Podcast appearances and mentions of Justice Roberts

This show is made possible by you!  To become a sustaining member go to LauraFlanders.org/donateAffirmative action's foes worked with conservative Chinese American organizations to sue two colleges over their admissions processes. The result was a victory for activists who have been trying to do away with affirmative action for years. What led to the June 29 decision by the Trump-packed Supreme Court finally to ban race-conscious affirmative action? In this month's “Meet the BIPOC Press” feature with URL Media, our guests fill in the blanks in the media coverage and correct some of the misconceptions about affirmative action, systemic racism, and how we got here. This time, Laura Flanders and co-host Sara Lomax of Philadelphia's WURD Radio are joined by Washington DC-based journalist Brandon Tensley, the National Politics Reporter at Capital B News, a nonprofit newsroom based in Atlanta, and Claire Jean Kim, a political scientist and Asian American studies professor at UC Irvine in Southern California. Kim is also the author of the forthcoming book “Asian Americans in an Anti-Black World”. How will the recent Supreme Court decision affect diversity and fairness in US institutions, and what does solidarity with African Americans specifically look like in the US today? “As someone who teaches about anti-Blackness and race, I can tell you how much that impacts the classroom to not have more diversity in the classroom . . . It affects the quality of education for everybody.” - Claire Jean Kim“One of the professors I spoke to  put it very clearly when I asked him, ‘What will the higher education landscape look like post affirmative action?' He was like, we don't need to theorize, we don't need to sort of imagine it. We can look to where this has already happened . . . “ - Brandon Tensley Guests:Claire Jean Kim: Professor of Political Science & Asian American Studies, UC Irvine; Author, Asian Americans in an Anti-Black World (Cambridge University Press, 2023)Sara Lomax: Co-Founder, URL Media; President & CEO, WURD RadioBrandon Tensley: National Politics Reporter, Capital B News Full Episode Notes are located HERE.  They include related episodes, articles, and more.Music In the Middle:   “Sometimes I Wonder” by The Allergies from their full length album Tear The Place Up released on Jalapeno Records.  And additional music included- "In and Out" and "Steppin" by Podington Bear FOLLOW The Laura Flanders ShowTwitter: twitter.com/thelfshow Facebook: facebook.com/theLFshow Instagram: instagram.com/thelfshow/YouTube:  youtube.com/@thelfshow ACCESSIBILITY - This episode is available with closed captioned by clicking here for our YouTube Channel

On Tuesday's Mark Levin Show, we bring you the best of Mark Levin on the fourth of July. The Supreme Court ruled that affirmative action is out in colleges and universities around the country. Justice Roberts wrote the decision on the High Court's ruling, which strikes down affirmative action practices in college admissions. President Biden giving his two cents today in the White House press briefing - sharing his displeasure of the High Court's ruling. The Democrat party is the segregationist party. They seek to punish people based on their race and skin color. The Democratic party is destroying America, because they hate America. The Democrat Party today claims that colorblindness is racist. How anyone could be a part of such a party, is a question for the ages. The decision today was a very important one. Also, this country is dying, not because of us, but because of the Democrat party. The Democrat party is at war America. This party wants to put Donald Trump in prison for the rest of his life and take him off the political battlefield. Biden will be remembered for trying to lock up his political opponent. What's being done to Trump is violent - and he won't be the last. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Photo Credit : Encyclyopedia Britanica   In this program, the hosts discuss the Supreme Court's decision to forbid race-conscious affirmative action  approaches to achieve diversity n higher education.  The discussion contrasts Justice Roberts' pronouncement that decisions should be color-blind with Justice Jackson's reminder that the country has been far from colorblind and the effects are not just historical but real in the present because of the intergenerational transmission of inequality.  Moreover, the “self-evident” truth that all are created equal has not been applicable to Black Americans.   Ketanji Jackson Brown's dissenting opinion   OTHER EPISODES OF INTEREST   Affirmative Action - How we got to now From Loving vs Virginia to Roe vs Wade: Who gets to decide which rights get protected for Americans The Hands That Rock The Cradle: Donald Trump, the Supreme Court, and the Federalist Society. Whose Constitution is it, Anyway?: Originalism vs. The Living Constitution     RELATED LINKS Follow Ellis Conversations on Twitter Follow Judge Ronald Ellis on Twitter Follow Jamil Ellis on Twitter Follow Jamil Ellis on LinkedIn Check out Unified Ground Check out BlackHistoryChatGPT

Unpopular decisions and multiple scandals involving lavish, undisclosed gifts from conservative megadonors have the Supreme Court handing down decisions under a cloud of public outcry and controversy—but that hasn't stopped the conservative majority from acting just as hardline as its critics feared.  Guest: Mark Joseph Stern, court watcher and senior writer at Slate. If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get benefits like zero ads on any Slate podcast, bonus episodes of shows like Slow Burn and Dear Prudence—and you'll be supporting the work we do here on What Next. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to help support our work. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Unpopular decisions and multiple scandals involving lavish, undisclosed gifts from conservative megadonors have the Supreme Court handing down decisions under a cloud of public outcry and controversy—but that hasn't stopped the conservative majority from acting just as hardline as its critics feared.  Guest: Mark Joseph Stern, court watcher and senior writer at Slate. If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get benefits like zero ads on any Slate podcast, bonus episodes of shows like Slow Burn and Dear Prudence—and you'll be supporting the work we do here on What Next. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to help support our work. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Unpopular decisions and multiple scandals involving lavish, undisclosed gifts from conservative megadonors have the Supreme Court handing down decisions under a cloud of public outcry and controversy—but that hasn't stopped the conservative majority from acting just as hardline as its critics feared.  Guest: Mark Joseph Stern, court watcher and senior writer at Slate. If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get benefits like zero ads on any Slate podcast, bonus episodes of shows like Slow Burn and Dear Prudence—and you'll be supporting the work we do here on What Next. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to help support our work. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the words of Khalid...Another one! SCOTUS is back at it and not hiding it's hood...JD's that is. Buff doesn't hold back on the folks that sat out 2016. We discuss the Affirmative Action ruling from the supreme court. We celebrate Auntie Angela Basset for her honorary Oscar and Juvenile for his Tiny Desk concert on NPR. Ferg doesn't like Back that Azz up and we are as appalled as you are. He is also excited coming off of his family reunion and the nostalgia that it creates. Buff takes first question and wants to know if we agree with Ban the Box initiatives and that leads to a discussion on whether we would hire felons. Razi wants to discuss the Chicago shooting by the 14 year old son. We discuss if we would have done the same thing, was it the right thing to do, and if we agree with the DA for not charging the family. Finally we talk through what the affirmative action ruling will do for HBCU applications. We close with Razi mistaking Justice Roberts for Justice Thomas. He isn't sorry though. Buff is excited for the NBA free agency and the contracts that everyone is getting, but is not impressed at the song Pound Town. Finally, we debate what makes a burger a burger and the best thing Ferg has never had. This was a fun one!! Enjoy! --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/threebrothersnosense/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/threebrothersnosense/support

Enjoy it! SHOULDN'T GOVERNOR RON DESANTIS BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE FOR UNCONSTITUTIONAL THEREFORE CRIMINAL CONDUCT???????????? @MIAMIHERALD @TEXASTRIBUNE EVERYBODY CALL DOJ TELL THEM TO CHARGE #ABBOTT IN TEXAS AND THEN HE WILL BE IMMEDIATELY REMOVED FROM OFFICE BECAUSE THAT'S THE LAW IN TEXAS HAHAHA THAT'S WHAT GOT #PAXTON SACKED!!! I'm trying to get six supreme Court justices removed for perjury

Everybody call the justice department 202-514-2000 demand they hurry the f up!!!! Stop giving him preferential treatment anybody else would be on death row by now!!!!!SHOULDN'T GOVERNOR RON DESANTIS BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE FOR UNCONSTITUTIONAL THEREFORE CRIMINAL CONDUCT???????????? @MIAMIHERALD @TEXASTRIBUNE EVERYBODY CALL DOJ TELL THEM TO CHARGE #ABBOTT IN TEXAS AND THEN HE WILL BE IMMEDIATELY REMOVED FROM OFFICE BECAUSE THAT'S THE LAW IN TEXAS HAHAHA THAT'S WHAT GOT #PAXTON SACKED!!! I'm trying to get six supreme Court justices removed for perjury

#DanielleRadin is a favorite creator of one of my favorite indigenous creators, #asinaabe, 7th Fire Messenger, who points out that just substitute colonizer for narcissist and you can understand the f** atrocities that have taken place in the past four and a half centuries! Every American should know how to protect themselves from predatory malignant psychopathic narcissists like Trump! And in your private life as well don't put up with these c**********!! Dump them!!! #dumptrump ! Here's one for the young people thank you you're going to save the planet just by all voting en masse all 8 million of you in 2024! Can't wait to see it!!!!

Jared kushner got 2 billion in blood money from the Saudis! He couldn't get a security clearance in the white house but he still managed to make off with 640 million dollars with his wife Ivanka Trump! Call DOJ 202-514-2000 and ask them wtf is their problem!?! Why aren't these mfrs being investigated?? seize their ill-gotten assets!!!!Here's one for the young people thank you you're going to save the planet just by all voting en masse all 8 million of you in 2024! Can't wait to see it!!!!

F* face #NaziTrump is actually trying to sue his rape victim E Jean Carroll for defamation! F* outrageous mfr belongs behind bars! Here's one for the young people thank you you're going to save the planet just by all voting en masse all 8 million of you in 2024! Can't wait to see it!!!!

Why don't they charge him with a million wire fraud charges, TREASON AND TERRORISM and throw him in f* prison where he belongs????Here's one for the young people thank you you're going to save the planet just by all voting en masse all 8 million of you in 2024! Can't wait to see it!!!!

Everybody called Dick durbin's office 202-224-3121 tell him to subpoena Justice Roberts to tell Congress about all this f* corruption in the supreme Court these days!! I have been calling for six of those justices to be removed resign prosecuted for perjury, having sworn an oath that Roe v Wade was settled law! They f** lied under oath to get confirmed so let's demand the resignations!!!! FAIR IS FAIR Trump organization CFO just got out of jail hahaha!We need to #SHUTHIMDOWN, TOTALLY !!! EVERYBODY CALL DOJ 202-514-2000 IT'S A FREE F** PHONE CALL YOU LAZY B******!

There are some great unknown comics out there in social media like MattRife is some young talent! I love that Asian comic who says what the hail LOL

On Thursday's Mark Levin Show, the Supreme Court ruled that affirmative action is out in colleges and universities around the country. Justice Roberts wrote the decision on the High Court's ruling, which strikes down affirmative action practices in college admissions. President Biden giving his two cents today in the White House press briefing - sharing his displeasure of the High Court's ruling. The Democrat party is the segregationist party. They seek to punish people based on their race and skin color. The Democratic party is destroying America, because they hate America. The Democrat Party today claims that colorblindness is racist. How anyone could be a part of such a party, is a question for the ages. The decision today was a very important one. Later, our friend Whoopi on The View, said "I want to also sort of read something that Clarence Thomas apparently said. He doesn't know what diversity is. That's what he said. And so he doesn't get it." The Democrats hate him because he's Black. He grew up poor. He grew up a Marxist... until he began to think for himself! She went on later on in the show to say "You know, is this leading to no women in colleges soon? Who knows?" Who wrote and passed the 14th Amendment? Equal protection. Republicans. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

#BenMeiselas term of FASCIST IDIOCRACY comes to mind! WHAT DO YOU EXPECT FROM THE WORST CRIMINAL IN HIS HUMAN HISTORYJudge Cannon f* up three times before and even got scathing opinions handed down from the 11th circuit on her judicial misconduct, trying to protect traitor Trump from Justice! These scathing opinions came from Trump- appointed, conservative judges no less! I think everyone's making a huge mistake by not calling for her removal hell she should be impeached as a judge! She's obviously incompetent and conflicted Thank Gods for young people! YOUNG PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SAVE THE PLANET

Judge Cannon f* up three times before and even got scathing opinions handed down from the 11th circuit on her judicial misconduct, trying to protect traitor Trump from Justice! These scathing opinions came from Trump- appointed, conservative judges no less! I think everyone's making a huge mistake by not calling for her removal hell she should be impeached as a judge! She's obviously incompetent and conflicted Thank Gods for young people! YOUNG PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SAVE THE PLANET

#AriMelber thanked me on Twitter for my support and comments (he's one of the best & only sane reporters!) and I thanked him for thanking me and offered to be on his show

This mf4 must be the Antichrist because nothing seems to stick! He's broken every single f* law on the books and then some! & still walking around free WTAF!!! Call the justice department and demand the death penalty for the worst criminal in human history! Capital punishment is definitely commensurate with all his f* crimes #TrumpIsTheAntichrist Everybody call Dick durbin's office 202-224-3121 tell him to subpoena Justice Roberts to tell Congress about all this f* corruption in the supreme Court these days!! I have been calling for six of those justices to be removed resign prosecuted for perjury, having sworn an oath that Roe v Wade was settled law! They f** lied under oath to get confirmed so let's demand the resignations!!!! FAIR IS FAIR Trump organization CFO just got out of jail hahaha!We need to #SHUTHIMDOWN, TOTALLY !!! EVERYBODY CALL DOJ 202-514-2000 IT'S A FREE F** PHONE CALL YOU LAZY B******!

I asked @TrevorNoah countless times if I could have his job!

Megyn Kelly begins the show with the breaking news out of the Supreme Court, overturning affirmative action and race-based admissions for colleges. The Manhattan Institute's Jason Riley, author of "Maverick," and Heather Mac Donald, author of "When Race Trumps Merit," join to discuss why it was the right decision, the opinions from Justice Roberts and Thomas, the dissenting opinion from Justice Sotomayor, the hysterical reaction from progressives in the media and Michelle Obama, smears and lies about the topic, and more. Then Carrie Prejean Boller and Britt Mayor, founders and hosts of "The Battle Cry," join to discuss California's bill criminalizing parents who don't affirm child transgender identity, a trans influencer who got banned after flashing at the White House's underwhelming apology, Budweiser's CEO refusing to apologize for Dylan Mulvaney partnership, Pride lowlights about "coming for your children" and the Girl Scouts, and more.Riley's book: https://www.amazon.com/Maverick-Biography-Thomas-Jason-Riley/dp/1541619684Mac Donald's book: https://www.amazon.com/When-Race-Trumps-Merit-Sacrifices/dp/1956007164 Carrie and Britt's "Battle Cry": https://www.instagram.com/thebattlecry_us/ Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKellyTwitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShowInstagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShowFacebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at: https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow 

Back by popular demand! You guys want more #StevenGreer and #extraterrestrials you got it babes! I am happy to comply

Thank Gods for young people! YOUNG PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SAVE THE PLANET

Malcolm Vance is extremely knowledgeable interesting guy! Check out this interviewEverybody called Dick durbin's office 202-224-3121 tell him to subpoena Justice Roberts to tell Congress about all this f* corruption in the supreme Court these days!! I have been calling for six of those justices to be removed resign prosecuted for perjury, having sworn an oath that Roe v Wade was settled law! They f** lied under oath to get confirmed so let's demand the resignations!!!! FAIR IS FAIR Trump organization CFO just got out of jail hahaha!We need to #SHUTHIMDOWN, TOTALLY !!! EVERYBODY CALL DOJ 202-514-2000 IT'S A FREE F** PHONE CALL YOU LAZY B******!

In this episode, Alex starts by going through his fascination over the public fascination of the Titan submersible  tragedy. He goes through the tragedy, the ironies of the catastrophy, and why it appears like this fiasco could have been prevented. Next, Alex talks about new reports that discuss how Germany is going to increase its military spending to meet NATO's goal of 2% of GDP. It seems like Germany is changing due to rising security threats from the War in Ukraine and worries towards China. Alex then discusses a new report that (potentially) names three scientists from the Wuhan Insitute of Virology that could be patient zeroes for getting COVID-19. If these reports are true, this could prove that the virus came from a lab and not nature; however, Alex is sceptical. Finally, new revelations from ProPublica shine a light on more ethical violations in the Supreme Court. This time, these allegations involve Justice Samuel Alito taking trips to Alaska with a billionaire named Paul Singer. Alex worries that the court truly has a legitimacy crisis and Justice Roberts must do something about it. 

Host Saeed Khan talks with guests, attorneys Steve Fishman and Joel Sklar, veteran journalist Nancy Derringer and Deadline Detroit co-founder Allan Lengel.They talk about: MSU students sue professor for forcing them to fund liberal political group; Ron DeSantis's bumbled announcement on Twitter; Is Jack Smith going to slam Trump soon? Justice Roberts says ethics changes on the way;  State official's suggestion for Michigan officeholder pay hike shot down; Target pulls Pride collection items after threats to employees; Hindu “White Supremacist” with Nazi flag Crashes truck into White House barrier; and Schmuck of the Week.

Tonight on The Last Word: Chief Justice Roberts claims the Supreme Court is adhering to the “highest standards of conduct.” Also, Attorney General Merrick Garland publicly ignores the Trump letter. Plus, a Florida school bans Amanda Gorman's inauguration poem. And Uvalde families are demanding accountability one year later. Cecile Richards, Mini Timmaraju, Daniel Horwitz, Rep. Maxwell Alejandro Frost and Beto O'Rourke join Lawrence O'Donnell.

Negotiators from Speaker McCarthy's team and President Biden's team meet at the White House to discuss a debt ceiling compromise. While McCarthy urges Republicans to stay united, the White House estimates that 100 Democratic votes will be needed to pass a deal. Chief Justice John Roberts speaks out during a publicly televised speech to defend the Supreme Court. An attack is launched across the Russian border.... by Russians. And the Brooklyn Bridge turns 140 years old today. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Trust in the Supreme Court is on the decline. A new poll by Marquette University Law School finds 41% of Americans approve of how the Supreme Court is doing its job.  Now the Chief Justice himself is speaking out in his first televised speech since the pandemic. Boyd looks at what Justice Roberts had to say about the court's ethics and examines where we go from here. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The two hundred eighty-third episode of the DSR Daily Brief Stories Cited in the Episode: Russia launched 35 attack drones over Kyiv, the Ukrainian Air Force says. Ukraine war: 'Mad panic' as Russia evacuates town near Zaporizhzhia plant Yellen: ‘No good options' if Congress fails to act on debt Texas gunman's white supremacist views eyed as possible motive All hail Queen Ursula! Pakistan, Afghanistan agree to boost trade, lower border tensions Democrat urges Justice Roberts to act over Clarence Thomas's ‘tangled web' Man uses $40 in lottery winnings to win $500,000 jackpot Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The two hundred eighty-third episode of the DSR Daily Brief Stories Cited in the Episode: Russia launched 35 attack drones over Kyiv, the Ukrainian Air Force says. Ukraine war: 'Mad panic' as Russia evacuates town near Zaporizhzhia plant Yellen: ‘No good options' if Congress fails to act on debt Texas gunman's white supremacist views eyed as possible motive All hail Queen Ursula! Pakistan, Afghanistan agree to boost trade, lower border tensions Democrat urges Justice Roberts to act over Clarence Thomas's ‘tangled web' Man uses $40 in lottery winnings to win $500,000 jackpot Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The two hundred eighty-third episode of the DSR Daily Brief Stories Cited in the Episode: Russia launched 35 attack drones over Kyiv, the Ukrainian Air Force says. Ukraine war: 'Mad panic' as Russia evacuates town near Zaporizhzhia plant Yellen: ‘No good options' if Congress fails to act on debt Texas gunman's white supremacist views eyed as possible motive All hail Queen Ursula! Pakistan, Afghanistan agree to boost trade, lower border tensions Democrat urges Justice Roberts to act over Clarence Thomas's ‘tangled web' Man uses $40 in lottery winnings to win $500,000 jackpot Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We'll be speaking with activist Jose Vega about disrupting the establishment's corporate narrative, President Biden's hypocritical statement regarding journalism & the continued unraveling corruption of SCOTUS.   Check out our Patreon for more! ☀️ patreon.com/JENerationalChange ☀️ WEBSITE: jenerationalchange.com ☀️ TWITTER: @JENChangeFL  ☀️ INSTAGRAM: @JENerationalChange  ☀️ FACEBOOK: @Jen Perelman   Streamed live on May 1, 2023.

Roy Woods Jr was right! From the corrupt court of Justice Roberts to false flags in Ukraine, we dissect this week's attempt to make us all feel like Boo Boo the Fool! Plus we teach you how to make the perfect cocktail of delicious white supremacist tears with a Tucker-is-for-sure-racist back! The Final Word on all things Political and Pop Cultural. Comedic duo Frangela makes "Real News. REAL FUNNY!" Your positive "Back Up AND Black Up!" here to inspire you to #RESIST! Do you want to hear more Idiots of the Week?? Become a Frangela patron at Patreon.com and get three exclusive Micro Idiot podcasts each week as our thank you for your support. Frangela swag available at https://www.zazzle.com/store/frangela! Book a personalized video shout-out from Frangela at Cameo.com/frangeladuo. And please go to pickedcherries.com to share a small snippet of our podcasts with others to help us grow our listenership. Thank you! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

1Will Chevron Deference Be Overturned?The U.S. Supreme Court granted cert in Loper Bright Enterprises, et al. v. Raimondo, et al. andagreed to reconsider Chevron v. NRDC, which instructs courts to defer to a federal agencies'interpretation of an ambiguous law. NCLA filed an amicus brief in support of Loper BrightEnterprises' petition for a writ of certiorari on behalf of similarly situated clients, RelentlessInc., Huntress Inc., and Seafreeze Fleet LLC, corporations operating in the herring fishery off thecoast of New England. NCLA represents amici as parties in Relentless Inc., et al. v. U.S. Dept. ofCommerce, et al.Vec comments on the Loper Bright cert grant and the question of whether Chevron deferencewill be overturned by the Supreme Court.2The NYTimes Attack on Chief Justice RobertsU.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. informed the Senate Judiciary Committeein a recent letter that he was declining its invitation to testify about ethics rules for the SupremeCourt. The New York Times has since then attacked Chief Justice Roberts, claiming that he isunfit to serve on the judiciary.Mark defends Chief Justice Roberts from the New York Times attack for declining to testifybefore Congress on SCOTUS ethics.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Let's talk about Chief Justice Roberts being invited to the Senate.... --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/beau-of-the-fifth-column/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/beau-of-the-fifth-column/support

As laughter ricocheted around the Supreme Court chamber Wednesday, Professor Mary Anne Franks wondered if she could quite believe her ears. The matter of some hilarity, it seems, were messages sent by a convicted stalker to his victim. Individual messages that were among what one detective estimated to number in the hundreds of thousands - possibly as many as one million messages - sent by Billy Raymond Counterman to singer Coles Whalen. Counterman's campaign of harassment drove Whalen away from performing, indeed drove her away from her home state. She moved across the country to get away. On this week's Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Professor Mary Anne Franks to discuss Counterman v Colorado and how the details of a cyber-stalking case were lost to free speech concerns about trigger warnings and "sensitivity". You can read Prof. Franks' powerful piece on this here.  In this week's Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia is joined by Slate's Mark Joseph Stern to discuss the big fat settlement Dominion got in its defamation case against Fox News, and why it feels so unsatisfying, the religious liberty case you probably missed at the court this week, Groff v DeJoy. They also talk about how Sen. Dianne Feinstein's continued absence from the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Senate Democrats' workarounds for it, are like bringing a bubble blower to a knife fight.  Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

As laughter ricocheted around the Supreme Court chamber Wednesday, Professor Mary Anne Franks wondered if she could quite believe her ears. The matter of some hilarity, it seems, were messages sent by a convicted stalker to his victim. Individual messages that were among what one detective estimated to number in the hundreds of thousands - possibly as many as one million messages - sent by Billy Raymond Counterman to singer Coles Whalen. Counterman's campaign of harassment drove Whalen away from performing, indeed drove her away from her home state. She moved across the country to get away. On this week's Amicus, Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Professor Mary Anne Franks to discuss Counterman v Colorado and how the details of a cyber-stalking case were lost to free speech concerns about trigger warnings and "sensitivity". You can read Prof. Franks' powerful piece on this here.  In this week's Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia is joined by Slate's Mark Joseph Stern to discuss the big fat settlement Dominion got in its defamation case against Fox News, and why it feels so unsatisfying, the religious liberty case you probably missed at the court this week, Groff v DeJoy. They also talk about how Sen. Dianne Feinstein's continued absence from the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Senate Democrats' workarounds for it, are like bringing a bubble blower to a knife fight.  Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, reflected on his career and work as a judge at the Tenth Circuit Bench-Bar Conference Fireside Chat on September 2, 2022. This podcast features excerpts from that discussion. Incoming Tenth Circuit Chief Judge Jerome A. Holmes and outgoing Chief Judge Timothy M. Tymkovich interviewed Justice Roberts for this program.  Justice Roberts began by responding to news media comments about the Supreme Court's legitimacy after decisions during the 2021-22 Term changing established precedents. Those decisions included the Court's landmark ruling overturning abortion rights established in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, No. 19-1392, 597 U.S. __ (2022).  This podcast also features Justice Roberts' comments about: 1)         his role presiding over the Judicial Conference of the United States and serving as Chancellor of the Smithsonian Institution; 2)         his work in the early 1980's as a law clerk for Justice William Rehnquist, including law clerks' basketball games in that era with Justice Byron White; 3)         his work in private practice and the U.S. Solicitor General's office as an appellate specialist before becoming a judge; 4)         why he enjoys the job as Supreme Court Chief Justice, and his explanation of the behind-the-scenes collegiality which exists among the current justices;  5)         how he seeks to write court decisions that are clear for both lawyers and non-lawyers; and6)         how he deals with welcoming new justices to the Court and its decision making process, and with the stress of deciding complex cases.

Various options are at play in the EPA's planned greenhouse gas standards for new and existing power plants. In this episode, Lissa Lynch of NRDC discusses the implications.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsA couple of weeks ago, the policy analysts at the Rhodium Group put out a new report showing that the Biden administration's legislative achievements are not quite enough to get it to its Paris climate goals. But those goals could be reached if the legislation is supplemented with smart executive action.Some of the most important upcoming executive actions are EPA's greenhouse gas standards for new and existing power plants. The Supreme Court famously struck down Obama's Clean Power Plan — his attempt to address existing power plants — judging it impermissibly expansive. So now EPA has to figure out what to ask of individual plants.The agency's decisions will help shape the future of the US power sector and determine whether the Biden administration gets on track for its climate goals. To talk through those decisions in more detail, I contacted Lissa Lynch, who runs the Federal Legal Group at the NRDC's Climate & Clean Energy Program. We discussed the options before the EPA, the viability of carbon capture and hydrogen as systems of pollution reduction, and whether Biden will have time to complete all the regulatory work that remains.Alright. With no further ado, Lissa Lynch from NRDC. Welcome to Volts. Thank you so much for coming.Lissa LynchThank you for having me.David RobertsThis is a subject that I used to spend a lot of time thinking about back in the day, and it's sort of receded for a while, and now it's back. So it's very exciting for a nerd like me. So I want to just quickly walk through some history with this and then sort of hand it off to you so you can tell us where things stand now, because I don't want to assume that listeners have been obsessively following this now nearly two decade long saga. So let me just run through some history really briefly. So listeners will recall in 2007, there's a big Supreme Court case, Massachusetts vs. EPA, in which the Supreme Court ruled that CO2 is eligible to be listed as a pollutant under the Clean Air Act if EPA determines it is a threat to human health.And then shortly thereafter, Obama's EPA officially determined that it is a threat to human health via the endangerment finding. So this is one thing I'm not sure everybody understands, and I just want to get it on the table up front. So for context, the combination of those two things, Mass vs. EPA, plus the endangerment finding, means that EPA is lawfully obliged to regulate greenhouse gases. This is not a choice. This is not something it can do or not do, depending on how it feels or who's president. They have to do it. So then that triggers the obligation, three separate obligations.You have to regulate mobile sources, which Obama did with his new fuel economy regulations, which are still in place, as far as I know. Then you have to regulate new stationary sources of greenhouse gases, which Obama did. And as far as I know, we can come back to this in a second, but as far as I know, those new power plant regulations that Obama passed are still in effect. And then thirdly, you have to regulate existing stationary sources of greenhouse gases, which mainly means power plants. And so Obama's effort to regulate existing power plants is called the Clean Power Plan.People may remember the fuss and ado about the Clean Power Plan as it was under development. Lawsuits were immediately launched. Of course, the Supreme Court took the extremely unusual step of putting the law on hold, basically not letting it go into implementation until it had heard this case. And then it heard the case, rejected the Clean Power Plan on the basis of the newly dreamed up, rectally, extracted Major Questions Doctrine. So that's where we stand now is we've got the mobile regs in place, although Biden is updating those too. I think we've got the new power plant regs in place, although Biden is also updating those.But as for existing power plant regulations, there are basically none. It's been a legal mire and so Biden's got to do those too. So let's talk about what Supreme Court said about the Clean Power Plan in their ruling and how that constrains the sort of solution space that we're looking at now.Lissa LynchSo in West Virginia vs. EPA, that was the Supreme Court decision from last summer. The Supreme Court held that this section of the Clean Air Act that we're talking about here, section 111, does not clearly provide authority for the approach that EPA took in the Clean Power Plan. And what they did there we sort of refer to as generation shifting. In the Clean Power Plan, EPA looked at the power sector as a whole and they concluded that the best system for reducing fossil-fuel-fired power plant emissions was a combination of measures including shifting generation away from dirtier fossil power toward cleaner power.So essentially retiring dirtier power plants and replacing them with renewables.David RobertsRight. So the unit of analysis here was a state's whole power fleet, not the power plant individual, but the whole power fleet.Lissa LynchRight. And the reasoning for that in the Clean Power Plan context was supported by the companies themselves, the power companies themselves and the states who said, yes, this is the way that we are dealing with decarbonizing our fleets. We are looking out across our whole fleets, retiring the dirtiest sources and replacing them with cleaner generation. That's how the existing RGGI program in California cap-and-trade programs work. That's how many of the power companies that have emission reduction or clean energy targets are doing that.David RobertsAnd let's just say Republicans have been saying for decades that regulations are too restrictive and they're not flexible enough and states and power companies need flexibility. And this was perfectly flexible. This is absolutely as flexible as you could make a system. It just said to the state, do whatever you want to do to lower the average emissions of your power plant fleet. And then conservatives got what they wanted and hated it for other reasons.Lissa LynchOne of the things that's important about what is left on the table after this decision is there is still a considerable amount of flexibility on the compliance side. So what the Supreme Court was really dealing with was the method EPA uses for setting the level of the standard, basically setting the target that industry has to meet. So the Supreme Court explicitly took that generation shifting approach off the table for purposes of setting the level of the standard itself. And so after this decision, EPA can still set standards, in John Roberts words, "Based on the application of measures that would reduce pollution by causing the regulated source to operate more cleanly."David RobertsRight? So the idea here is EPA, by interpreting the Clean Air Act in such a way as to apply to the power plant fleet overall, and sort of telling states how they have to shape their overall power plant fleets. EPA was assuming too much authority, basically. Like doing something major, despite too major for the words in the Clean Air Act, which I don't want to dwell on this too long, but let's just pause here to acknowledge that. No one then in the ruling, now in the subsequent ruling, since then in all scholarship knows what the hell "major" means or when it is that an agency has crossed the line from proper regulatory interpretation into "Oops, too major."It really just kind of sounds like and seems that major means anything bigger than John Roberts is comfortable with.Lissa LynchRight? I mean, this is one of the really concerning things about the Major Questions Doctrine, just generally is that it is murky and it does have this sort of paralyzing effect on ...David RobertsYes, intentionally.Lissa LynchExactly. It is explicitly anti-regulatory and explicitly sort of intended to stop agencies in their tracks and make them question, oh, is this too major?David RobertsAnd there's no answer. Right. So naturally you're going to be cautious because there's no definition of major. It's just whatever irritates John Roberts when he wakes up one day. So this was the opening salvo, I think, in a longer Supreme Court effort basically to brow-beat agencies into being timid. So anyway, point being EPA can't use the overall power fleet as a sort of benchmark through which to set this standard. So what does that leave? What's the sort of range of motion that we think we still can act in here when we're talking about these new standards?Lissa LynchSo now that we have this Supreme Court decision in place. EPA's got some guidelines, and they can base the next round of standards on, as Justice Roberts put it, measures that make the plants operate more cleanly. So what they're looking for now is a rule that looks more like what traditional pollution regulations of the past looked like based on scrubbers, bag houses, the stuff that you can physically attach onto the plant or do at the plant itself to reduce that plant's emissions. When it comes to reducing CO2 emissions, the options are limited.David RobertsWell, let me pause there. Before we get into that, I just want to say one thing that I learned from your writing that I had not known, and I don't know that it's widely known. So there's been talk ever since Mass vs. EPA that bugged conservatives, and they would love to undo that, right? Because they would just love to moot this whole thing by undoing that ruling and saying that CO2 is outside the context of the Clean Air Act and have been muttering about doing that. So the Inflation Reduction Act statutorily locks into place that ruling.Right. It says explicitly CO2 qualifies under the Clean Air Act, and it instructs EPA to develop new standards. So there's no ambiguity about that. And it says EPA needs to set standards that are going to reduce emissions relative to baseline, where the new baseline is taking the Inflation Reduction Act itself and all its subsidies into account. So it's telling EPA calculate what all these subsidies are going to do, what the new sort of business as usual trajectory of emissions would be, and then develop regulations that reduce it further. I didn't know any of that.Lissa LynchYeah, no, this is huge. And I mean, obviously the Inflation Reduction Act is enormous. It is going to accelerate the clean energy progress that we've seen in the last decade or so by many fold. It is a huge, huge deal. And one of the provisions in this quite large law essentially reaffirms EPA's not only statutory authority, but its obligation to go ahead and set CO2 emission standards for fossil-fuel-fired power plants. And so that's a clear statement from Congress last year.David RobertsClear enough even for John Roberts.Lissa LynchRight. So we have always thought that that authority and obligation under the statute was quite clear, but now it's crystal clear, and they need to move.David RobertsAnd I think it's also important to absorb this new baseline idea, because the IRA itself and all the historical progress since the last round of these regs, the new expected baseline for power plant emissions is much lower now than it was when Oobama's EPA was calculating these things. Which commensurately means you're going to need tighter standards if you want to reduce further than that new baseline.Lissa LynchYeah. And it is kind of wild to look back on ten years ago. So it was ten years ago, 2013, that President Obama announced in his big climate change speech that he was directing his EPA to go ahead and set carbon pollution reduction standards under Section 111 for fossil-fuel-fired power plants. The first time that was being done. So much has changed in ten years in the power sector. And I think anyone listening to this podcast knows we are smack in the midst of a clean energy transition in the power industry. Industry itself says so.The Edison Electric Institute says we are, quote, "In the middle of a profound long term transformation in how energy is generated, transmitted and used." Lazard, the investment firm, estimates that wind costs have fallen by 46%, solar has fallen by 77% over the past decade. So we're just in a totally different world now than we were ten years ago. And so we passed the Clean Power Plan's 2030 emission reduction targets in 2019 without the Clean Power Plan ever having gone into effect.David RobertsWhich in retrospect makes all the Republican arguments about how this is an economy killing regulation and it's too strong and it's unrealistic and there's no way we can move that fast look utterly ludicrous, which we all said at the time, but we had to pretend that it was a real live argument. So they're saying it's too stringent, it's going to destroy the economy. And here we rocketed past it in 2019 without any regs.Lissa LynchRight? And that is part and parcel with each time. There are new ambitious pollution standards set ...David RobertsEvery time.Lissa LynchUnder the Clean Air Act, industry claims the sky is going to fall. This happened with the acid rain program back in the American Electric Power predicted that it was going to destroy the economy of the Midwest. Like the lights are going to go out, the sky is going to fall.Every time and we never learn. We never learn from those previous examples. It's crazy, right?And so the actual costs of complying with the acid rain program and reducing sulfur dioxide ended up being, I think, around a 10th of what industry had estimated. Sulfur scrubbers are now widely used. The program has been a great success. It is this great example of how we can set pollution standards and then innovate to meet them cost effectively and quicker than anyone expects. We do it over and over again.David RobertsOver and over again.Lissa LynchAnd we can do it in this context.David RobertsRight? One more thing. Before we get to what's available for the new standards, we should mention I should mention that when the clean power plant got shut down, the legal obligation to pass regulations on existing power plants then passed to the Trump administration, which did that sort of passed a ... what was it called? The clean America ...Lissa LynchThe Affordable, Clean Energy Plan.David RobertsYes, Affordable Clean Energy, the ACE Plan, which several analyses showed would on net have raised emissions in the power plant sector. So those got shut down in court, too. They were just completely a joke. Ludicrous so that's all the history. So here we are Biden's EPA has got to regulate existing power plants and new power plants. And it can't take this so called outside the fence line holistic approach that the clean power plant took. So it's got to set standards based on what you can do at the individual power plant level inside the fence line, as they say.So what are the options? Actually, I'm talking way too much, but let me get one more thing out of the way and then I'll let you talk. But one of the things that faced the reason I just want people to understand this too, the reason Obama took this approach, the reason Obama's EPA took this outside the fence line holistic approach, is that if you're just restricting yourself to the individual power plant, you're stuck with either marginal improvements, right? You get the boiler to work more efficiently, you tighten up efficiency, and you can sort of marginally 3% to 5%, reduce emissions.Or on the other side, there's carbon capture and sequestration, which especially ten years ago when Obama's EPA was contemplating it, was not very well tested, not very well proven, super expensive. So you either had sort of like a fly swatter or a nuke when it comes to the individual power plant, which is why they went with the holistic approach. So now the holistic approach is off the table. We're back to the fly swatter or nuke problem. So just tell us sort of like, what are the available options here?Lissa LynchYeah, so you kind of covered the two ends of the range, right? On one end, the very low ambition end, you can make minor improvements to the operating efficiency of the plant, the way the plant operates. That was the basis for the standards that the Trump administration issued. And as you noted, improving the efficiency of the plant makes it run better and it can be called upon to run more and therefore can end up increasing its overall emissions. That sort of rebound effect. That's a possibility. You can still reduce emissions through operating efficiency improvements. And I think there's more options that could achieve greater reductions than the ones that the Trump administration included in their rule.But still, we're talking the very low-end, single percentage reductions in the middle, there's this option of cofiring with a lower carbon fuel. So if you're talking about coal plants, you can co-fire that coal plant partially with gas. In a gas plant, you could co-fire partially with hydrogen and you're going to bring the emissions rate of the plant down somewhat. In some of our analysis, we've estimated that a 40% cofiring coal with gas. So cofiring a coal plant with 40% gas gets you about a 20% emission reduction. So it's not nothing, but it also involves additional fossil infrastructure to get gas to a coal plant or additional infrastructure to get hydrogen to a gas plant.And on top of several other issues with hydrogen that we can talk about a little later.David RobertsWell, a legal question, I guess all of this in some respect is arbitrary, but where is the line between forcing fuel-switching, which I think Supreme Court said was out of bounds, and too far, versus a rule that requires cofiring, which is like kind of like halfway to fuel switching? Is there a legal distinction there between those two?Lissa LynchThere's absolutely precedent for requiring cleaner fuels or fuel processes. What the Supreme Court mentioned, at least in dicta, was we don't want to see standards that would force a plant to stop existing. And so essentially, if EPA were to base the standard on total conversion from coal to gas, which some coal plants have undertaken with cheap gas prices, that I think, based on our reading of the decision anyway, would probably be too far. So full conversion probably off the table along with generation shifting. But partial cofiring is actually one of the technologies that the Obama administration considered for their Clean Power Plan, as was carbon capture.And as you noted, the approach that they took in the Clean Power Plan, they selected because it was the most cost effective. So they ruled out carbon capture and cofiring, not because they weren't adequately demonstrated or available, they were just more expensive than the approach that EPA ended up going with.David RobertsBut now we're forced back basically to that more expensive approach.Lissa LynchRight, as I mentioned before, but want to keep reiterating, this is all about setting the level of the standard, finding it's a math problem. EPA looks at the options, and so the options as we see them are efficiency improvements, getting very little cofiring, getting somewhere in the middle, or carbon capture and storage, getting the most amount of emission reductions. They look out at that and they select the best system. Then they apply it to the plant and essentially do a math problem and come out with a number, a numerical limit for the amount of CO2 emission reductions that the plants need to achieve.Then they hand the baton off to the states for existing sources and to the companies for new sources. So this is not a requirement to install that specific technology. It's a way to derive the level of the standard and then pass that off to the states and the companies to comply with.David RobertsRight. EPA sets the standard and then says to states and companies, do what you want.Lissa LynchRight, as long as you can meet this number. Be creative, innovate.David RobertsThe central question is what upon what technology is the number going to be based on exactly? This low-end, this something in the middle, and this high-end, which is carbon capture and sequestration. So here I want to talk about what the sort of arguments are around this. It says in the text of the Clean Air Act that EPA should set the standard based on the best available system. That has to be adequately demonstrated so I just want to dig in a little bit on the technical legal language here. Like what exactly or what have courts interpreted that language to mean exactly?What is required to be adequately demonstrated? A single demonstration plant somewhere? like some good charts and graphs in a lab? Or do you have to be commercial, or does price and, you know, financial viability come into that? Like, what is EPA thinking about when it thinks about what is adequately demonstrated or best?Lissa LynchYes. Okay, so I'm a Clean Air Act lawyer. This is my favorite part. I love the Clean Air Act, and I love to talk about the language of the statute because that's actually what we're really fighting over here. EPA is tasked with establishing the standard of performance, and so that definition is in the statute. They have to determine the degree of emission limitation that can be achieved through the application of the best system of emission reduction that is adequately demonstrated considering cost, energy factors and essentially other factors. And so there's this really defined set of criteria that EPA needs to go through as they're determining what's the best system of emission reduction.So we've been talking about adequately demonstrated that it can't be a made up technology, but it also doesn't have to be widely used by everyone. Already, the Clean Air Act is technology forcing it's forward looking.David RobertsRight.Lissa LynchIt requires the regulated source to reduce its emissions commensurate with the best control systems that are available, not the ones that are already sort of out there in use, that plants are choosing to use of their own accord. So again, in a lot of ways, this is analogous to so SO2 scrubbers which were not in widely used, they were not widely produced in the 90s, and there were all these doom and gloom predictions of how much it's going to cost.We're not going to be able to do this. So right now, there's no limit at all on CO2 emissions from power plants. There's been no reason to innovate on carbon capture for power plants, and there is not a ton of projects out there in the world, but there are plenty to serve as an adequate demonstration for purposes of the Clean Air Act. There's essentially three parts here of carbon capture. There's capture, there's transport, and there's storage. And each part of that process is well established and has been in use for decades, especially the capture part. We've been capturing carbon for decades.And so there's plenty of demonstration in both pilot projects and at commercial scale to be applied in the power sector. It doesn't have to be something that's already widely out there.David RobertsSo it's sort of a holistic consideration. And EPA is sort of attempting to apply something like wisdom here. There's a balance of considerations. And I assume, and tell me if I'm wrong, that the usual suspects are arguing to EPA that that would be too strict, that a standard based on CCS would be too strict. And presumably the way they're making that argument is by saying CCS is not the best or adequately demonstrated. So what is their argument? Have you read, like, their briefs, or do they have a specific argument here?Lissa LynchThey do, and they're familiar. It's the same set of arguments that we've seen over and over. It's too costly, we can't do it yet. We're getting there. Just let us do this at our own pace. One of the concerning things is the argument that we need gas now, and we're okay with standards that are based on something we might do in the future. So set the standards only at a level that were ready for CCS, that were ready for hydrogen sometime in the future.David RobertsCCS ready.Lissa LynchCCS ready. Hydrogen ready.David RobertsI love that phrase.Lissa LynchIt's just kicking the can down the road.David RobertsLike your own David Hawkins once said, it's like saying, my driveway is Ferrari ready.Lissa LynchExactly. And I think what's at the heart of this industry estimates that CCS can achieve 90% capture and emissions data from the projects that have been built back that up. That is not to say that EPA needs to go ahead and require a 90% emission reduction from every single coal and gas plant in the country. Right. We think it makes the most sense for EPA to draw some distinctions based on the role that the plants perform on the grid. Right. So there's a big difference between ...David RobertsOh, really?Lissa LynchYes, there's a big difference between plants that are used for baseload power that are running constantly all the time, and those that are used intermittently for reliability as backup power during times of high demand.There does not need to be the exact identical standards on those two types of plants. So plants that are running full time are emitting the most, and they should be required to reduce their emissions to the greatest degree. So we think it makes sense to have a 90% capture based standard for plants that are going to serve as baseload, that are going to run all the time. And it's the most cost effective for those types of plants to install CCS, especially when you consider the tax credit. Plants that are operating intermittently as backup are already emitting less pollution simply by running less.And those plants can face a less stringent standard, stay on the grid as backup, and serve that really important reliability function without being required to install CCS, they can meet a lesser standard.David RobertsIs there a distinction between those two kinds of plants that is clean enough and clear enough to set legal limits around them because there are some fuzzy edge cases? And then, number two, are we sure that EPA like that's within EPA? Sort of. That's not major for EPA to be thinking to be sort of specifying which standards applied based on function based on operations.Lissa LynchYes. So this is the kind of detailed analytical and technical decision making that is well within the expert agency's wheelhouse. This is exactly the type of thing that the experts at the agency are normally tasked by the statute to do. They're the ones who run the numbers and figure out what's most appropriate for the specific type of plant that they're regulating. And in fact, the existing standards for new sources do include these sorts of subcategorization based on the use type of the plant. So this is not something complex and mysterious. This is based on true and visible distinctions between types of plants based on the way that they're used.And I think it really is yet another layer of the sort of flexibility that EPA can and should build into this program. Again, none of this is a particular mandate. And so the states and the companies then have that additional choice. Well, they can run a plant full steam and install controls, or they can run intermittently, keep that plant online and face a lesser limit, or they can retire it and make their own choices about what to replace it with. This is providing more and more levels of choices to the regulated industry to comply in the way that makes sense for them.David RobertsYeah. And something you mentioned in passing, I want to just highlight and put a pin in here, which is that a big argument here on your side is CCS is now being showered with subsidies. Like there are huge subsidies coming down from the Inflation Reduction Act for captured hydrogen, enough to make them economic in some cases or certainly a lot closer. So these are synergistic. I'm saying like the Biden administration's legislation is bolstering the case for these tighter standards because CCS is not just on its own now. Now it's explicitly being helped and shaped and stood up by government grants.Lissa LynchThat's right. And at the same time, the Inflation Reduction Act also contains a ton of money for renewables. And so that level of investment across these types of technologies really changes the overall cost of the regulations. And that's one of the things that EPA has to consider, is the overall cost of compliance to the system. And so again, when these standards are in place and states and companies are looking out across their fleet and saying, oh, what should we do? All of those incentives are going to come into that consideration for them. And it makes renewables really cheap to replace your older dirtier generation with.David RobertsI got one more question about the standard setting before I want to get into the politics a little bit, but some energy heads out there may be familiar with a company called NET Power, which has come up with a new, I guess it's a couple of years old now. They've built one demonstration plan, a new technology that without getting into the technological details, it's really fascinating. I might do a whole pod on it, but basically it burns natural gas. Emits no particulate pollution at all and captures 100% of the CO2 emissions as a purified stream of CO2.So you have in NET Power a natural gas power plant with zero particulate emissions and 100% carbon capture. They've built one, it's running and working. So has there been any talk about using that as a standard? Because that would be 100% carbon reduction. Has NET Power's tech come up in these discussions?Lissa LynchYeah, for sure. I mean, it's very cool, right? It was included, the EPA put out a white paper last year asking for input, sort of preregulatory input on the technologies that are available to reduce emissions, specifically from gas plants. And they took comment on the NET Power approach, which I cannot remember the name of. Allam something.David RobertsAllam Cycle, I think is right. I was trying to think of that.Lissa LynchAnd it is really cool and innovative and I hope that that is a direction that we're going to see any remaining fossil generation go in. And I think we may see that in the proposal. Again, all of what I'm talking about here is we have not seen a proposal from EPA. This is sort of NRDC's perspective on what is possible, justifiable achievable and legally defensible in court. And this is what we've been advocating for before the agency, and then we'll have to see what they come up with. We're expecting a proposal relatively soon, probably within a month or so.David RobertsWhat's really interesting to me about this, just from a political perspective, is it's a sort of weird inversion here of the typical roles. So you've got the power sector, which has been touting CCS for years, to sort of like defend the ongoing existence of fossil power plants. They sort of wave their hands at CCS and say, no, we can go clean too. So they've got Joe Manchin out up there saying, I want to go clean, but I want to do it with fossil. I literally think they've convinced him that they can eliminate their carbon emissions. And traditionally you've had sort of greens and climate people saying that's big and overly complicated and overly expensive and stupid and nobody's ever really going to do it and it's just going to make more sense to switch to clean generation.And so now we've got this odd political inversion where the power companies are saying, whoa, whoa, whoa, CCS is not really ready. We didn't mean "ready ready," we meant just over the horizon is what we meant. That's where they like it. They like CCS just over the horizon. And all of a sudden this is like calling their bluff. Like, oh, you've been talking about this for decades. Well, how about you use it? And then on the green side, on the climate side, you have a similar inversion where now greens and green groups like yours are arguing like CCS.Oh, it's great. Yeah, it's right there, it's ready to go, absolutely ready to serve. As the basis for a standard. It's just odd and funny and I just wonder if you have any comment on the politics of trying to herd the cats in the climate community around this message of like CCS is ready and viable, which I don't think comes naturally to a lot of factions, let's say, within the climate community.Lissa LynchWell, that's well phrased. We're walking a fine line. I think our vision for the power sector and the power industry is one of net zero. And in order to get to net zero, that means a heck of a lot of renewables and a heck of a lot less fossil.David RobertsRight.Lissa LynchFor the purposes of setting pollution limits, we need a technological basis and by far and away CCS is the most effective of the options that we've got.David RobertsThat the Supreme Court left us.Lissa LynchExactly. And I think it is very important to have limits on the CO2 emissions from power plants. I think that is sort of the baseline, most important thing from our point of view.David RobertsRight, well, lots of, I mean, reports, we should just say lots of reports have been done saying the legislative progress is great, but it's not enough to reach Biden's stated goal. And to reach Biden's stated goal, you need a whole of administration approach, including these standards.Lissa LynchExactly. And just to put some actual numbers on that, if we want to meet our international and domestic greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for 2030, we need to get our power sector emissions down by 80% from the 2005 sort of peak emissions. We're already about a third of a reduction, 33% -ish reduction since 2005. Our analysis and RDCs of the Inflation Reduction Act puts us now on track to cut our power sector emissions by about 65% by 2030. So that is massive and also not enough.David RobertsRight.Lissa LynchAnd our estimate there is somewhere in the middle there's a really wide range of modeling of the Inflation Reduction Act and a lot of work is going to need to be done in order to get those emission reductions that we're sort of showing in that modeling. It's not a foregone conclusion.David RobertsYeah, one of the wildest things going on right now is just the incredible range of projections about what the IRA will do. Right. Like the sort of government came up with, oh, that it's going to spend $370 on these tax credits and then Credit Suisse is like, actually it's more like a trillion. And then I think there was another one last week, it was like actually it's more like a trillion five. So the range of amounts of money that could come out of this bill are just huge. It's so opaque.Lissa LynchIt is. And a lot still remains to be written in all the guidance for these tax credits. But that sort of uncertainty aside, I think the Inflation Reduction Act is going to accelerate a bunch of clean energy and it's going to get us a bunch of emission reductions in the power sector. And at least based on our analysis, that's not quite enough. And we absolutely are going to need limits on the CO2 emissions in addition to investments in clean energy.David RobertsSo maybe the way to summarize is just to say endorsing CCS as the basis of a performance standard is different than endorsing CCS, full stop.Lissa LynchYeah, well put. And I think what we see in the modeling reflects what I've been saying about the decision making that comes once EPA sets the standard. So when we model standards that are based on CCS and we've included the Inflation Reduction Act in the baseline, we overall get to around between 70% and 77% CO2 emission reduction by 2030. And what we're seeing in the actual generation results, there is some CCS deployment and also a ton of clean energy.David RobertsThis is my next question, actually, and you're here answering it before I even ask it, but I just wanted to ask, as a matter of curiosity, has someone modeled what would happen if EPA sets the standards where you are endorsing and what does the modeling say about the decisions power companies are going to make? Like how many fossil fuel plants will shut down versus installing CCS? I don't know if there's like an easy answer to that.Lissa LynchWell, so we have done lots of modeling and we've been doing it for quite a while because even before this Supreme Court decision last summer, we were anticipating that EPA was going to be constrained and in this sort of inside the fence line way. And so we've really been looking for ways to get the most ambition and the most emission reductions out of these sort of source specific basis for the standards. That range that I gave you is based on CCS and partial CCS runs. So 70% to 77% overall emission reductions depending how much you crank the dial on the ambition.But still with some of those sort of flexibilities that I talked about in terms of the type of use of the plant and what we see in those runs is renewables and energy storage capacity tripling from now to 2030 and quadrupling by 2035. And I think that is in large part based on these new Inflation Reduction Act tax credits being just so much more cost effective. And we still do see some retrofits with carbon capture and storage and some new builds of gas with carbon capture, but not a massive amount. And so there is some uptake of the technology and there's also some reinvestment in clean energy and that kind of tracks with what you would expect, right?And that kind of goes back to that was essentially what EPA was counting on and basing their standards off of in the Clean Power Plan and that's why they did it that way. I think we can do it this way. And that carbon capture and storage based best system of emission reduction can be shown to be available to the plants that could use it. And not all plants are going to make that choice. It's going to be up to the states and the companies to look at their options and choose whether they want to keep that plant online, and that should work.David RobertsSo NRDC is recommending a CCS based standard for both existing-source regs and new-source regs. Is there any difference between those two that's worth sort of pulling out here?Lissa LynchYeah, so I think industry estimates that CCS can achieve 90% capture. And so given that that technology exists, we think it should be used to set the standard for at least the plants that are operating at full bore, both new and existing. When you're building a new plant, you have much greater options in terms of where you're sighting it, how you're building it. You should be required to use the latest and greatest technology on a brand new plant. So that's pretty straightforward for existing plants because they're all over the place. We rely on them already for power.There needs to be more flexibility, there needs to be more of a phase-in sort of glide path to compliance and some flexibility for how you're going to comply and some exemptions for those plants that are going to commit to retire. You don't want to make them retrofit right before they're expected to retire, you want to just let them plan to retire at the natural end-of-life of the plant. And so giving that flexibility on the existing source side is going to be really important and has long been part of the way that the section 111 standard setting has worked to differentiate between new and existing plants.David RobertsSo, CCS based standard in both cases, but maybe more flexibility and implementation for the existing plants.Lissa LynchExactly.David RobertsIf EPA does use CCS or hydrogen, something like that, as the basis for its performance standard, does it have any say at all in the details of sort of how CCS or hydrogen are used or measured? Because Volts listeners just got an hour and a half earful of discussion of the clean Hydrogen Tax Credits last week, and the details are many, and they make a big gifference in how clean hydrogen is used, how it's measured sort of how its carbon intensity is assessed, how much end users are allowed to claim reductions from using it, et cetera, et cetera. Does EPA get into any of that? Or is this purely just, we're using this tech as a way to set the numerical standard, but the details of how a power plant might implement this is somebody else's problem.Lissa LynchSo they absolutely have some authority over how it gets used to comply with this standard. So for purposes of standard setting, they're looking kind of broadly at what the technology is capable of achieving, how it's been used in the past, how it could apply to power plants that exist now in terms of compliance, though, they've got the authority over CO2 essentially in this rulemaking. And so if a plant is going to demonstrate compliance using carbon capture and storage or hydrogen, they can absolutely include the types of rigorous monitoring and verification requirements they would need to see in order for a plant to be demonstrating compliance using one of these technologies.David RobertsRight? So they can get into saying, here's what does and doesn't qualify as full CCS like measured every so often, or this kind of geographical storage. They can't get into that?Lissa LynchI absolutely think so. I think they have authority to say you need to have rigorous monitoring and verification from the point of capture to the point of sequestration. And that needs to be part of your demonstration of compliance for using carbon capture. For hydrogen ... It's a little trickier.David RobertsI'm very aware at the moment.Lissa LynchTo the extent that there is going to be a pathway for hydrogen to be used for compliance, it's got to take into account where that hydrogen comes from, how it's made in order to avoid net emissions increases. And I think they absolutely have that authority. Given that the purpose of this is for the best system of emission reduction, they've got to ensure that it is truly reducing emissions.David RobertsMaybe they can just borrow whatever treasury comes up with for the hydrogen.Lissa LynchAssuming it's good.David RobertsYes, true. If EPA doesn't go with CCS, doesn't go with the high end here, what do you think it will do? Will it fall back to something medium, something in the fuel blending sort of range? And just more broadly, do we have any sense at all of what EPA is thinking or which direction it's going or what to expect?Lissa LynchI think in terms of publicly facing tea leaves, what we've got to look at really is that white paper from last year where they had laid out the options and said, hey, give us some comments on what you think of these options for reducing CO2 emissions from combustion turbines. From everything that we have seen from this administration, we are hoping that they're going to be ambitious. They know that this is a critical moment. They know that this is an important wedge of emissions, that the power sector is still a really significant percentage of our emissions, roughly a quarter, and that we need standards on those CO2 emissions and they need to be strong.And it's not going to be worth all this work, honestly, if they don't make them strong. And so that has been our message to the administration, is, look, if you're going to go through the trouble of doing this all over again, let's make it worth it.David RobertsIs Manchin he's like the monster under my bed at this point. Is there some way Manchin could burst out of the closet and screw this up somehow? Or is he ...Lissa LynchI hesitate to even speculate.David RobertsCan I just not think about him in this respect, or does he have some way that he could theoretically muck this up, or is this something that's finally just sort of beyond his reach?Lissa LynchI think for now, the ball is in EPA's court to come out with a proposal and to take public comments and to consider them. And so for right now, this is an EPA project. Once it's finalized, it will presumably be subject to a Congressional Review Act resolution, and it will depend on who is in charge as to what happens there. And so that's when Congress gets to have its veto opportunity over regulations, which is unfortunate, but it is the world we're living in.David RobertsAnd does that just require a majority or a supermajority?Lissa LynchI believe it's just a majority, but it can be blocked by the President.David RobertsRight. And by the time there's a new president, it'll be too late. We're coming in under the deadline that the Congressional Review Act, if it's going to happen at all, would happen under Biden and thus would be vetoed. So that's not really ...Lissa LynchAnd so that takes place at the final rule. So we're only at the proposal stage. We've got a long way to go.David RobertsIs it going to get done under the Congressional Review Act just to just explain to listeners? Congressional Review Act says basically Congress can undo or veto a regulation basically within a certain window of it being finalized which is 60 ...Lissa Lynch60 working days, which does not equal the calendar days.David RobertsRight. So what you want to do is get your regulations on the books more than 60 working days prior to the next presidential election.Lissa LynchExactly.David RobertsJust so you're sure your guys in charge, if it happens.Lissa LynchThe date that we are looking at is next April, roughly a year from now, for all of these regulations. Right. Like it's not just ...David RobertsThere's a lot these are not the only ones. There's a lot of there's a big backlog.Lissa LynchIt is. And we are seeing the use of the Congressional Review Act right now as we speak in this Congress with attempts to invalidate the rules that the administration has recently finalized. It is a terrible tool. It is not a good thing.David RobertsIt's a Newt Gingrich special, isn't it? Am I right about the history? Of course, like so many malignant things in our government treat.Lissa LynchBut it is the world we're living in, and I think the administration is aware of the timeline that's facing them next year.David RobertsInteresting. So you think a proposed rule is going to show up in the next month or two?Lissa LynchYeah, we're expecting a proposed rule maybe by the end of April. And then when ... you know what happens, that gets published in the Federal Register. There's an opportunity for public comment. There's public hearings. And so there will be sort of a flurry of activity as everybody gets their comments in, and then the agency has to review those comments and address them in the final rule. That's part of the sort of Administrative Law 101. And then they have to issue the final rule and demonstrate yeah, we heard all your comments, and this is why we made the decisions that we made.David RobertsAnd that's when the lawsuits kick off.Lissa LynchAnd that's when the lawsuits start. Exactly. We do it all over again. It's the circle of life.David RobertsYes. And what do you think of the chances that this Supreme Court ends up hearing a case on this again? Do you think the conservatives can mount a legal case plausible enough to get it back into the Supreme Court?Lissa LynchI would never speculate about what this Supreme Court will do, because who knows, right? Our job is to make this thing as airtight as possible. And Chief Justice Roberts gave us some guidelines and a roadmap in the West Virginia decision. He told us what he's looking for, and it's this sort of traditional looking approach to pollution control. And so that's what we're operating under. And we are urging EPA to follow those guidelines and do the most that they can within those constraints, and we'll be there to defend it with them if it comes down to that.David RobertsAll right, awesome. Lissa Lynch of NRDC, thank you for coming and forecasting and explaining all this with us. Maybe we'll talk again in that distant future day when these things are actually on the books and the lawsuits have started. We'll talk again.Lissa LynchThank you so much for having me.David RobertsThank you for listening to the Volts podcast. It is ad-free, powered entirely by listeners like you. If you value conversations like this, please consider becoming a paid Volts subscriber at volts.wtf. Yes, that's volts.wtf so that I can continue doing this work. Thank you so much, and I'll see you next time. Get full access to Volts at www.volts.wtf/subscribe

Hour 1 - Talked about Great African American Preachers.  Hour 2 - Started out with breaking news about Justice Roberts. Went on to talk about the left attack on the court. Took calls and talked about The Political Zoo Hour 3 - Best-of hour - Started out talking about Israel and the Nuclear Bomb. What's the liberal response when something bad happens? I know I'm imperfect and the hourglass of life. Running of the Bulls and take calls on Running of the Bulls - rooting for the bulls. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The latest on Title 42 via The Hill:   The Biden administration on Tuesday asked Chief Justice John Roberts to rule against 19 GOP-led states that initiated court action to keep the controversial Title 42 policy in place.  The administration was responding to Roberts's administrative stay from Monday in which he temporarily halted the end of the policy, set to end Wednesday.  Title 42 has taken center stage in the political debate over immigration and border policy.  Most Republicans and some Democrats say it is essential to border control, while immigration advocates and most Democrats oppose Title 42 mainly because it undermines the asylum system.  Also, Pastor David Chadwick from Moments of Hope Church, joins the program.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

0:00 Intro 1:25 Mysterious Shockwave 4:40 Back to Earth Problems 5:55 Title 42 21:05 Vaccines 33:13 Swastika Crossword 41:45 Extermination Tactics   - Coronal Mass Ejection shock wave CRACKS Earth's magnetosphere, allowing deadly radiation to flood in - Kari Lake wins right to have voter fraud case heard in court - Title 42 about to end, Justice Roberts grants temporary pause on takedown - Once ended, 14,000 illegals PER DAY will flood into the USA - El Paso declares emergency, Denver and NYC panic over expected invasion - Americans being displaced at homeless shelters by illegals - Americans being evicted from apartments, replaced by illegals packed in - Facebook censorship ops run by CIA, FBI, NSA and DHS - Ron Paul calls to abolish the FBI - #FDA confirms "signal" of cardiovascular clots caused by covid #vaccines - Vaxxed people keep dropping dead in India - Vaxxed football players are suffering injuries at a shocking pace - NY Times publishes giant swastika to confirm Nazis are still in charge - Operation Paperclip and the Fourth Reich run US institutions - New Zealand orders family members, neighbors and friends to TURN IN dissenters - Anyone who disagrees with the government is labeled a terrorist - WHO claims anti-vaxxers are mass murderers - Bloomberg headline calls for domestic terrorism in the name of eco-activism - Features professor calling for activists to blow up pipelines and burn all cars, trucks and trains - Corporate media goes all-in with eco-fascist terrorism and property destruction For more updates, visit: http://www.brighteon.com/channel/hrreport NaturalNews videos would not be possible without you, as always we remain passionately dedicated to our mission of educating people all over the world on the subject of natural healing remedies and personal liberty (food freedom, medical freedom, the freedom of speech, etc.). Together, we're helping create a better world, with more honest food labeling, reduced chemical contamination, the avoidance of toxic heavy metals and vastly increased scientific transparency. ▶️ Every dollar you spend at the Health Ranger Store goes toward helping us achieve important science and content goals for humanity: https://www.healthrangerstore.com/ ▶️ Sign Up For Our Newsletter: https://www.naturalnews.com/Readerregistration.html ▶️ Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channels/hrreport ▶️ Join Our Social Network: https://brighteon.social/@HealthRanger ▶️ Check In Stock Products at: https://PrepWithMike.com

This is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily Newsbrief for Wednesday, November 2nd 2022. Happy hump day everyone, I hope you all have been having an excellent week thus far… Before we get to the newsbrief: Fight Laugh Feast Magazine Our Fight Laugh Feast Magazine is a quarterly issue that packs a punch like a 21 year Balvenie, no ice. We don’t water down our scotch, why would we water down our theology? Order a yearly subscription for yourself and then send a couple yearly subscriptions to your friends who have been drinking luke-warm evangelical cool-aid. Every quarter we promise quality food for the soul, wine for the heart, and some Red Bull for turning over tables. Our magazine will include cultural commentary, a Psalm of the quarter, recipes for feasting, laughter sprinkled through out the glossy pages, and more. Sign up today, at fightlaughfeast.com. https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-justice-roberts-blocks-house-committee-from-obtaining-trump-tax-returns?utm_campaign=64487 Justice Roberts blocks House committee from obtaining Trump tax returns Supreme Court Justice John Roberts has granted an administrative stay of a lower court order that prevents the House Ways and Means Committee from accessing Trump's tax returns. The stay is temporary and will last until the court considers a final decision. On Monday, the former president asked the Supreme Court to block the House Ways and Means Committee from accessing his tax returns after it requested six years' worth of Trump's returns as part of an investigation into IRS audit practices of presidents and vice presidents, reports ABC News. Trump accused the committee of seeking his taxes under dubious circumstances, with a petition to the Supreme Court reading "The Committee's purpose in requesting President Trump's tax returns has nothing to do with funding or staffing issues at the IRS and everything to do with releasing the President's tax information to the public." In August, a federal appeals court ruled that the committee would be handed the tax returns, having first sought the returns in 2019. NBC reports that Trump "recently failed to block the request on Thursday when the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals shot down his request to reconsider a unanimous opinion from one of its three-judge panels approving the committee's access to the documents." Trump says that the panel's attempts to get their hands on his returns are purely political. https://hotair.com/john-s-2/2022/11/01/voter-registration-has-been-a-disaster-democrats-have-lost-330000-voters-in-florida-n507245 'Voter registration has been a disaster': Democrats have lost 330,000 voters in Florida Democrats are not poised to do well in Florida next week. In fact, it looks like they may not do well in the state for some time. Since the 2020 election, Dems have lost more than 330,000 registered voters in the state while GOP registrations have surged. The Florida Division of Elections released its voter registration report for the November election, known as book closing, earlier this month. Taken with the reports from the general elections in 2020 and 2018, Republicans and no-party-affiliate voters show a steady increase in voter registration. But from 2020 to 2022, Democrats lost 331,810 voters… News 6 political analyst and UCF professor Dr. Jim Clark says the problem can be laid at the feet of the Florida Democratic Party. The result of this large shift in registrations is that the GOP now has a registration advantage in the state for the first time. As of last month, there were 5.3 million registered Republicans and just under 5 million Democrats in Florida, marking the first time in state history that the GOP will carry a voter advantage on Election Day. As bad as that news is, what’s even worse is who Democrats are losing. Republicans have picked up where Trump left off. More than half of their gains in registered voters can be attributed to the 58,000 new Hispanic voters who checked “Republican” on their forms. Democrats, though, are bleeding support from these communities. The party saw a net loss of more than 46,000 Hispanic voters. The reversal is made more stunning because Democrats entered the election cycle firmly aware of the trend and set out to address it, promising they would have dedicated staff and outreach focused on the disparate Hispanic communities that are scattered across the state… It is also worth noting that Republicans saw a slight but sizable uptick of Black registered voters in the past two years while Democrats lost more than 71,000, a quarter of which came from Miami-Dade. The result of all of this is that Republicans are in a position to win in Miami-Dade County for the first time in 20 years. The party has picked up 11,000 new voters in the county since 2020 while Democrats have lost nearly 58,000 voters over the same time span. On top of the registration advantage, the GOP also has a big money advantage. CNN notes that in 2020 Michael Bloomberg committed $100 million to help Biden win Florida. This year there are no outside benefactors coming to rescue the Democrats. Meanwhile, Gov. DeSantis has raised nearly $200 million. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ (R) political operation reported raising $177.4 million through Sept. 9, breaking the gubernatorial fundraising record without adjusting for inflation, a new OpenSecrets analysis of state campaign finance filings found. His reelection campaign has raised over $31.4 million since January 2021, and Friends of Ron DeSantis, his state-level PAC that is not subject to contribution limits, raked in $146 million since January 2019. The bottom line is that even the Miami Herald doesn’t see much hope for Democrats this year. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/republicans%20predicted-huge-house-win-forecast Majority rules: Republicans predicted to have huge House win in new forecast The Republican Party is set to experience a big win in the House of Representatives come election night, gaining a double-digit edge in the lower chamber of Congress. The GOP needs to have a net gain of at least five seats in the House if it wishes to take the majority, but predictions released on Tuesday indicate that the party may have a 19-seat majority after election night, bringing its total to 236 seats. This estimate is based on if Republican candidates win half of the toss-up races that are in a dead heat, according to Fox News. The majority by the GOP could be bigger or smaller, depending on voter outcome for the party. In a best-case scenario for Republicans, the party would leave election night with 249 seats, while a best-case scenario for the Democratic Party would be for Republicans to have only 223 seats after the election, according to the outlet. The Republican Party's lead in the 2022 midterm House elections can possibly be attributed to its focus on inflation and crime, while Democrats have focused on abortion rights following the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade earlier this year. An ABC/Ipsos poll conducted from Oct. 28-29 found that 26% of those surveyed ranked the economy as the most important issue, while 23% reported inflation was the most important. The poll surveyed 729 adults and had a margin of error of 3.9 percentage points. While Republicans are expected to take control of the House, the Senate remains up in the air, as the party only won in 50 of the 100 simulated outcomes of the midterm elections for the Senate, according to FiveThirtyEight. The GOP needs to have a net gain of at least one senator if it wishes to take control of the upper chamber of Congress. Accountable2You Is your smartphone a tool in the service of Christ, or a minefield of distractions and temptations? With soul-killing seductions just a few taps away, our families and churches must embrace biblical accountability on our digital devices. Accountable2You makes transparency easy on all your family's devices, by sharing app usage and detailed browsing history—including "Incognito" mode—with your spouse, parent, or chosen accountability partner. Accountable2You helps your family to proactively guard against temptation, so you can live with integrity for God's glory! Learn more and try it for free at Accountable2You.com/FLF https://breakingdefense.com/2022/10/as-army-begins-electrification-push-c5isr-office-aims-to-smooth-bumps-in-the-road/ As Army begins electrification push, C5ISR office aims to smooth bumps in the road As the Army seeks to be more energy efficient between fiscal 2023 and 2027, officials with the service’s C5ISR Center told Breaking Defense they’re working on a plan to make the transition, whether its to installation microgrids or the planned electrified vehicle fleet, smoother and smarter. The Army’s ambitious climate strategy, which it estimates will cost upwards of $6.8 billion over five years, follows three lines of efforts: installations, acquisition and logistics and training. According to the strategy’s implementation plan, released Oct. 5, $5.2 billion of that will go to the installation line of effort, wherein the service wants to field fully electric non-tactical vehicles and reduce greenhouse gasses. The Army also wants to operationalize 55 microgrids on its installations (20 microgrids by fiscal 2024, 15 more by FY26 and then 20 more in FY27) with a total cost of $1.6 billion. (The training portion is expected to cost far less.) The service is currently working on implementing the first set of those tactical microgrids, which will allow the service to “interconnect” power equipment in an “interoperable and smart way,” Marnie Bailey, power division chief at the Army’s C5ISR Center, told Breaking Defense in an interview this week. She added that the development of the tactical microgrid standard (TMS) has underpinned a lot of the research the Army has been doing in that area. TMS is an interoperability standard that allows devices to plug and play together, and that’s what the Army wants to do with its power systems, Mike Gonzalez, expeditionary power and environmental controls branch chief at the C5ISR Center, added. Over the next year, the Army wants to explore how to do active load management (things that consume power, like electronics) through the use of the TMS, which can monitor the loads and see how much power installations or bases are consuming on a regular basis, whether the facilities are stateside or in far-flung regions. According to the Army’s climate plan, the service plans to field an all-electric light-duty-non-tactical vehicle fleet by 2027 and is aiming for an all-electric non-tactical fleet overall by 2035. The Army wants to reap the benefits of the technologies and, at the same time, make sure the transition to these new concepts are seamless for soldiers. As part of that, the service is engaging in “soldier touchpoints” to get feedback on what is and isn’t working. Those soldier touchpoints are key to making sure the Army doesn’t spend years on stuff that’s not performing in real situations, Gonzalez said. As to how the Army sees in the opportunities space over the next fiscal years coming up, both Bailey and Gonzalez summed it up in three words: intentionality, flexibility and maximizing options. It also opens up opportunities for incorporating things like artificial intelligence in the future for things like controls, Bailey added, but the focus right now remains on implementing the interoperability standards into equipment. https://dailycaller.com/2022/11/01/fed-interest-to-pass-defense-budget/ The Government Is Set To Spend More On Debt Payments Than The Entire Defense Budget Interest on federal debt is set to skyrocket, potentially surpassing defense spending by as early as 2025, CNN reported Tuesday. The federal government made $475 billion in net interest payments in the fiscal year 2022 — which ended in September — up from $352 in fiscal year 2021, according to the Treasury Department. The number exceeds the $406 billion spent on transportation and veterans’ benefits, and is on track to eclipse the roughly $750 billion spent on defense this year between 2025 to 2026, according to CNN, citing financial analytics firm Moody’s Analytics. (‘Reckless’: Obama Economist Tears Apart Biden’s Student Loan Forgiveness) “Regardless of who wins the midterms or in 2024, there are really difficult decisions that will have to be made,” Dan White, an economist at Moody’s Analytics, told CNN. “This is really going to handcuff them.” The Federal Reserve has historically kept interest rates low in a bid to encourage economic growth and the purchase of U.S. debt by foreign investors, CNN reported. This contributed to aggressive borrowing campaigns by both the Trump and Biden administrations, which boosted the nation’s debt past $31 trillion for the first time this year, that have “fast-forwarded us almost an entire generation” in terms of debt, White said. With inflation still above 8%, far above the Federal Reserve’s goal of 2%, it is unlikely that the Fed will slow its pace of interest rate hikes this week in a bid to put downward pressure on the economy and slow inflation, The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday. As interest rate hikes push economic activity down and the cost of interest up, the U.S. might soon be in a position where it struggles to make its interest payments, White told CNN. A recession, which economists consider increasingly likely, would make it even more difficult to make interest rate payments, since governments typically spend more on social programs during recessions, White told CNN. Now it’s time for my favorite topic… sports! https://www.si.com/xfl/2022/10/31/xfl-unveils-cities-teams-2023-season XFL Unveils Eight Cities, Teams for 2023 Season Hopefully, the third time’s the charm for the XFL. The newest edition of the spring football league formally announced cities, team names and logos for its new season Monday. The XFL failed to live past its first season in 2001 and the COVID-19 pandemic shuttered the 2020 season after only a few weeks, but 2023 will be a new year. The season is set to start Feb. 18, 2023, and games will be televised on ESPN, ESPN2, ABC and FX. ESPN’s Laura Rutledge showed off the new logos, names and cities for all eight of the XFL’s squads in the announcement video. Here are the eight franchises and coaches for the 2023 XFL season: Arlington (Texas) Renegades - Bob Stoops D.C. Defenders - Reggie Barlow Houston Roughnecks - Wade Phillips Orlando Guardians - Terrell Buckley San Antonio Brahmas - Hines Ward Seattle Sea Dragons - Jim Haslett St. Louis Battlehawks - Anthony Becht Vegas Vipers - Rod Woodson

In this episode - John discusses SCOTUS lead Justice John Roberts temporarily blocking the House Ways and Means Committee from receiving Trump's tax returns until after the Midterms and the SCOTUS ruling that says Senator Lyndsey Graham must testify to the grand jury in the Georgia election probe. Then he interviews White House reporter April Ryan on her book, “Black Women Will Save the World”. Next he speaks about loneliness and depression becoming an epidemic in the U.S. and where people can turn if they need help. Then to wrap it up he welcomes the return of Rev. Barry Lynn and they mull over politics, religion, and more.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily Newsbrief for Wednesday, November 2nd 2022. Happy hump day everyone, I hope you all have been having an excellent week thus far… Before we get to the newsbrief: Fight Laugh Feast Magazine Our Fight Laugh Feast Magazine is a quarterly issue that packs a punch like a 21 year Balvenie, no ice. We don’t water down our scotch, why would we water down our theology? Order a yearly subscription for yourself and then send a couple yearly subscriptions to your friends who have been drinking luke-warm evangelical cool-aid. Every quarter we promise quality food for the soul, wine for the heart, and some Red Bull for turning over tables. Our magazine will include cultural commentary, a Psalm of the quarter, recipes for feasting, laughter sprinkled through out the glossy pages, and more. Sign up today, at fightlaughfeast.com. https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-justice-roberts-blocks-house-committee-from-obtaining-trump-tax-returns?utm_campaign=64487 Justice Roberts blocks House committee from obtaining Trump tax returns Supreme Court Justice John Roberts has granted an administrative stay of a lower court order that prevents the House Ways and Means Committee from accessing Trump's tax returns. The stay is temporary and will last until the court considers a final decision. On Monday, the former president asked the Supreme Court to block the House Ways and Means Committee from accessing his tax returns after it requested six years' worth of Trump's returns as part of an investigation into IRS audit practices of presidents and vice presidents, reports ABC News. Trump accused the committee of seeking his taxes under dubious circumstances, with a petition to the Supreme Court reading "The Committee's purpose in requesting President Trump's tax returns has nothing to do with funding or staffing issues at the IRS and everything to do with releasing the President's tax information to the public." In August, a federal appeals court ruled that the committee would be handed the tax returns, having first sought the returns in 2019. NBC reports that Trump "recently failed to block the request on Thursday when the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals shot down his request to reconsider a unanimous opinion from one of its three-judge panels approving the committee's access to the documents." Trump says that the panel's attempts to get their hands on his returns are purely political. https://hotair.com/john-s-2/2022/11/01/voter-registration-has-been-a-disaster-democrats-have-lost-330000-voters-in-florida-n507245 'Voter registration has been a disaster': Democrats have lost 330,000 voters in Florida Democrats are not poised to do well in Florida next week. In fact, it looks like they may not do well in the state for some time. Since the 2020 election, Dems have lost more than 330,000 registered voters in the state while GOP registrations have surged. The Florida Division of Elections released its voter registration report for the November election, known as book closing, earlier this month. Taken with the reports from the general elections in 2020 and 2018, Republicans and no-party-affiliate voters show a steady increase in voter registration. But from 2020 to 2022, Democrats lost 331,810 voters… News 6 political analyst and UCF professor Dr. Jim Clark says the problem can be laid at the feet of the Florida Democratic Party. The result of this large shift in registrations is that the GOP now has a registration advantage in the state for the first time. As of last month, there were 5.3 million registered Republicans and just under 5 million Democrats in Florida, marking the first time in state history that the GOP will carry a voter advantage on Election Day. As bad as that news is, what’s even worse is who Democrats are losing. Republicans have picked up where Trump left off. More than half of their gains in registered voters can be attributed to the 58,000 new Hispanic voters who checked “Republican” on their forms. Democrats, though, are bleeding support from these communities. The party saw a net loss of more than 46,000 Hispanic voters. The reversal is made more stunning because Democrats entered the election cycle firmly aware of the trend and set out to address it, promising they would have dedicated staff and outreach focused on the disparate Hispanic communities that are scattered across the state… It is also worth noting that Republicans saw a slight but sizable uptick of Black registered voters in the past two years while Democrats lost more than 71,000, a quarter of which came from Miami-Dade. The result of all of this is that Republicans are in a position to win in Miami-Dade County for the first time in 20 years. The party has picked up 11,000 new voters in the county since 2020 while Democrats have lost nearly 58,000 voters over the same time span. On top of the registration advantage, the GOP also has a big money advantage. CNN notes that in 2020 Michael Bloomberg committed $100 million to help Biden win Florida. This year there are no outside benefactors coming to rescue the Democrats. Meanwhile, Gov. DeSantis has raised nearly $200 million. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ (R) political operation reported raising $177.4 million through Sept. 9, breaking the gubernatorial fundraising record without adjusting for inflation, a new OpenSecrets analysis of state campaign finance filings found. His reelection campaign has raised over $31.4 million since January 2021, and Friends of Ron DeSantis, his state-level PAC that is not subject to contribution limits, raked in $146 million since January 2019. The bottom line is that even the Miami Herald doesn’t see much hope for Democrats this year. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/republicans%20predicted-huge-house-win-forecast Majority rules: Republicans predicted to have huge House win in new forecast The Republican Party is set to experience a big win in the House of Representatives come election night, gaining a double-digit edge in the lower chamber of Congress. The GOP needs to have a net gain of at least five seats in the House if it wishes to take the majority, but predictions released on Tuesday indicate that the party may have a 19-seat majority after election night, bringing its total to 236 seats. This estimate is based on if Republican candidates win half of the toss-up races that are in a dead heat, according to Fox News. The majority by the GOP could be bigger or smaller, depending on voter outcome for the party. In a best-case scenario for Republicans, the party would leave election night with 249 seats, while a best-case scenario for the Democratic Party would be for Republicans to have only 223 seats after the election, according to the outlet. The Republican Party's lead in the 2022 midterm House elections can possibly be attributed to its focus on inflation and crime, while Democrats have focused on abortion rights following the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade earlier this year. An ABC/Ipsos poll conducted from Oct. 28-29 found that 26% of those surveyed ranked the economy as the most important issue, while 23% reported inflation was the most important. The poll surveyed 729 adults and had a margin of error of 3.9 percentage points. While Republicans are expected to take control of the House, the Senate remains up in the air, as the party only won in 50 of the 100 simulated outcomes of the midterm elections for the Senate, according to FiveThirtyEight. The GOP needs to have a net gain of at least one senator if it wishes to take control of the upper chamber of Congress. Accountable2You Is your smartphone a tool in the service of Christ, or a minefield of distractions and temptations? With soul-killing seductions just a few taps away, our families and churches must embrace biblical accountability on our digital devices. Accountable2You makes transparency easy on all your family's devices, by sharing app usage and detailed browsing history—including "Incognito" mode—with your spouse, parent, or chosen accountability partner. Accountable2You helps your family to proactively guard against temptation, so you can live with integrity for God's glory! Learn more and try it for free at Accountable2You.com/FLF https://breakingdefense.com/2022/10/as-army-begins-electrification-push-c5isr-office-aims-to-smooth-bumps-in-the-road/ As Army begins electrification push, C5ISR office aims to smooth bumps in the road As the Army seeks to be more energy efficient between fiscal 2023 and 2027, officials with the service’s C5ISR Center told Breaking Defense they’re working on a plan to make the transition, whether its to installation microgrids or the planned electrified vehicle fleet, smoother and smarter. The Army’s ambitious climate strategy, which it estimates will cost upwards of $6.8 billion over five years, follows three lines of efforts: installations, acquisition and logistics and training. According to the strategy’s implementation plan, released Oct. 5, $5.2 billion of that will go to the installation line of effort, wherein the service wants to field fully electric non-tactical vehicles and reduce greenhouse gasses. The Army also wants to operationalize 55 microgrids on its installations (20 microgrids by fiscal 2024, 15 more by FY26 and then 20 more in FY27) with a total cost of $1.6 billion. (The training portion is expected to cost far less.) The service is currently working on implementing the first set of those tactical microgrids, which will allow the service to “interconnect” power equipment in an “interoperable and smart way,” Marnie Bailey, power division chief at the Army’s C5ISR Center, told Breaking Defense in an interview this week. She added that the development of the tactical microgrid standard (TMS) has underpinned a lot of the research the Army has been doing in that area. TMS is an interoperability standard that allows devices to plug and play together, and that’s what the Army wants to do with its power systems, Mike Gonzalez, expeditionary power and environmental controls branch chief at the C5ISR Center, added. Over the next year, the Army wants to explore how to do active load management (things that consume power, like electronics) through the use of the TMS, which can monitor the loads and see how much power installations or bases are consuming on a regular basis, whether the facilities are stateside or in far-flung regions. According to the Army’s climate plan, the service plans to field an all-electric light-duty-non-tactical vehicle fleet by 2027 and is aiming for an all-electric non-tactical fleet overall by 2035. The Army wants to reap the benefits of the technologies and, at the same time, make sure the transition to these new concepts are seamless for soldiers. As part of that, the service is engaging in “soldier touchpoints” to get feedback on what is and isn’t working. Those soldier touchpoints are key to making sure the Army doesn’t spend years on stuff that’s not performing in real situations, Gonzalez said. As to how the Army sees in the opportunities space over the next fiscal years coming up, both Bailey and Gonzalez summed it up in three words: intentionality, flexibility and maximizing options. It also opens up opportunities for incorporating things like artificial intelligence in the future for things like controls, Bailey added, but the focus right now remains on implementing the interoperability standards into equipment. https://dailycaller.com/2022/11/01/fed-interest-to-pass-defense-budget/ The Government Is Set To Spend More On Debt Payments Than The Entire Defense Budget Interest on federal debt is set to skyrocket, potentially surpassing defense spending by as early as 2025, CNN reported Tuesday. The federal government made $475 billion in net interest payments in the fiscal year 2022 — which ended in September — up from $352 in fiscal year 2021, according to the Treasury Department. The number exceeds the $406 billion spent on transportation and veterans’ benefits, and is on track to eclipse the roughly $750 billion spent on defense this year between 2025 to 2026, according to CNN, citing financial analytics firm Moody’s Analytics. (‘Reckless’: Obama Economist Tears Apart Biden’s Student Loan Forgiveness) “Regardless of who wins the midterms or in 2024, there are really difficult decisions that will have to be made,” Dan White, an economist at Moody’s Analytics, told CNN. “This is really going to handcuff them.” The Federal Reserve has historically kept interest rates low in a bid to encourage economic growth and the purchase of U.S. debt by foreign investors, CNN reported. This contributed to aggressive borrowing campaigns by both the Trump and Biden administrations, which boosted the nation’s debt past $31 trillion for the first time this year, that have “fast-forwarded us almost an entire generation” in terms of debt, White said. With inflation still above 8%, far above the Federal Reserve’s goal of 2%, it is unlikely that the Fed will slow its pace of interest rate hikes this week in a bid to put downward pressure on the economy and slow inflation, The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday. As interest rate hikes push economic activity down and the cost of interest up, the U.S. might soon be in a position where it struggles to make its interest payments, White told CNN. A recession, which economists consider increasingly likely, would make it even more difficult to make interest rate payments, since governments typically spend more on social programs during recessions, White told CNN. Now it’s time for my favorite topic… sports! https://www.si.com/xfl/2022/10/31/xfl-unveils-cities-teams-2023-season XFL Unveils Eight Cities, Teams for 2023 Season Hopefully, the third time’s the charm for the XFL. The newest edition of the spring football league formally announced cities, team names and logos for its new season Monday. The XFL failed to live past its first season in 2001 and the COVID-19 pandemic shuttered the 2020 season after only a few weeks, but 2023 will be a new year. The season is set to start Feb. 18, 2023, and games will be televised on ESPN, ESPN2, ABC and FX. ESPN’s Laura Rutledge showed off the new logos, names and cities for all eight of the XFL’s squads in the announcement video. Here are the eight franchises and coaches for the 2023 XFL season: Arlington (Texas) Renegades - Bob Stoops D.C. Defenders - Reggie Barlow Houston Roughnecks - Wade Phillips Orlando Guardians - Terrell Buckley San Antonio Brahmas - Hines Ward Seattle Sea Dragons - Jim Haslett St. Louis Battlehawks - Anthony Becht Vegas Vipers - Rod Woodson