movement to spread nationwide.Karen Bracken, “Our Constitution Limits Federal Authority To 18 Enumerated Powers?”Originally Recorded on Tuesday, January 16, 2024Season 2, Episode 230Learn More at: GeneValentino.comImage(s) Courtesy of: Gene Valentino  Join the Conversation: https://GeneValentino.com WMXI Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/NewsRadio981 More WMXI Interviews: https://genevalentino.com/wmxi-interviews/ More GrassRoots TruthCast Episodes: https://genevalentino.com/grassroots-truthcast-with-gene-valentino/ More Broadcasts with Gene as the Guest: https://genevalentino.com/america-beyond-the-noise/ More About Gene Valentino: https://genevalentino.com/about-gene-valentino/

BUY CAST BREW COFFEE TO FIGHT BACK - https://castbrew.com/ Become a Member For Uncensored Videos - https://timcast.com/join-us/ Hang Out With Tim Pool & Crew LIVE At - http://Youtube.com/TimcastIRL Texas Declares SUPREMACY Over Federal Authority, Several States ALIGN With Texas, CIVIL WAR Trending Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Supreme Court is weighing border security and the extent to which states can challenge federal policy. Texas and Louisiana are contesting the Biden administration's guidelines on who should be prioritized for deportation. Marcia Coyle of the National Law Journal and Theresa Cardinal Brown of the Bipartisan Policy Center joined John Yang to discuss the arguments. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

The Supreme Court is weighing border security and the extent to which states can challenge federal policy. Texas and Louisiana are contesting the Biden administration's guidelines on who should be prioritized for deportation. Marcia Coyle of the National Law Journal and Theresa Cardinal Brown of the Bipartisan Policy Center joined John Yang to discuss the arguments. PBS NewsHour is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

In this episode of Frankly Speaking we speak to Christer Viktorsson, the Director General of the Federal Authority for Nuclear Regulation in the UAE about whether the world is ready for nuclear escalation as concerns grow that the conflict between Ukraine and Russia could turn nuclear. Also about how the UAE and Saudi Arabia can set an example for the rest of the world in the production of carbon-free emissions as ties between the two countries' nuclear officials continue to strengthen.

In a world where cyber-attacks are ever-changing, cybersecurity has to adapt accordingly. Joining us today to delve into the world of cloud security for federal agencies is Sandeep Shilawat, Vice President of Cloud and Edge Computing at ManTech. Sandeep has extensive experience in both Commercial and Federal technology markets. We'll get to hear his predictions on where the cloud world is heading, as well as what the Federal Authority to Operate (ATO) process will look like in the future. We learn the benefits of cloud compliance standards, as well as how FedRAMP is leveling the playing field in federal cloud computing. We also touch on the role of 5G in cloud computing, and why its presence will disrupt going forward. Join us as we pick Sandeep's brain for some insights into the present and future of federal cybersecurity.Tweetables“Visibility has become [the] single biggest challenge and nobody's dealing with cloud management in a multi-cloud perspective from cradle to grave.” — @Shilawat [0:09:03]“I think that having a managed cloud service is probably the first approach that should be considered by an agency head. I do think that that's where the market is heading. Sooner or later, it will probably become a de facto way of doing cloud security.” — @Shilawat [0:19:43]Comprehensive, full-stack cloud security Secure infrastructure, apps and data across hybrid and multi-cloud environments with Prisma Cloud.

Dr. Wes Bellamy, chair of the political science department at Virginia State University and former Vice-Mayor of Charlottesville, Virginia, joins us to talk about the heated gubernatorial race in Virginia as voters go to the polls today, and where the culture wars have colored the contest between former Democratic governor Terry McAuliffe and Republican candidate Glenn Youngkin. We talk about how the controversy over Critical Race Theory and education has become one of the main talking points in the campaign, which reflects greater political and cultural anxieties in the country, and how Biden's stalled infrastructure plan is having an effect in state-wide elections. Dr. Sharon Anderson, attorney and business consultant, former law school professor and lecturer at Howard Law, and the CEO and founder of KCG Consulting Services, joins us to talk about the debate over the Texas abortion law, SB 8, and how this controversy is raising questions about the power of states to challenge federal authority. We also talk about what it would mean to allow states to decide what constitutional rights are actually protected within them and which aren't, how the attorneys from Texas defended the law, and whether defenders of reproductive rights should be worried. Esther Iverem, multidisciplinary author and independent journalist, host of "On The Ground: Voices of Resistance From the Nation's Capital" on Pacifica Radio, and founding member of DC Poets Against the War, joins us to talk about a ballot initiative in Minneapolis where city residents will vote on replacing the Minneapolis Police Department with a Department of Public Safety, the Poor People's Campaign pushback on the investment framework Democrats are still hammering out, and Donald Trump's comments on a radio show about Israel's influence in U.S. politics. Zachary Siegel, freelance journalist and a journalism fellow at Northeastern University's Health in Justice Action Lab, joins us to discuss the new Hulu mini-series “Dopesick” and how the show glosses over the true story of the epidemic, while reinforcing racialized stereotypes about drug addiction, law enforcement, and the war on drugs.

The Federal Authority of Identity and Citizenship (ICA) in the UAE has warned its customers against fake emails from scamsters, using its name. In this episode, we discuss the implications of such scams. We also talk about drones delivering pizzas in South Korea and Apple repairing iPhone 12 models with faulty audio functions. Listen to #Pulse95Radio in the UAE by tuning in on your radio (95.00 FM) or online on our website: www.pulse95radio.com ************************ Follow us on Social. www.facebook.com/pulse95radio www.twitter.com/pulse95radio www.instagram.com/pulse95radio

This first part of a series discusses governmental authority to close schools, require masks, require citizens to shelter in place and to close businesses.  It discusses how states vary in their approaches to executive emergency power.  At the federal level, this first part explores federalism issues and  analyzes statutes that authorize executive action. This podcast is an excerpt from COVID-19 Litigation: A Discourse on Nondelegation, Constitutional Rights and Statutory Interpretation.  This first-of-its-kind analysis of pandemic litigation  is available on Amazon at: https://www.amazon.com/COVID-19-Pandemic-Litigation-Constitutional-Interpretation/dp/B09733DTVT/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=COVID-19+pandemic+litigation&qid=1624303183&s=books&sr=1-1

On July 10, 1821, the United States of America accepted possession of the Spanish Florida territory in a ceremony at St Augustine. Whatever tranquility the Seminoles enjoyed began to end with this change of ownership. They knew and trusted the Spanish authorities. They liked them because they left the Seminole alone. But these Americans were different. The Seminole had sided with the Spanish in the so-called Patriot War of 1812. Now the patriots were coming to town to run the peninsula. The Spanish days of benign neglect of the Seminoles began to end with this ceremony. The Historic Florida Militia is providing a living history interpretation with mock proclamation signings, musket and cannon firing, and living historians mingling with the public on July 9 and 10. Maria Alvarez. who run the company with her husband Bob, joins us to tell us about the importance of this transfer of authority to the United States. She also explains how her group brings to life various historic periods, such as Pedro Mendendez's founding in 1565 and Sir Francis Drake's 16th century raids and the British colonial period (1763-1783) in St Augustine's history.  FHM presents the past to the present for the future.    Host Patrick Swan is a board member with the Seminole Wars Foundation. He is a combat veteran and of theU.S. Army, serving in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, and Kosovo, and at the Pentagon after 9/11. A military historian, he holds masters degrees in Public History, Communication, and Homeland Security, and is a graduate of the US Army War College with an advanced degree in strategic studies. This podcast is recorded at the homestead of the Seminole Wars Foundation in Bushnell, Florida.  Like us on Facebook, LinkedIn, and YouTube. Get the latest episode without delay where and when you want it by subscribing through your favorite podcast catcher, such as iHeart, Stitcher, Spotify, DoubleTwist, Pandora, Podbean, Google podcasts, iTunes or directly from the Seminole Wars Foundation website www.seminolewars.us      

Welcome back, you, Inglorious Bastards, and Magnificent Bitches to Doc's Thought of the Day Your daily test of the Emergency Podcast System. Here is a clip from the last podcast. Today we States beginning to defy federal authority.Website - https://thatsonpoint.squarespace.com/Follow Us On;Bitchute-https://www.bitchute.com/channel/8SXcz1rqDyu7/YouTube-https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRNHroldv9kuaatarS7uclAMinds-https://www.minds.com/thatsonpoint/ToP Clips: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCn_fZ4JhHN05YLijsdmkYSQ/Paler:https://parler.com/profile/DocComeauSupport Us On;Subscribe Star-https://www.subscribestar.com/that-s-on-pointPatreon-https://www.patreon.com/ThatsOnPoint?fan_landing=true

Welcome back, you, Inglorious Bastards, and Magnificent Bitches to Doc's Thought of the Day Your daily test of the Emergency Podcast System. Here is a clip from the last podcast. Today we States beginning to defy federal authority.Website - https://thatsonpoint.squarespace.com/Follow Us On;Bitchute-https://www.bitchute.com/channel/8SXcz1rqDyu7/YouTube-https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRNHroldv9kuaatarS7uclAMinds-https://www.minds.com/thatsonpoint/ToP Clips: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCn_fZ4JhHN05YLijsdmkYSQ/Paler:https://parler.com/profile/DocComeauSupport Us On;Subscribe Star-https://www.subscribestar.com/that-s-on-pointPatreon-https://www.patreon.com/ThatsOnPoint?fan_landing=true

Constitutional Law Professor Robert Natleson joins the show to talk about the roll back of limits placed on Federal Authority and the impact of a possible Primary challenge for Ken Buck See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Tim and Adam see parallels between the Civil War Ft. Sumter and the modern rabble in Portland, they discuss Trump's ability to reopen states and federal action, and Tim asks, "Is it too late?" Support the show (http://Timcast.com/donate)

Watch The KrisAnne Hall Show on YouTube Today we discuss the depth of regulatory agencies, from the war on drugs to the war on property rights and the war on the mind of our youth. Time to start identifying the depth of the deep state so we can get to work on solutions! #LibertyFirst Ensure this Excellent Constitution Training Continues! Partner with The KrisAnne Hall Daily Journal and be a part of the force that will restore Americans with their Constitutional Principles! To JOIN with us just simple text- impact2020 to 33777 --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/the-krisanne-hall-show/support

AsktheTrucker "Live' Open Forum-ELD Exemptions and Federal Authority Provisions Saturday June 2nd 6PM EST Call in 347-826-9170 The discussions continue as truckers move full steam ahead addressing the 2 most pressing issues in the industry today. ELD mandate and the Federal Authority trucker wage provision. The ELD Mandate Exemptions H.R. 5948 H.R.5948 - To exempt motor carriers that own or operate 10 or fewer commercial vehicles from the electronic logging device mandates, and for other purposes The Anti-Trucker Wage legislation to be voted on in the Senate this month. The Federal Authority provision known as the Denham Amendment or F4A , which if passed in the 2018 FAA Reauthorization bill and THUD bill ( they are currently in both House versions), would minimize and limit trucker wages by way of a New Federal Law  

The latest moves by John Horgan are reminscent of the Salmon Wars of the late 90's. Guest: Tristin Hopper - National Post Columnist

Secession was “a right unknown in the Constitution”, one that, without doubt or question, would ultimately lead to “anarchy and war”, at least that would be what James G. Taliaferro, Delegate to the Louisiana Secessionist Convention, would argue as the state debated its place in the Union. Only 58 years earlier the territory had been purchased from the French at 3 cents per acre, but the US ban on the African slave trade and importation had created prosperity and it flourished. By 1840, only 28 years since it had been admitted as a full state, its premier city, New Orleans had grown to one of the largest and wealthiest in the country. Even as the population of the Bayou state grew to almost three quarters of a million, they knew that everything relied on the 47 to 48 percent of the population that lived in the bonds of that brutal and bitter subjugation known by that simple word: Slavery. They could not and would not abide under a President that would rip from them what they considered their property, and, in turn, destroy their prosperity. To many of them he wasn’t even their President. How could he be when he wasn’t even on the ballot in the state? He would not then be allowed to destroy their way of life. Action needed to be taken. On January 26th, 1861 it was by a vote of 113 to 17 as the Secessionist Convention made its intentions clear. The cannons would fire and the masses would gather an cheer as fireworks were set off and a sense of jubilation filled the people of the state, as if a burden was lifted from them. Louisiana would become the 6th State to leave the Union, joining with South Carolina, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, and Georgia in open defiance, declaring: We, the people of the State of Louisiana, in convention assembled, do declare and ordain, and it is hereby declared and ordained, That the ordinance passed by us in convention on the 22d day of November, in the year eighteen hundred and eleven, whereby the Constitution of the United States of America and the amendments of the said Constitution were adopted, and all laws and ordinances by which the State of Louisiana became a member of the Federal Union, be, and the same are hereby, repealed and abrogated; and that the union now subsisting between Louisiana and other States under the name of "The United States of America" is hereby dissolved. The truth was that Thomas Overton Moore perhaps had little intention of abiding by the results of the election if his side lost. Even as he was sworn in as the State’s 16th Governor in January of 1860, he declared, “At the North, a widespread sympathy with felons has deepened the distrust in the permanent Federal Government, and awakened sentiments favorable to a separation of states.” His view was that, “So bitter is this hostility felt toward slavery, which these fifteen states regard as a great social and political blessing, that it exhibits itself in legislation for the avowed purpose of destroying the rights of slaveholders guaranteed by the Constitution and protected by the Acts of Congress. Popular addresses, Legislative resolutions, Executive communications, the press and the pulpit, all inculcate hatred against us and war upon the institution of slavery – an institution interwoven with the very element of our existence.” When James Buchannan’s Vice President, John C. Breckinridge lost the general election, Moore would order the State Militia up. It would escalate the situation even before the convention met as he issued orders for them to seize all US Military posts within the state in the hopes of chasing the Federal Authority from their soil. Yet it would be short lived. Union blockades would block commerce and trade in what was the third largest port in the United States, and the almost 700,000 tons of import that would travel through New Orleans would trickle to a halt, even as the drums of war would replace the sounds of jubilation. By 1862 the government would abandon Baton Rouge even as the Union Army under General Benjamin Butler pushed forward to occupy New Orleans. The child of the Mississippi, the state would find that it had no friend in it as the Union Army pushed up it to take the state, battle by battle. By 1865, as the Confederacy collapsed, whatever prosperity once flowed through the state had long since evaporated as it was brought back into the Union, the resistance of many of its people long since broken.

There was little doubt that the John C. Calhoun who began his career as a Congressman representing the 6th District of South Carolina and who rose to serve as James Monroe’s Secretary of War, was a different man politically than the John C. Calhoun who was overwhelmingly selected to serve as the 7th Vice President of the United States under both John Quincy Adams and his successor Andrew Jackson. A supporter of protective tariffs, he would begin to oppose them and where he once advocated a strong Federal Government, his allegiances began to shift towards State’s Rights, and limited, more restrained authority. It would be this political realignment that would, on December 28th, 1832, lead him to become the first Vice President to resign the Office. The significance of Calhoun leaving the office was not in the fact that he had. Former Senator and Governor of New York turned Secretary of State Martin Van Buren would already be elected to replace Calhoun as Jackson’s Vice President. Increasingly at odds with President Jackson, Calhoun had assured Van Buren’s place as his successor in his attempt to destroy the man’s political career by casting the tie-breaking vote to block him from serving as US Minister to the United Kingdom. As the Nullification Debate raged on, Calhoun was the leader of that ideological movement that believed States had the right to nullify federal laws within their borders. As Senator Robert Y. Haynes had proven ill-equipped to defend South Carolina’s position, especially when faced Massachusetts Senator Daniel Webster in the Senate Debate, he would leave for the Governor’s Office while Calhoun would take over his seat in the Senate. Part of the issue here was that the Supreme Court, under then Chief Justice John Marshall, had already rejected Nullification as early as 1809 in the United States v. Peters, stating, “If the legislatures of the several States may, at will, annul the judgments of the courts of the United States, and destroy the rights acquired under those judgments, the Constitution itself becomes a solemn mockery, and the nation is deprived of the means of enforcing its laws by the instrumentality of its own tribunals. So fatal a result must be deprecated by all, and the people of Pennsylvania, not less than the citizens of every other State, must feel a deep interest in resisting principles so destructive of the union, and in averting consequences so fatal to themselves.” James Madison, one of the Chief Architects of the Constitution would assert that the Federal Courts, not the states, had the power to determine the Constitutionality of a federal law. Still, the Nullification Crisis was a long time coming in the new nation as States and the Federal Government both sought to assert their place and their power within the Republic. Yet despite most of the states challenging the Federal Authority at one point or another, Calhoun and South Carolina would stand alone in 1832 in their disregard of the Tariffs of 1828 and 1832, even though most of the Southern States still reliant on a slave economy had a stake in asserting the ability to invalidate Federal Law. The situation would escalate with South Carolina preparing to assert nullification by force if necessary and President Andrew Jackson ready to respond in kind. Eventually the issue would become moot as a compromise would be reached. Yet, as Andrew Jackson would recognize, the issue would be far from over, stating, “"the tariff was only a pretext, and disunion and southern confederacy the real object. The next pretext will be the negro, or slavery question." Still, until 1973, when Spiro Agnew stepped down, he was the only man to ever resign from the Vice Presidency. Though he would remain in the Senate and serve briefly as Secretary of State, the Presidency that he wanted would remain forever out of his grasp.

Just as the Denham Amendment attempted, but failed, to prevent Fair wages for truckers in last years Highway Bill known as the FAST ACT, once again the large motor carriers (ATA) have managed to slip in the same exact provision into H.R. 4441, the Aviation Innovation, Reform, and Reauthorization Act, otherwise known as the FAA Reauthorization Bill. The Act was introduced by the House of Representatives. The “AIRR” Act as it is called, is a bill designed to authorize aviation programs, but on pp 256-258, Title VI, Sec 611, labeled Federal Authority, the attack on driver wages was slipped in by these members of the U.S House of Transportation Committee. Listen to our last show explaining the dangers of the Denham Amendment and read more via OOIDA's Fighting for Truckers page. We believe this attack on wages exploits new CDL drivers. Attorney Christina Humphrey is our guest who will discuss Section A and B of the provisions within the FAA Reauthorization Bill. 347-826-9170 and press"1" to join the conversation.