Podcasts about stephen douglas

WE'REEE BACK! Two incredible guests in this week's episode from the NAIA and Division 2 levels respectfully. Rontavious Farmer comes from Saint Thomas University in Miami Gardens Florida, where he set the state record for career collegiate rushing yards across ALL DIVISIONS and has earned an invite to the Dolphins local pro day. Stephen Douglas transferred from D3 Albion College and followed his coach to Northwood University, where he made an impact immediately and just wrapped up his pro day in preparation for the draft/free agency. We also highlight D2 teams facing off against one another this spring as a part of new legislation at the Division 2 level, and recognize 2 small school players for signing to the CFL with the Winnipeg Blue Bombers! TAP IN!Video Chapters:0:00 Episode Overview2:12 Rontavious Farmer - Saint Thomas14:50 D2 Teams Competing in Spring Games25:10 Small School Players to the CFL26:45 Stephen Douglas - Northwood

The second half of the 5G era is here, and the next five years will define its success. “5G has reached the halftime mark—five years since its launch, with another five years until 6G arrives. The second half is all to play for,” says Stephen Douglas, Head of Market Strategy at Spirent. In this episode of Technology Reseller News, host Doug Green sits down with Douglas to discuss the findings of Spirent's 2025 5G Report, which draws insights from over 415 engagements with global operators, suppliers, governments, and enterprises. The report reveals where 5G has succeeded, where it has fallen short, and the key technologies driving growth for the next five years. The Road So Far: 5G's First Half 5G deployments have expanded rapidly, with over 340 commercial non-standalone (NSA) networks worldwide and 2.1 billion users. However, revenue growth has lagged behind expectations, largely due to the staggered rollout of 5G capabilities. Many operators have focused on building out infrastructure rather than launching monetizable services. One notable exception? 5G Fixed Wireless Access (FWA), which has emerged as the biggest commercial success of 5G's first half. With over 162 global launches, FWA has provided an alternative to fiber, enabling broadband expansion in rural and urban markets alike. The Second Half: The Push for Monetization For operators, the next five years will be defined by one goal: turning 5G into a revenue-generating machine. The key enablers of this shift include: 5G Standalone (SA): Only 64 operators have launched full 5G SA networks so far. That number is expected to surge to 160+ in the next three years, unlocking new revenue streams. Enterprise Solutions: Telcos are pivoting away from consumer-driven revenue models and toward high-value enterprise services, including private networks, industrial IoT, and AI-powered automation. Cloud-Native Evolution: 5G core networks are transitioning to cloud-native architectures, allowing for rapid scaling, automation, and seamless software updates. AI-Optimized Networks: AI traffic is becoming a major factor in network planning. Operators are investing in differentiated services, prioritizing AI-powered applications alongside traditional connectivity. Future Game-Changers Beyond 2025, several emerging technologies will redefine telecom's role: Reduced Capability IoT (RedCap): Lightweight, low-power 5G IoT devices will fuel growth in smart manufacturing, healthcare, and logistics. 5G-V2X for Automotive Safety: Governments are pushing for vehicle-to-everything (V2X) technology to enhance road safety and optimize traffic systems. 5G-Enabled Drones: Future 5G networks will provide reliable, beyond-visual-line-of-sight (BVLOS) connectivity for commercial drones. Augmented Reality Glasses: The race is on to bring affordable, lightweight AR glasses to mass markets, potentially creating a multi-billion-dollar opportunity. The Clock is Ticking As operators look ahead, the pressure is on to make 5G a true business success. Spirent anticipates a surge in standalone 5G rollouts, new enterprise-driven services, and innovative use cases that will reshape the telecom landscape. To dive deeper into these insights, download the full 2025 5G Report at Spirent.com. #5G #TelecomInnovation #Enterprise5G #AIinTelecom #RedCap #5GV2X #Spirent #FixedWirelessAccess  

Send us a textJoin hosts Joe and Chops on the Dealerchat Podcast as they chat with Stephen Douglas from Real Easy Car Credit. Together, they dive into the world of car financing and subprime finance, sharing insights on running a dealership, marketing strategies, and adapting to a competitive market. Learn about the challenges of sourcing vehicles, navigating regulations, leveraging social media, and building trust with customers. Don't miss this in-depth look at the auto industry and the importance of innovation for success!To find out more about if Dealerway can help you follow this link: https://dealerway.co.uk/Real Easy Car Credit: https://www.reallyeasycarcredit.co.uk/Go check out https://www.youtube.com/@Dealerway/videos podcast where you might just see some familiar faces, real soon

Stephen Douglas is a self-described expert in combat propaganda (is a former diplomat), and creator of Decoding Trolls and Disinfolklore. The latter has been described in a Byline Times review as a “brilliant new analytical method to parse and counter disinformation”. ---------- LINKS: https://twitter.com/DecodingTrolls https://www.decodingtrolls.net/ https://www.disinfolklore.net/ https://www.bylinesupplement.com/p/disinfolklore ---------- SILICON CURTAIN FILM FUNDRAISER A project to make a documentary film in Ukraine, to raise awareness of Ukraine's struggle and in supporting a team running aid convoys to Ukraine's frontline towns. https://buymeacoffee.com/siliconcurtain/extras ---------- SUPPORT THE CHANNEL: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/siliconcurtain https://www.patreon.com/siliconcurtain ---------- TRUSTED CHARITIES ON THE GROUND: Save Ukraine https://www.saveukraineua.org/ Superhumans - Hospital for war traumas https://superhumans.com/en/ UNBROKEN - Treatment. Prosthesis. Rehabilitation for Ukrainians in Ukraine https://unbroken.org.ua/ Come Back Alive https://savelife.in.ua/en/ Chefs For Ukraine - World Central Kitchen https://wck.org/relief/activation-chefs-for-ukraine UNITED24 - An initiative of President Zelenskyy https://u24.gov.ua/ Serhiy Prytula Charity Foundation https://prytulafoundation.org NGO “Herojam Slava” https://heroiamslava.org/ kharpp - Reconstruction project supporting communities in Kharkiv and Przemyśl https://kharpp.com/ NOR DOG Animal Rescue https://www.nor-dog.org/home/ ---------- WATCH NEXT: Carl Miller https://youtu.be/5MYEpbs7CHU Nina Jankowicz https://youtu.be/em0gfGQf0Zs Adam Ure https://youtu.be/EzimhQc62AQ Valeria Kovtun https://youtu.be/0BY82QBE-Js Oleksandra Tsekhanovska https://youtu.be/xfyr4XvLguM ---------- PLATFORMS: Twitter: https://twitter.com/CurtainSilicon Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/siliconcurtain/ Podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/4thRZj6NO7y93zG11JMtqm Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/finkjonathan/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/siliconcurtain ---------- Welcome to the Silicon Curtain podcast. Please like and subscribe if you like the content we produce. It will really help to increase the popularity of our content in YouTube s algorithm. Our material is now being made available on popular podcasting platforms as well, such as Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

Today we're still speaking with Orlando attorney, James O. Cunningham, who has written much on the intersection of faith and politics. Not too long ago Jim wrote a fascinating article for substack entitled History Doesn't Repeat but it Rhymes. Jim is joining us again today because we want our listeners to hear from someone who has thought deeply and carefully about the truth and values of the Christian faith must express themselves in our current truth-averse culture. As Anchored by Truth listeners know, we believe that there are four lines of evidence that demonstrate that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, and infallible word of God. We term those 4 lines of evidence reliable history, remarkable unity, fulfilled prophecy, and redeemed destinies. First, as both science, archeology, and human historical records amply demonstrate the Bible is historically reliable. Second, the Bible displays a remarkable unity for a book that was composed by over 3 dozen human authors who wrote over a span of 1,500 years. Third, the Bible gives evidence of supernatural origin especially through a large body of fulfilled prophecy. And the 4th line of evidence is that the Bible has resulted in an untold number of lives that have been positively changed by its transcendent message. Jim' life was transformed and redeemed by the scriptures. Jim has been practicing law in Florida for nearly 50 years and he also taught law classes at the Barry college of law including a class on the foundations of law. So, Jim not only knows how the law operates in our society but why it operates that way. And as we heard in our last couple of episodes of Anchored by Truth Jim has done an extensive investigation of the famous debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas as they both ran for the US Senate just prior to the civil war. Any listeners who didn't catch that episode of Anchored by Truth can go the website for Crystal Sea Books and find them there. The Lincoln-Douglas debates were an extremely important series of political conversations because in them the two men articulated far different visions of the American democracy. And those different visions are still being expressed in the political dialog of our day. This is episode 288. +++++++ You can find more information here: http://www.crystalseabooks.com/

The "bone and sinew" in Pennsylvania, the voters there, would determine the election of Zachary Taylor or Cass. So said the candidate Zachary Taylor himself. In the final part of our two-party series on the 1848 Presidential Election, we look at stump speeches, the third party Free Soilers, Stephen Douglas speaking for Democratic candidate Lewis Cass and Abraham Lincoln touting Zachary Taylor. We hear stories from newspapers and a budding author starts to ply his trade with a diversion into political satire. We have a Patreon - www.myhistorycanbeatupyourpolitics.com We are part of Airwave Media Network Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

August 12, 2024Season 6 | Episode 30What if the secret to winning one of the most pivotal elections in U.S. history lay in the hands of an underdog with a vision? Join us as we travel back to 1860 and uncover how Abraham Lincoln, a little-known one-term Whig representative from Illinois, rose to prominence as the Republican nominee. We'll break down his strategy against formidable opponents like Stephen Douglas and John Breckinridge, and reflect on how his political savvy helped him secure victory in a deeply divided nation. This not only sheds light on our historical roots but also offers a fresh perspective on today's polarized political landscape.Shifting to the world of finance, we dissect the turbulent performance of the S&P 500 and Nasdaq, driven by mixed earnings reports and macroeconomic factors. Discover how the yen situation in Japan and tech company earnings have influenced market sentiment, and learn why experts advocate for a diversified, long-term investment approach. Whether you're eyeing undervalued sectors or curious about opportunities in smaller and mid-sized companies, we offer insights to help you navigate the current financial climate with confidence.In our final segment, we tackle critical topics affecting your financial future. From conservative investment strategies and the potential changes to Social Security taxation to the economic impact of aging populations in the U.S. and China, we've got you covered. Insights from experts like Torsten Slocke from Apollo Global illuminate key factors driving inflation and offer strategies for managing market volatility. Plus, get the latest on industry movers like Alphabet and Parker Hannafin, and learn how to assess your risk tolerance and investment goals in this ever-changing market landscape.** For informational and educational purposes only, not intended as investment advice. Views and opinions are subject to change without notice. For full disclosures, ADVs, and CRS Forms, please visit https://heroldlantern.com/disclosure **To learn about becoming a Herold & Lantern Investments valued client, please visit https://heroldlantern.com/wealth-advisory-contact-formFollow and Like Us on Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn | @HeroldLantern

Conversation with Sergej Sumlenny and Stephen Douglas. ---------- General Rudenko, the Soviet Chief Prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials of senior Nazi war criminals made a famous address: about the German leadership having the ‘Morals of Cannibals, the Greed of Burglars'. “The defendants knew that cynical mockery of the laws and customs of war constituted the gravest of crimes. They knew it, but they hoped that total war, by securing victory, would also secure their impunity…” Not unlike Putin's criminal war against Ukraine. But do Russian liberals recently released from custody also seek ‘impunity' for the countrymen, supposedly guiltless and disconnected from Putin's crimes and thuggish regime, absolved of responsibility for the largest war since 1946. ---------- Sergej Sumlenny is founder of the European Resilience Initiative Centre and a former Regional Director for Ukraine and Belarus at the Heinrich Böll Foundation. He is based in Berlin, Germany and is an expert in Energy and Security Policy, Human Rights, and International Business Consulting. ---------- Stephen Douglas is a self-described expert in combat propaganda (is a former diplomat), and creator of Decoding Trolls and Disinfolklore. The latter has been described in a Byline Times review as a “brilliant new analytical method to parse and counter disinformation”. ---------- LINKS: https://twitter.com/sumlenny https://www.linkedin.com/in/sergej-sumlenny-4502aa5/ https://european-resilience.org/ https://www.boell.de/en https://twitter.com/DecodingTrolls https://www.decodingtrolls.net/ https://www.disinfolklore.net/ https://www.bylinesupplement.com/p/disinfolklore ---------- SUPPORT THE CHANNEL: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/siliconcurtain https://www.patreon.com/siliconcurtain ---------- TRUSTED CHARITIES ON THE GROUND: Save Ukraine https://www.saveukraineua.org/ Superhumans - Hospital for war traumas https://superhumans.com/en/ UNBROKEN - Treatment. Prosthesis. Rehabilitation for Ukrainians in Ukraine https://unbroken.org.ua/ Come Back Alive https://savelife.in.ua/en/ Chefs For Ukraine - World Central Kitchen https://wck.org/relief/activation-chefs-for-ukraine UNITED24 - An initiative of President Zelenskyy https://u24.gov.ua/ Serhiy Prytula Charity Foundation https://prytulafoundation.org NGO “Herojam Slava” https://heroiamslava.org/ kharpp - Reconstruction project supporting communities in Kharkiv and Przemyśl https://kharpp.com/ NOR DOG Animal Rescue https://www.nor-dog.org/home/ ---------- PLATFORMS: Twitter: https://twitter.com/CurtainSilicon Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/siliconcurtain/ Podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/4thRZj6NO7y93zG11JMtqm Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/finkjonathan/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/siliconcurtain ---------- Welcome to the Silicon Curtain podcast. Please like and subscribe if you like the content we produce. It will really help to increase the popularity of our content in YouTube's algorithm. Our material is now being made available on popular podcasting platforms as well, such as Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

Join me this week for the second chapter of Lincoln's life and legacy. Tune in as I discuss Lincoln's early political career, his debates with Stephen Douglas, and how he surprised everyone to become the 16th President of the United States. And be sure to come back next week for a special guest as I wrap up my coverage of Abraham Lincoln. 

A presentation from "Censorship and Official Lies: The End of Truth in America?" This event was co-hosted by the Mises Institute and the Ron Paul Institute, and recorded in Lake Jackson, Texas, on April 13, 2024.Full Written Text (Audio link is above): Over the past three years, the word “sedition” has again become popular among regime agents and their friends in the media. It's certainly not the first time the word has enjoyed a renaissance. It's frequently employed whenever the ruling class wishes us to become hysterical about various real and imagined enemies, both domestic and foreign.This time, the regime's paranoia about sedition was prompted by the Capitol Riot in January 2021, when we were told that Trump supporters nearly carried out a coup d'etat. Since then, regime operatives have frequently referred to Trump supporters and Trump himself as seditionists.Yet, out of the approximately 850 people charged with crimes of various sorts, only a very small number have been charged with anything even close to treason or insurrection. Rather, most charges are various forms of infractions related to vandalism and trespassing. However, because these charges have to do with the regime's sacred office buildings, the penalties are outrageously harsh compared to similar acts, were they to occur on private property.For a small handful of defendants, however—the ones the Justice Department has most enthusiastically targeted—the federal prosecutors have brought the charge of “seditious conspiracy.”Why not charges of treason, rebellion or insurrection? Well, if federal prosecutors though they could get a conviction for actual rebellion, insurrection, or treason for the January 6 riot, they would have brought those charges.But they didn't.What they did do is turn to seditious conspiracy, which is far easier to prove in court, and is—like all conspiracy charges in American law—essentially a thought crime and a speech crime. Seditious conspiracy is not actual sedition, or rebellion, or insurrection. That is, there is no overt act necessary, nor is it necessary that the alleged sedition or insurrection actually take place or be executed. What really matters is that two or more people said things that prosecutors could later claim were part of a conspiracy to do something that may or may not have ever happened.Moreover, the regime now routinely employs other types of conspiracy charges for prosecuting Americans supposedly guilty for various crimes against the state. At the moment, for example, Donald Trump faces three different conspiracy charges for saying that the 2020 election was illegitimate.As we shall see, purported crimes like seditious conspiracy are crimes based largely on things people have said. They are a type of speech crime. Now, some may ask how that is even possible if there is freedom of speech in this country.Contrary to what a naïve reading of the First Amendment might suggest, the federal government has never been especially keen on respecting the right to free speech.The federal government has long sought tools to get around the First amendment, and one of them is seditious conspiracy.Now, the term seditious conspiracy contains two pieces. There's the sedition part, and there is the conspiracy part. Let's explore both parts of this in a bit more detail to see what we can learn about this inventive way the regime has developed to silence those who question the legitimacy of the American state.Seditious Conspiracy Was Invented to Get Around Limitations on Treason Prosecutions From the very beginning, federal politicians have sought ways to create political crimes above and beyond the Constitution's very limited definition of treason. This began with the Sedition Act of 1798, and continued with the creation of the Seditious Conspiracy law in 1861, and carried on through to the Sedition Act of 1918, and the Smith Act of 1940, and a plethora of various types of “conspiracy” laws used to punish many different types of antiwar and dissident activities since then.All of these laws, involve restrictions on freedom of speech, and open up suspects to punishments for saying things.The reason why federal politicians believe they need extra sedition laws on top of treason can be found in the fact that the framers of the Constitution defined treason in very specific and limiting terms:Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.Note the use of the word “only” to specify that the definition of treason shall not be construed as something more broad than what is in the text. As with much of what we now find in the Bill of Rights, this language stems from fears that the US federal government would indulge in some of the same abuses that had occurred under the English crown, especially in the days of the Stuart monarchs. Kings had often construed “treason” to mean acts, thoughts, and alleged conspiracies far beyond the act of actually taking up arms against the state.Treason could have been anything the king didn't like, and it how you end up with a situation in which St. Thomas More was executed for treason simply for refusing to say that the king was head of the church.By contrast, in the US Constitution, the only flexibility given to Congress is in determining the punishment for treason.Naturally, those who favored greater federal power chafed at these limitations and sought more federal laws that would punish alleged crimes against the state. It only took the Federalists ten years to come up with the Alien and Sedition Acts, which stated:That if any persons shall unlawfully combine or conspire together, with intent to oppose any measure or measures of the government of the United States … or to impede the operation of any law of the United States, … from undertaking, performing or executing his trust or duty, and if any person or persons, with intent as aforesaid, shall counsel, advise or attempt to procure any insurrection, riot, unlawful assembly, or combination, whether such conspiracy, threatening, counsel, advice, or attempt shall have the proposed effect or not, he or they shall be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor.Note the references to “intent,” “counsel,” and “advise” as criminal acts so long as these types of speech are employed in a presumed effort to obstruct government officials. In the twentieth century, we will again see this type of language designed to ensnare Americans in so-called crimes of conspiracy.A great many Americans—some of whom who still took the radical liberalism of the revolutionary era seriously—saw the Sedition Act for what it was. A blatant assault on the rights of Americans, and an attack on freedom of speech. Thanks to the election of Thomas Jefferson in 1800 the Sedition Act was allowed to expire,Then, for sixty years, the United States government had no laws addressing sedition on the books. But the heart of the 1798 Sedition Act would be revived. As passed in July 1861, the new Seditious Conspiracy statute statedthat if two or more persons within any State or Territory of the United States shall conspire together to overthrow, or to put down, or to destroy by force, the Government of the United States, or to oppose by force the authority of the Government of the United States; or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States; or … prevent any person from accepting or holding any office, or trust, or place of confidence, under the United States. . . . Shall be guilty of a high crime.Note the crimes here are not overt acts like “overthrowing the government” of “delaying the execution of a law.” No, the crime here is conspiring to do something about it. That is, saying things about it to another person. That is what constitutes “conspiracy” here.Now, some people who have a rather benign view of the state might think, well, people shouldn't conspire to do bad things. Well, in real life, conspiracy as prosecuted, does not necessarily look like a group of bad guys getting together in a dark room and explaining how they're going to blow up some government building. That's Hollywood stuff.In real life, people can be found guilty of conspiring with people with whom they have never been in the same room, or with whom the "conspirator" expressed any actual violent intent.We'll return to this, and this is just something to keep in mind, whenever looking at government conspiracy laws.Given the timing of the seditious conspiracy legislation that I just read—i.e., in 1861, following the secession of several Southern states—it is assumed that the legislation originated to address alleged Confederate treason. This is not quite the case. The legislation did enjoy considerable support from those who were especially militant in their opposition to the Confederacy. However, Rep. Clement Vallandigham of Ohio—who would later be exiled to the Confederacy for opposing Lincoln's war—supported the bill precisely because he thought it would help punish opponents of the fugitive slave laws.” Congress had initially become serious about punishing “conspiracies” not in response to Southern secession, but in response to John Brown's 1859 raid at Harper's Ferry.Thus, there was support for the idea in the South before the war. Soon thereafter, however, the Confederate secession and fears of rebellion helped enlarge the coalition in favor of a new sedition law. The new sedition law represented a significant expansion of the idea of “crimes against the state.” Senator Stephen Douglas, the bill's sponsor understood this perfectly well, statingYou must punish the conspiracy, the combination with intent to do the act, and then you will suppress it in advance. … If it be unlawful and illegal to invade a State, and run off fugitive slaves, [a reference to John Brown] why not make it unlawful to form conspiracies and combinations in the several States with intent to do the act?Others were more suspicious of expanding federal power in this way, however. Sen. Lazarus Powell and eight other Democrats presented a statement opposing the passage of the bill. Specifically, Powell and his allies believed the new seditious conspiracy law would be a de facto move in the direction of allowing the federal government to expand the definition of treason offered by the federal constitution. The statement read:The creation of an offense, resting in intention alone, without overt act, would render nugatory the provision last quoted, [i.e., the treason definition in the Constitution] and the door would be opened for those similar oppressions and cruelties which, under the excitement of political struggles, have so often disgraced the past history of the world.Powell is here describing what George Orwell would later call a “thoughtcrime.” This “crime” Powell tells us, rests “in intention alone, without overt act.” To anyone who actually valued freedom in 1861, this would set off major alarm bells.Even worse, Powell saw that the new legislation would provide to the federal government “the utmost latitude to prosecutions founded on personal enmity and political animosity and the suspicions as to intention which they inevitably engender.”Like so many political crimes invented by regimes, the legislation tends to grant unusual flexibility and discretion in prosecuting the state's perceived enemies. This opens up political dissidents to new kinds of prosecution.Such legislation COULD have been used against opponents of the fugitive slave acts, as well as against opponents of federal conscription during the war. After all, opponents of both the Civil War draft and the Vietnam War draft “conspired” to destroy government property—as with the heroic draft-card burnings of the Catonsville Nine, for example.It would be far harder to prove in court that such acts constituted treason, so sedition laws have paved to way for more frequently prosecuting various acts of resistance against the regime and its crimes.It's bad enough that federal policy makers schemed to insert into federal law new crimes against the state. But, as Powell correctly noted, the greater danger is in the part of the sedition law that enables prosecutions for conspiracy.What Is Conspiracy?So now we look at the other component of seditious conspiracy: the conspiracy part.Now conspiracy laws are used far more broadly than for political crimes. They are also used in the war on drugs and countless other federal legal crusades.Current federal conspiracy laws outlaw conspiracy to commit any other federal crime. Other provisions include conspiracy to commit some specific form of misconduct, ranging from civil rights violations to drug trafficking. Conspiracy is a separate offense under most of these statutes, regardless of whether the conspiracy accomplishes its objective.This latter point is an important distinction. As was explicit in the Sedition Act of 1798, so it is today: it is not necessary that the defendant charged with conspiracy harm anyone —i.e., that there be any actual victim. Indeed, conspiracy charges act as a way of charging individuals with crimes that might occur, but have not.Moreover, it is not even necessary in all cases that a "conspirator" take any affirmative steps toward completion of the alleged conspiracy. While it is true that some federal conspiracy statutes require at least one conspirator to take some affirmative step in furtherance of the scheme, It is also the case that Many have no such explicit overt act requirement. Even in those cases where some "affirmative step" or overt act take place, it is not necessary that the act be illegal. The "act" could be publicly stating an opinion or making a phone call.In a 2019 interview with the Mises Institute, Judge Andrew Napolitano highlighted his own problem with conspiracy charges:If it were up to me, there would be no such thing as conspiracy crimes because they are thought crimes and word crimes. But, at the present time in our history and in fact, for all of our history, regrettably, an agreement to commit a felony, agreement by two or more people or two or more entities to commit a felony and a step in furtherance of that agreement, constitutes an independent crime. ... In the world of freedom, where you and I and people reading this live, conspiracy is a phony crime. For 600 years of Anglo-American jurisprudence, all accepted [that] crime contained an element of harm. Today, crime is whatever the government says it is.Napolitano is right, and the fact that crime is whatever the government says it is becomes apparent in one of the other key problems with conspiracy laws. Namely, as one legal commentator put it, “few things [are] left so doubtful in the criminal law, as the point at which a combination of several persons in a common object becomes illegal.”That is, at what point do a bunch of people talking about things become a criminal act. The law is very vague on this, and it is why it's not so easy to say “well, golly, I won't ever be prosecuted for conspiracy, because I don't plan to do anything illegal.But you are not safe because it is not clear in the law, at what point, statements encouraging legal activities become illegal —or statements encouraging legal activities, but without real criminal intent, become felonies.So, you can imagine yourself mouthing off unseriously and saying “we oughta burn down the offices of the department of education.” And then your friend texts back and says “I agree.” Well, congratulations, a prosecutor could easily use that exchange as a way of building a case for conspiracy against you.Would a single expression of an opinion against the regime be enough to convict? Probably not, but combined with other unrelated acts and legal activities such as a stated plan to visit Washington DC or buy a gun for unrelated activities, a prosecutor could, with enough convincing, tie them together in the minds of jurors to get a conviction for conspiracy.Legislators and the courts have never been able to provide any objective standard of when these disconnected, and often legal acts become crimes, and thus, prosecutors are afforded enormous leeway in stringing together a series of acts and claiming these constitute a conspiracy. For an indictment, the prosecutor merely need convince a grand jury that legal acts are really part of an illegal conspiracy. This is not difficult, as noted by Judge Solomon Wachtler when he cautioned that district attorneys could convince grand juries to "indict a ham sandwich."Not surprisingly, people who are actually concerned about regimes abusing their power have long opposed conspiracy prosecutions.For example, Clarence Darrow wrote on conspiracy prosecutions in 1932, concluding "It is a serious reflection on America that this wornout piece of tyranny, this dragnet for compassing the imprisonment and death of men whom the ruling class does not like, should find a home in our country."Darrow was at least partly joined in this opinion several years earlier by Judge Learned Hand who in 1925 described conspiracy charges as "that darling of the modern prosecutor's nursery" for the way it favors prosecutors over defendants.Crimes of Thought and Speech Vaguely DefinedConspiracy crimes have been a favorite of government prosecutors in going after political opponents historically.And, In the wake of the Vietnam War and the federal government's many attempts to prosecute antiwar protestors and activists for various crimes, many legal scholars took a closer look at the nature of conspiracy charges. Many were skeptical that conspiracy charges are either necessary or beneficial. The elastic and vague nature of conspiracy "crimes" means that, as legal scholar Thomas Emerson puts it, "the whole field of conspiracy law is filled with traps for the unwary and opportunities for the repressor."One of the more famous cases of conspiracy prosecutions running amok was the 1968 prosecution and trial of American pediatrician and antiwar activist Benjamin Spock. Spock and four others were charged with conspiring to aid, abet, and counsel draft resisters. That is, they were charged with saying things. Although prosecutors could never show the "conspirators" committed any illegal acts—or were ever even in the same room together—Spock and three of his "co-conspirators" were found guilty in federal court. The case was eventually set aside on appeal, but only on a legal technicality.Spock was able to avoid prison, but countless others have not been so lucky. Defendants who do not enjoy Spock's level of fame or wealth continue to find themselves locked in cages for saying things federal prosecutors don't like.The legal incoherence of the charges laid against Spock—and against antiwar activists in general—was covered in detail in Jessica Mitford's 1969 book The Trial of Dr. Spock, in which she writesThe law of conspiracy is so irrational, its implications so far removed from ordinary human experience or modes of thought, that like the Theory of Relativity it escapes just beyond the boundaries of the mind. One can dimly understand it while an expert is explaining it, but minutes later, it is not easy to tell it back. This elusive quality of conspiracy as a legal concept contributes to its deadliness as a prosecutor's tool and compounds the difficulties of defending against it.Mitford further draws upon Darrow to illustrate the absurdity of these prosecutions, pointing out that Darrow described conspiracy laws this way: if a boy steals a piece of candy, he is guilty of a misdemeanor. If two boys talk about stealing candy and do not, they are guilty of conspiracy—a felony.Again, we find that the foundation of conspiracy laws are thoughts and words, rather than any actual criminal acts. Or, as legal scholar Abraham Goldstein put it in 1959: "conspiracy doctrine comes closest to making a state of mind the occasion for preventive action against those who threaten society but who have come nowhere near carrying out the threat."This ability to treat this "state of mind" as real crime means, in the words of legal scholar Kevin Jon Heller:the government currently enjoys substantive and procedural advantages in conspiracy trials that are unparalleled anywhere else in the criminal law. Conspiracy convictions can be based on circumstantial evidence alone, and the government is allowed to introduce any evidence that "even remotely tends to establish the conspiracy charged.Conspiracy Prosecutions Are a Means of Quashing DissentConspiracy laws----including seditious conspiracy of course -- have long been used for a wide variety of alleged crimes.However, as the Dr. Spock case makes clear, conspiracy prosecutions are also a tool against those who protest government policies. More specifically, given that conspiracy "crimes" are essentially crimes of words and thoughts, conspiracy prosecutions have long been employed as a way of circumventing the First Amendment. As the editors of the Yale Law Journal put it in 1970:Throughout various periods of xenophobia, chauvinism, and collective paranoia in American history, conspiracy law has been one of the primary governmental tools employed to deter individuals from joining controversial political causes and groups.Or, put another way by the Journal, through conspiracy prosecutions, the "government seeks to regulate associations whose primary activity is expression." Naturally, citizens are more reluctant to engage in expressive activities with others that could later be characterized in court as some kind of conspiracy.So, if you and the other members of your gun club like to get a bit over-the-top in your comments about the crimes of America's political class, be careful. The federal informant in your midst may be taking notes.So it was the case with many government informants placed to investigate groups that opposed the War and the draft. Those who simply agreed with radical opinions could find themselves on the wrong end of a federal indictment.Yet, any strict interpretation of the First Amendment—which is the correct type of interpretation—would tell us that this ought to be protected speech under the First Amendment. Federal courts, however, have long disagreed, and some advocates of conspiracy might claim that speech encouraging a specific crime ought not be protected.Yet, in real-life conspiracy prosecutions, it is not easy to determine whether or not a "conspirator" is actually inciting a crime. As legal scholar David Filvaroff notes, the actual intent and effect of the speech in question in these cases is difficult to interpret. Thus, judgements about whether or not speech counts as protected speech is highly arbitrary:He writes:With a conspiracy to murder, one faces a potential crime of finite proportion and of near unmistakable content. There is little, if any, risk that either the defendants themselves, or the court or jury, will mistake the criminality of what the defendants propose to do. The probability of such a mistake both by the alleged conspirators and by the trier of fact is very high, however, in the case of conspiracy to incite.Back to our case about burning down the dept. of education. Was that casual comment a conspiracy to incite arson? Did the defendant intend it as such? This is largely up to the unilateral interpretation of the prosecutor.Most of the time, it is difficult for a "conspirator" to guess how others will interpret his words and what concrete actions might take place as a result.Under these circumstances, innocent people can end up serving years in prison for expressing their views about what government agents or government institutions ought to do or stop doing.The fact that legal acts can become illegal, and the fact that intent need not be proven makes conspiracy crimes, especially seditious conspiracy an excellent avenue for political prosecutions against perceived enemies of the state. It is not a coincidence that most of the charges against Donald Trump are conspiracy charges. They largely come down to Trump making statement both public and private questioning the validity of the election. Prosecutors have turned these opinions into a legal theory that Trump “incited” others to commit crimes. Thanks to conspiracy laws, it is not necessary that any actual crimes take place, or that any actual victims materialize, to get a guilty verdict.Thanks to his wealth, Trump has been able to mount a defense. Most people accused of various conspiracy laws are not so lucky, and countless Americans have endured financial ruin and prison thanks to the vast and abusive powers handed over to prosecutors by conspiracy laws.These are most dangerous when wielded against political opponents because, conspiracy laws essentially nullify the First Amendment and enable prosecutors to turn words into crimes.End All Political CrimesSo what is to be done? Obviously, conspiracy laws, including seditious conspiracy laws, ought to be abolished. All sedition laws are especially ripe for repeal given that the United States survived for decades without any federal political crimes other than treason, narrowly defined.Yet, if we are to win any meaningful victory against the state, we ought to repeal all political crimes, including treason, altogether.For one, political crimes like treason and sedition are simply unnecessary.It is already illegal to blow up buildings. It's especially illegal to do it with people inside the building, whether those people are government employees or not. It is already illegal to murder people, regardless of whether or not they represent the state. Destruction of property is illegal in every state.What political crimes like treason and sedition do is create a special class of people and institutions: government employees and government property, to send the message—via harsher penalties and punishments—that the destruction of government property, or the killing of government employees is worse than crimes against the mere taxpayers who pay all the bills.Political crimes are often subject to fewer regulations protecting the rights of the accused, and are often prosecuted by authorities more directly under the control of the central executive power. In the United States, the federal government has taken over control of most political crimes, centralizing enforcement and thus strengthening the central state. Certainly this has been the case with sedition laws.This scam that all modern regimes embrace exists not to keep the public safe. It exists for propagandistic purposes. These laws exist to send a message.Treason and sedition laws create the illusion that loyalty to the regime to which on presently pays taxes is morally important.Or, as historian Mark Cornwell puts it, regimes have long used crimes such as these “as a powerful moral instrument for managing allegiance.”Freedom of speech has always been a grave threat to this manipulation of allegiance, and its why sedition and conspiracy laws have so long been employed to weaponize speech against dissidents.The remedy lies in taking a page from those early Jeffersonians who abolished early sedition laws and refused to create new ones. The regime does not need or deserve a way around the First Amendment. The country does not need these “wornout pieces of tyranny” that are sedition and conspiracy laws. Abolish them now.

Steve hosts this crisp episode despite his creaky voice from a springtime bug (and Lucretia is partly hobbled, too) covering a lot of ground, starting with a brief recap of the latest (unanimous!) property rights victory at the Supreme Court, but then moving quickly on to initial reactions to the outbreak of World War III yesterday. What to make of Iran's attack on Israel? Many things are not clear about this impetuous scene.Closely related, while the Biden Administration seems determined to tamp down the prospect of a wider war in the Middle East, it seems to be inviting one with Antony (Blank) Blinken saying a week ago that Ukraine should or would become a member of NATO. Are they trying to make Russia dig in, or draw the U.S. more directly into the war (which NATO membership would require)? We also ponder J.D. Vance's very clear-headed New York Times op-ed that reviews the grim math of the Ukranian battle scene, making us wonder whether the Biden Administration has any strategy at all beyond "fight to the last Ukranian."Then we ponder briefly the astounding scene of the anti-Semitic protests in the back yard of Berkeley Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, with Steve arging that to see this incident as a matter of the limits of free speech is woefully inadequate. But the bulk of the episode is devoted to analyzing the latest abortion controversies, starting with the Arizona Supreme Court decision upholding the validity of Arizona's pre-Roe statutes, and observing as usual the way this narrow and largely technical ruling is being mis-reported in the media and misrepresented by the left. The main portion of this segment, though, is devoted to Trump's announcement that he does not support federal legislation of abortion and wants to leave the issue iup to the states. Does this make him the modern-day equivalent of Stephen Douglas, as John Davidson argues in our Article of the Week over at The Federalist? Lucretia will startle many regular listeners with her analysis of the matter, to which John and Steve largely agree.In fact, it is an amazing how much agreement we had this week, but perhaps because we recorded in the morning sans-whisky, and with Steve and Lucretia ailing.

Did Aaron Burr try to run for President on the sly, while claiming he didn't? What about that dinner with Jefferson? Did Stephen Douglas stump when he said he was "just visiting his mom?" Did President Monroe actually have a campaign for President in 1820? More to the point did he actually get a vote cast against him? (This one is different from what you may have learned in history class). This, and other stories of that American tradition of not running for President. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Dinesh has an in-depth conversation with longtime friend and Texas Congressman Troy Nehls, focusing on his latest book “Borderless by Design” which exposes the Biden administration's deliberate wrecking of U.S. border security. Nehls gives us the what and the why.  Dinesh continues his argument for Stephen Douglas as part of his study of the Lincoln-Douglas debates.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We record live from a ranch in Oklahoma, we talk Alabama executions with the great Liz Bruenig, and Jake unfortunately confuses Stephen Douglas and Frederick Douglas0:00 - Open20:30 - Viewer Mail32:45 - Sports: Jerry speaks at the Senior Bowl49:00 - Liz Bruenig1:20:45 - News1:33:30 - Today in History with Dominic Robinson (00:00) - Open (20:30) - Viewer Mail (32:45) - Sports: Jerry speaks at the Senior Bowl (49:00) - Liz Bruenig (01:20:45) - News (01:33:30) - Today in History with Dominic Robinson ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

For more than a decade Russia has pumped poison into the bloodstream of our civilisation, in the form of hypnotic lies and myths, that Stephen Douglas calls Disinfolklore. These human-crafted, mythical falsehoods are a form of simplistic, yet impactful fairytale nonsense. They have fooled many foreign policy professionals, politicians, diplomats, as well as lay people, into repeating patently absurd, yet endlessly recycled bogus Russian narratives. There is a strategic purpose behind the contemporary Russian Disinfolklore, says Stephen, to prevent allies coming to the aid of Ukraine, to provide what it needs, and enforce its inherent right to self-defence. ---------- ABOUT: Stephen Douglas is a self-described expert in combat propaganda (is a former diplomat), and creator of Decoding Trolls and Disinfolklore. The latter has been described in a Byline Times review as a “brilliant new analytical method to parse and counter disinformation”. ---------- LINKS: https://twitter.com/DecodingTrolls https://www.decodingtrolls.net/ https://www.disinfolklore.net/ https://www.bylinesupplement.com/p/disinfolklore ---------- SUPPORT THE CHANNEL: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/siliconcurtain https://www.patreon.com/siliconcurtain ---------- TRUSTED CHARITIES ON THE GROUND: Save Ukraine https://www.saveukraineua.org/ Superhumans - Hospital for war traumas https://superhumans.com/en/ UNBROKEN - Treatment. Prosthesis. Rehabilitation for Ukrainians in Ukraine https://unbroken.org.ua/ Come Back Alive https://savelife.in.ua/en/ Chefs For Ukraine - World Central Kitchen https://wck.org/relief/activation-chefs-for-ukraine UNITED24 - An initiative of President Zelenskyy https://u24.gov.ua/ Serhiy Prytula Charity Foundation https://prytulafoundation.org NGO “Herojam Slava” https://heroiamslava.org/ kharpp - Reconstruction project supporting communities in Kharkiv and Przemysl https://kharpp.com/ NOR DOG Animal Rescue https://www.nor-dog.org/home/ ---------- WATCH NEXT: Carl Miller https://youtu.be/5MYEpbs7CHU Nina Jankowicz https://youtu.be/em0gfGQf0Zs Adam Ure https://youtu.be/EzimhQc62AQ Valeria Kovtun https://youtu.be/0BY82QBE-Js Oleksandra Tsekhanovska https://youtu.be/xfyr4XvLguM ---------- PLATFORMS: Twitter: https://twitter.com/CurtainSilicon Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/siliconcurtain/ Podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/4thRZj6NO7y93zG11JMtqm Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/finkjonathan/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/siliconcurtain ---------- Welcome to the Silicon Curtain podcast. Please like and subscribe if you like the content we produce. It will really help to increase the popularity of our content in YouTube s algorithm. Our material is now being made available on popular podcasting platforms as well, such as Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

It's no surprise that Steve Inskeep of NPR narrates well. Host Jo Reed and AudioFile's Alan Minskoff discuss how he narrates with a practiced cadence and the authoritative tone of a polished broadcaster. The subject is Abraham Lincoln, the most studied and written about president in American history. Inskeep examines how Lincoln dealt with those he disagreed with (Stephen Douglas), those who were critical of him (Frederick Douglass), those who didn't follow his directions (General George McClellan), and those he had to soothe emotionally (his wife, Mary). The politics of today are illuminated in this fine, deftly narrated work. Read the full review of the audiobook on AudioFile's website. Published by Penguin Audio. Find more audiobook recommendations at audiofilemagazine.com Support for AudioFile's Behind the Mic comes from HarperCollins Focus, and HarperCollins Christian Publishing, publishers of some of your favorite audiobooks and authors, including Reba McEntire, Zachary Levi, Kathie Lee Gifford, Max Lucado, Willie Nelson, and so many more! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Abraham Lincoln led the country through the Civil War…but it was this man who defeated him for the senate just two years prior.  We'll go...

We play the campaign trail in 1860. We go up against Abraham Lincoln as Stephen Douglas, but we try to make ourselves as abolitionist as possible.

Welcome to the Instant Trivia podcast episode 857, where we ask the best trivia on the Internet. Round 1. Category: universal studios florida 1: You'll find Universal Studios Florida in this city, not too far from Disney World. Orlando. 2: Watch out for the green slime geyser when you visit this "Nick at Nite" network's studio on the lot. Nickelodeon. 3: You'll careen through time and space on the thrill ride based on this trilogy of Michael J. Fox films. Back to the Future. 4: 4 stories tall, this ape, star of his own ride, is the largest computer-animated figure ever built. King Kong. 5: The ride based on this 1975 film starts out as peaceful tour of Amity Harbor but something is "fishy". Jaws. Round 2. Category: u.s place names 1: Anne Arundel County in this state is named for the wife of the second Lord Baltimore. Maryland. 2: A city near L.A. is named for this novelist from New England; wonder how many "scarlet" women live there. (Nathaniel) Hawthorne. 3: This New Mexico city was named for a railroad paymaster, not for a pollster. Gallup. 4: Motley County in this state wasn't named for Motley Crue but for a man wounded in the Battle of San Jacinto. Texas. 5: A dozen U.S. counties are named for this 19th century politician, a "Little Giant" indeed. (Stephen) Douglas. Round 3. Category: bio hazard 1: Roy Jenkins, a leader in the UK's Labour Party, wrote a bio of this great wartime Conservative leader. Churchill. 2: Ibn Ishaq scored in the 8th century with his biography of this Muslim leader. Mohammed. 3: 1922:"Seven Pillars of Wisdom". T.E. Lawrence (of Arabia). 4: 1991:"Lady Day". Billie Holiday. 5: 1975:"Why Not the Best?". Jimmy Carter. Round 4. Category: "o" no! 1: These bivalves breed in beds. oysters. 2: The word that opens the Lord's Prayer. our. 3: The Greek word for "bird" gave us this word for the study of birds. ornithology. 4: A hospital attendant, even if he's not tidy. an orderly. 5: Founded in 1878, Lady Margaret Hall is this European university's oldest women's college. Oxford. Round 5. Category: bo, moe or po 1: She had a sheep location problem. Little Bo Peep. 2: "Kid Gorgeous", "Kid Presentable", "Kid Gruesome" and finally "Kid" this were boxing nicknames of this "Simpsons" barkeep. Moe (Szyslak). 3: Italy's longest river. Po. 4: First name of the leader of a film trio of "Knuckleheads". Moe (Howard of the Three Stooges). 5: John Schneider first played this "Good Ol' Boy" in 1979. Bo Duke. Thanks for listening! Come back tomorrow for more exciting trivia! Special thanks to https://blog.feedspot.com/trivia_podcasts/

This episode with Stephen Douglas of The Whitening Project opened my eyes to the possibilities of tooth whitening that I had not considered.Sure, tooth whitening helps patients whiten their teeth. However, there are additional, highly impactful benefits of assessing how your team manage tooth whitening in your clinic, with your existing and potential patients. The Whitening Project takes a fresh approach to tooth whitening, and I encourage you to listen in and see what you think. If you would like to contact Stephen, go to this website link: https://www.expertwhiteningsecrets.com/teeth-whitening-training-programYou can also contact Stephen directly via his email: stephen@thewhiteningproject.com.auIf you have any feedback or requests for specific content, contact me at julie@julieparkerpractcesuccess.com.auHead over to our website at Julie Parker Practice Success and find loads of information that can help you and your practice be more successful.There are:Online Mini-CoursesFree DownloadsThe Club membership information and registrationProducts and aids for purchaseInterested in taking your personal, team, and dental practice to the next level? Contact Julie today to explore the possibilities for growth and success! Visit our website, Dental Business Mastery, at https://dentalbusinessmastery.com.au/, and book a complimentary, obligation-free Discovery Call to discuss your specific needs and goals. Schedule your call here: https://tidycal.com/3l298p1/30-minute-meeting Our website is also packed with valuable information, free tools, and resources to support you on your journey. Be sure to check it out! If you have any questions or would like more information, feel free to contact us via email at info@dentalbusinessmastery.com.au.

Illinois lawyer Abraham Lincoln had a record of political failure. In 1858, he had lost a celebrated Senate bid against incumbent Stephen Douglas, his second failed Senate run, and had not held public office since one term in Congress a decade earlier. As the Republican National Convention opened in mid-May 1860 in Chicago, powerful New York Senator William Seward was the overwhelming favorite for the presidential nomination, with notables like Salmon Chase and Edward Bates in the running. Few thought Lincoln stood a chance.

Many remember Elizabeth Keckley from the film “Lincoln” as Mrs. Lincoln's dressmaker and confidant. But the story of the woman behind that film character is much deeper and fascinating and dramatic than most know. Just press play to hear the whole story. ———  Click on search links to see if there are episodes with related content: Cicely Hunter, Black History, People of Note, Women's History, ——— Podcast Transcript: I'm Cicely Hunter, Public Historian from the Missouri Historical Society, and here's history, on eighty-eight-one, KDHX. ——— Black women displayed their skill and brilliance as they wove and stitched together pieces of fabric to create beautiful ensembles. One woman whose ingenuity brought her from St. Louis to Washington D.C., was Elizabeth (Lizzie) Hobbs Keckly (also spelled Keckley). Her toiling and skillful hands whisked her into prominence as she created dresses for President Abraham Lincoln's wife, Lady Mary Todd Lincoln. Widely held as a controversial book, Elizabeth Keckley published a narrative detailing her experiences and life in Behind the Scenes: Or Thirty Years a Slave, and Four Years in the White House in 1868. ——— Keckley was born enslaved in Virginia during February 1818, and she worked as a domestic servant from a young age, learning how to sew alongside her mother. Keckley's slaveholders moved her, her mother, Agnes, and her son, George, to St. Louis in 1846 in hopes to improve their economic fortune. She was hired out as a seamstress and dressmaker to sustain the Garlands. She expressed, “With my needle I kept bread in the mouths of seventeen persons for two years and five months.” ——— Keckley desired freedom and labored as a skilled seamstress to obtain it, gaining a reputation as the best dressmaker in St. Louis and working with prominent families. Her clients offered to loan her the money to purchase her and her son's freedom, and in November 1855 she borrowed $1,200—about $35,000 today. For the next five years, she worked to repay them. ——— In 1860 she moved east—first to Baltimore and then Washington, DC. She was soon sewing dresses for the wives of Jefferson Davis and Stephen Douglas and her most notable client, First Lady Mary Lincoln who Keckley became her confidante and dressmaker. ——— For more information about St. Louis Black history, please visit our website mohistory.org/aahi. Here's history is a joint production of the Missouri Historical Society and KDHX. I'm Cicely Hunter and this is eighty-eight-one, KDHX, St. Louis. ———

Welcome to the Instant Trivia podcast episode 749, where we ask the best trivia on the Internet. Round 1. Category: U.s Place Names 1: Anne Arundel County in this state is named for the wife of the second Lord Baltimore. Maryland. 2: A city near L.A. is named for this novelist from New England; wonder how many "scarlet" women live there. (Nathaniel) Hawthorne. 3: This New Mexico city was named for a railroad paymaster, not for a pollster. Gallup. 4: Motley County in this state wasn't named for Motley Crue but for a man wounded in the Battle of San Jacinto. Texas. 5: A dozen U.S. counties are named for this 19th century politician, a "Little Giant" indeed. (Stephen) Douglas. Round 2. Category: Royal Houses 1: George I’s father was elector of this, hence its turnover into a house name. Hanover. 2: This dynasty’s last 3 monarchs, including Mary I, died childless. Tudor. 3: As a member of this house, it sounds like James I could have starred in “Harvey”. Stuart. 4: It could be called the house of Citrus sinensis. Orange. 5: This Shakespeare play sounds like it’s about the better halves of George V and George VI. The Merry Wives of Windsor. Round 3. Category: File Under "E" 1: The motto on the Great Seal of the U.S.: "Out of many, one". "E Pluribus Unum". 2: Gene Chandler is the Duke of Earl and Prince Philip is the duke of this city. Edinburgh. 3: Eritrea, now the northernmost province of this country, was an Italian colony from 1890-1941. Ethiopia. 4: 3-sided sword that's a familiar word to fencers and crossword puzzle enthusiasts. epee. 5: This ancient Greek city in Asia Minor was the site of the temple of Artemis. Ephesus. Round 4. Category: Chat Room Cliches 1: FWIW:"For"this. For what it's worth. 2: BTW:"By"this. By the way. 3: LOL:"Laughing"this way. Laughing out loud. 4: IMHO:"In my"this. In my humble opinion. 5: HTH:"Hope this"does this. Hope this helps. Round 5. Category: Oscar-Winning Roles 1: Mary Poppins. Julie Andrews. 2: Hannibal Lecter. Anthony Hopkins. 3: Rooster Cogburn. John Wayne. 4: Mexican cop Javier Rodriguez Rodriguez. Benicio Del Toro. 5: 2009:He was really good as Bad Blake. Jeff Bridges. Thanks for listening! Come back tomorrow for more exciting trivia! Special thanks to https://blog.feedspot.com/trivia_podcasts/

You know David Axlerod...the chief strategist for President Obama, CNN commentator, and founder of the University of Chicago Institute of Politics. The Obama years come up a bit in this conversation, but we focus mostly on his 20+ years as a working political media consultant before connecting professionally with then-State Senator Obama. We talk cutting his teeth in NYC, how the appeal of Chicago politics drew him to the Windy City, why he made the jump from political journalist to political operative, & stories, lessons, and insights from his 40+ years in and around politics.(To donate to support The Pro Politics Podcast, you may use this venmo link or inquire by email at mccrary.zachary@gmail.com) IN THIS EPISODE….David's early political memories growing up in NYC…The political appeal that drew David to Chicago for college…David tells the story of Chicago machine politics through 3 influential figures…What made David make the jump from journalism to become a political operative…The story behind David's first campaign working for Congressman Paul Simon…The Axelrod approach to political ads…David talks his time working for iconic Chicago Mayor Harold Washington…The historic 1992 Illinois Senate race that might not have happened without Axelrod agitation…How the 1992 Illinois Senate race foretold the 2004 rise of Senator Barack Obama…David's take on the “self doubt” present among many who work in politics… AND Jill Abramson, Paul Begala, Jessie Berry, Madison Brown, bullshit meters, Jane Byrne, Mike Calabrese, James Carville, cashing in stamps, the Chicago Tribune, chiseling, civilian review panels, Forrest Claypool, Cardiss Collins, George Collins, colorful Chicago lore, the Commissioner of Rodent Control, Rich Daley, Richard J. Daley, Bill Dawson, Alan Dixon, David Doak, Lloyd Doggett, dopes, Stephen Douglas, Rahm Emanuel, Carter Eskew, Jerry Finkelstein, Erwin France, gambling syndicates, Newt Gingrich, golfing with Dan Quayle, hammer-and-tong battles, Fred Hampton, Henry Henderson, Anita Hill, Al Hofeld, homespun wisdom, Hyde Park, impostor syndrome, Ben Lewis, John Lindsay, luminescent figures, JFK, RFK, the Jewish Kennedys, Vince Larkin, Jerry Liebner, Jim Ross Lightfoot, Abraham Lincoln, Little Rock, machine cogs, Jane Mayer, Mark McKinnon, Ralph Metcalfe, Kiki Moore, Carol Moseley Braun, Mike Murphy, Dr. Odom, Jesse Owens, PS 40, Deval Patrick, pastry and cash, Charles Percy, quixotic races, the Reagan Revolution, realpolitik, Republican golden boys, Dan Rostenkowski, Joe Rostenkowski, Mrs. Roth, secret sauces, Bill Singer, slate-making, Bob Squier, Andrew Stein, Stuyvesant Town, Tammany Hall, Clarence Thomas, unerring noses, the University of Chicago, Tom Vilsack, ward bosses, the wheel of history, David Wilhelm, the Wigwam, the Wizard of Oz Syndrome & more!

Undoubtedly, Abraham Lincoln was one of Americas greatest presidents. From his dirt-poor upbringings, Lincoln would rise in Illinois state politics to become a U.S. Congressmen in 1847. After sparring with Senator Stephen Douglas in the 1858 Illinois Senate race, Lincoln would go on to become the moderate choice for the newly formed Republican Party in 1860, where he would win in a heated election, and be forced to grapple with a crisis unprecedented in the country's history. 

When Sen. Stephen Douglas and Abraham Lincoln faced off in a debate in Peoria, Illinois, in 1854, the issue tearing apart the nation was slavery. A central issue was whether slavery would be permitted in new territories entering the union. Douglas' answer to the question was politics. Lincoln's answer was morality and the Bible. Douglas' answer to slavery in new states, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, was democracy. Citizens would vote to permit or not permit slavery in their state. Lincoln opposed the expansion of what he saw as the inherently evil institution of slavery. In his Peoria speech, Lincoln stated, “Judge...Article Link

In this episode we discussed Wilson's oratory rebuttal "Are Working Men Slaves?", the Lincoln-Douglass debates of 1858, and Wilsons re-election to the Senate. With the help of Kevin Pawlack and Jon-Erik Gilot we also discussed John Brown and his raid in Harpers Ferry Virginia.

Dozens of American leaders captured their party's nomination for the presidency but never reached the Oval Office. How would history have changed if they had won? If Abraham Lincoln had lost to Stephen Douglas, a pro-slavery Democrat, in 1860, then Emancipation would be the last thing on his mind during the Civil War. If Richard Nixon had defeated JFK in 1960, then the Cuban Missile Crisis, Bay of Pigs Invasion, and Space Race could have also turned out very differently. To explore these counterfactuals is today's guest Peter Shea, author of the book In the Arena: A History of American Presidential Hopefuls. We discuss the rise, early career, campaign, and later achievements of historical giants like Aaron Burr and Henry Clay, up through modern candidates to get insight into what it's like to run for one of the most powerful positions in the world – and come up short.In a speech Theodore Roosevelt gave after losing the 1912 presidential election, he assigned ultimate credit “to the man who is actually in the arena…who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

Welcome to the Instant Trivia podcast episode 423, where we ask the best trivia on the Internet. Round 1. Category: They Took Debate 1: This "League" has sponsored many political debates, including the Mondale/Reagan fisticuffs in 1984. the League of Women Voters. 2: In 1858 Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas had a series of debates over who should be senator from this state. Illinois. 3: In 1993 Vice President Al Gore and Ross Perot appeared on Larry King to debate this trade pact. NAFTA. 4: In the late 1970s conservative columnist James Kilpatrick debated liberal journalist Shana Alexander on this TV show. 60 Minutes. 5: "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy" was a quip from the famous debate between these two men. Quayle and Bentsen. Round 2. Category: Foreign Animal Noises 1: To the Germans and Vietnamese, these say wau wau when chasing a postman or a cat. a dog. 2: It will wake you up with kokekokko in Japan and kykeliky in Norway. a rooster. 3: Albanian ones say hunk hunk; maybe it's the smell that makes French ones say groin groin while truffle hunting. pigs. 4: In Argentina they berp; Swedish ones kvack while hopping. frogs. 5: They say piv while stealing havarti and squitt squitt if they get into the provolone. mice. Round 3. Category: Then We Can Dig It 1: Finds at Whitehall Villa in Britain reveal that this ancient people ate dormice and really loved oysters. the Romans. 2: The neolithic folk of Catal Huyuk, Turkey exposed their dead to the vultures, then put these remains under their beds. their bones. 3: Ironically, an "aquatic civilization" has been unearthed in this area that covers much of North Africa. the Sahara Desert. 4: Some skulls from colonial America show wear on a tooth from sucking on the stem of this artifact. a pipe. 5: Homeric Troy was found to date from this age, the metal of the Trojans' weapons in the "Iliad". the Bronze Age. Round 4. Category: Constitutional Powers Of Congress 1: Congress can do this, but by the 27th Amendment it can't take effect until after the next election. give themsleves a raise. 2: Article I, Section 8 says "Congress shall have the power to lay" these; the IRS agrees. taxes. 3: Congress has the right "to Constitutional tribunals inferior to this one". the Supreme Court. 4: Yo ho ho, Congress can "define and punish" these acts "and felonies committed on the high seas". piracy. 5: Article I, Section 8 says Congress can make this, regulate its value and punish people who copy it. money. Round 5. Category: Fruit Bowl 1: Casaba,Cantaloupe,Honeydew. Melons. 2: Asian and Anjou. pears. 3: Flame Seedless and Red Globe. grapes. 4: Jonathan and Pink Lady. apples. 5: Donut and Elberta. peaches. Thanks for listening! Come back tomorrow for more exciting trivia!

The Big Lead's Stephen Douglas and Kyle Koster recap episode three of Winning Time: The Rise of the Lakers Dynasty, a dizzying and disorienting effort that raises some real questions about the sustainability of the show. A new No. 1 emerges as Dr. Jerry Buss takes a backseat to some new characters, each chockfull of eccentricity and broadness. Are we 100 percent sure Adrien Brody doesn't think he's playing Phil Jackson? A shark-hunting trip to Las Vegas largely stays in Las Vegas, plus earnest appreciation of the incredible hair featured on screen.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Two episodes in, Winning Time: The Rise of the Lakers Dynasty has met high expectations with a star-studded cast and that familiar Adam McKay feel. The Big Lead's Kyle Koster and Stephen Douglas dive into the latest episode and endeavor to power-rank the characters. With such a crowded field, it will take a special performance to crack the Top 7. And with John C. Reilly throwing 103 mph, good luck usurping the top spot. Plenty of season left, though.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas continued to battle each other—steel against steel. Find more at https://timharner.com

In every great novel, the protagonist must prove his greatness by fighting and overcoming a powerful antagonist. In the life of Abraham Lincoln, this antagonist was Stephen Douglas. Find more at https://timharner.com

在喜马拉雅已支持实时字幕关注公众号“高效英语磨耳朵”获取文稿和音频词汇提示1.ordeal 磨难2.legislature 州议会3.integrity 正直的4.candidate 候选人5.prominent 重要的6.Emancipation Proclamation 奴隶解放宣言7.Gettysburg Address 盖茨堡演说8.defended 辩护原文Abraham LincolnWhen historians are asked to choose the greatest President in the history of the United States，one of the names most frequently mentioned is Abraham Lincoln.Lincoln was President during the greatest ordeal that ever faced the United States-the Civil War.Abraham Lincoln was born in 1809 in the state of Kentucky，but when he was a child，the family moved to the state of Indiana.Abraham's parents，Thomas and Nancy Lincoln，were farmers who were very poor，and they received only a few years of education.When Abraham was only 9 years old，his mother became ill and died.About one year later，Abraham's father remarried.As a young man，Abraham continued to work on the family farm，and he also worked as a laborer.During this time，the Lincolns moved to the state of Illinois.Abraham became known to the local people as an excellent athlete and story-teller.He educated himself by reading many books，most of which he borrowed from neighbors.Lincoln was interested in politics，and when he was in his mid-20s，he was elected to the Illinois state legislature.During this time，Lincoln also studied law，and soon became known as an excellent lawyer.People called Lincoln“Honest Abe”because of his personal integrityIn 1842，Lincoln married a woman named Mary Todd.During the 1850s，Lincoln became the strongly opposed the expansion of slavery into the western parts of the United States.Lincoln had several famous debates against a supporter of slavery named Stephen Douglas.In 1860，Lincoln was a candidate in the election for the President of the United States.During this election，the issue of slavery and its expansion was very prominent.Lincoln won，but soon after，several of the southern states decided to secede from the United States，and form their own country.After a few months later，fighting started between those southern states and the federal government，which was supported by the northern states.Lincoln managed the Civil War with skill and determination.Gradually the North began to win the war.In 1863，Lincoln made the“Emancipation Proclamation”，which freed the slaves.Later that years，Lincoln gave his most famous speech，the Gettysburg Address.The Civil War had brought terrible suffering to many Americans，and people were very bitter after the war.But Lincoln wanted the country to become united again，and he urged people to forgive.However，in April of 1865，only months after the war ended，Lincoln was shot and killed by an assassin.Many people，even Lincoln's critics，mourned his death.In the generations that have passed since Lincoln's death，he has continued to be viewed as a great president.Some historians have criticized Lincoln for not being more strongly opposed to slavery，but others have defended him，saying that Lincoln's approach to the issue was realistic and humane.But nearly all historians agree that Lincoln was an honest and brave leader during the difficult period in American history.

Author Reg Ankrom discusses the first two books of his three-part biography of Stephen Douglas. He talks about the major influences that shaped him, his diverse governmental career prior to running for Congress, his ability to produce compromise, views on slavery and the controversial issue of whether he owned slaves.

HBO aired the season finale of Succession last night. It marks the end of one era and the beginning of another. The Roy children have tried for so long to curry favor with their father, only to have Logan do what Logan was always going to do. The show's future figures to have GoJo at the center of the frame. Meanwhile, the Tom-Greg relationship takes an unexpected turn. The Big Lead's Stephen Douglas and Kyle Koster present their final power rankings of the year and reflect on where things go in Season Four.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Just about everything we know about Stephen Douglas can be tied back to the man who defeated him for the presidency, Abraham Lincoln. No other also-ran is defined, in popular memory, by his opponent quite so much as he. With help from special guest Tim Connors, we will look at Douglas as a frontier stump-speaker, an advocate of American expansion, and finally, a staunch defender of the Union at the onset of civil war.

The second episode of Succession's third season saw an attempted power play from Kendall, a tremendous amount of uncertainty among his siblings' allegiances, and the triumphant return of Marcia. Cousin Greg struggled to navigate the complicated world of lawyers and Shiv ultimately received an intriguing promotion. Who is the most likely to Succeed? The Big Lead's Kyle Koster and Stephen Douglas break it all down.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Big Lead's Stephen Douglas and Kyle Koster rank the seven most powerful Succession characters after each episode. Logan found himself on unstable ground in the season three premiere, but is he still atop the list? Has Gerri surpassed Shiv? What about Greg? Who is this week's most likely to succeed? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Franklin Pierce was a Democratic congressman, party leader, Mexican-American war hero, and #1 on our list of Top 5 Drunkest Presidents. He was nominated as a compromise candidate in 1852 and, taking office in the wake of a terrible family tragedy, promised not to let slavery re-emerge as a national issue after the sectional crisis of 1850. But when Senator Stephen Douglas came calling with a plan to organize the Kansas-Nebraska territory, Pierce dove headlong into a new sectional crisis and sparked a violent prelude to the coming Civil War. Also: Our list of Top 5 Would Be Presidents looks at some of the most interesting failed presidential candidates and speculates about what might've been had they occupied the White House.  

Fast and the Furious is a blockbuster franchise beloved and reviled in equal measures around the world. The journey the movies and characters have taken from 2001 to 2021 has been ridiculous, impossible to believe, and filled with NOS. At The Big Lead, it is cherished by Liam McKeone and Stephen Douglas.  In honor of the release of Fast 9, Liam and Stephen hijacked an episode of the Best Of 7 to rank their favorite Fast and the Furious films. Despite their shared enjoyment of the absurdity of these movies, their rankings differ greatly. Sit back, crack a Corona, and enjoy, because you're saying grace afterwards.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

From the New York Times bestselling author of A. Lincoln and American Ulysses, a revelatory glimpse into the mind and soul of our sixteenth president through his private notes to himself, explored together here for the first time. A deeply private man, shut off even to those who worked closely with him, Abraham Lincoln often captured “his best thoughts,” as he called them, in short notes to himself. He would work out his personal stances on the biggest issues of the day, never expecting anyone to see these frank, unpolished pieces of writing, which he'd then keep close at hand, in desk drawers and even in his top hat. The profound importance of these notes has been overlooked, because the originals are scattered across several different archives and have never before been brought together and examined as a coherent whole.  In Lincoln in Private: What His Most Personal Reflections Tell Us About Our Greatest President (Random House, 2021), Ronald C. White walks readers through twelve of Lincoln's most important private notes, showcasing our greatest president's brilliance and empathy, but also his very human anxieties and ambitions. We look over Lincoln's shoulder as he grapples with the problem of slavery, attempting to find convincing rebuttals to those who supported the evil institution (“As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy.”); prepares for his historic debates with Stephen Douglas; expresses his private feelings after a defeated bid for a Senate seat (“With me, the race of ambition has been a failure—a flat failure”); voices his concerns about the new Republican Party's long-term prospects; develops an argument for national unity amidst a secession crisis that would ultimately rend the nation in two; and, for a president many have viewed as not religious, develops a sophisticated theological reflection in the midst of the Civil War (“it is quite possible that God's purpose is something different from the purpose of either party”). Additionally, in a historic first, all 111 Lincoln notes are transcribed in the appendix, a gift to scholars and Lincoln buffs alike. These are notes Lincoln never expected anyone to read, put into context by a writer who has spent his career studying Lincoln's life and words. The result is a rare glimpse into the mind and soul of one of our nation's most important figures. Zach McCulley (@zamccull) is a historian of religion and literary cultures in early modern England and PhD candidate in History at Queen's University Belfast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Abraham Lincoln (US Senate Candidate): "A house divided against itself cannot stand" (June 16, 1858) (Springfield, Illinois) Thanks for tuning into Henry Gindt's American Legends series. On today's episode: Abraham Lincoln. Feel free to save and download the episode so you can come back and listen to it again later. Also, feel free to share it with friends, family or colleagues if it inspires you as it did me. Let's get started. Some of Abraham Lincoln's most famous words came in 1858, when he was running for the US Senate seat of Illinois against Stephen Douglas. Lincoln ultimately lost the US Senate race, but of course went on to become the 16th President of the United States two years later after winning the 1860 Presidential election against than Stephen Douglas in a rematch (as well as defeating 3 other candidates in the 4-way race). Talk about a comeback. The beautiful irony should not be lost as well that Barack Obama, an African American, late ran approximately 150 years later for the same US Senate seat and of course later also became President of Our United States. The following speech by Abraham Lincoln is oftentimes referred to as Lincoln's “House Divided” speech for arguably the most powerful words of the speech “A house divided against itself cannot stand,” which are actually direct quotes from Jesus, according to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke of the New Testament of the Bible. This speech was delivered on June 16, 1858 to more than 1,000 convention delegates, who met in the Springfield, Illinois, statehouse for the Republican State Convention at the height of tension between Northern “free” states and the Southern “slave” states. During Lincoln's time in office, in order to keep the “Divided House” together, approximately 750,000 soldiers died during the American Civil War, which lasted for 4 bloody years and 27 days from April 12, 1861 to May 9, 1865, with casualties being roughly similar for both sides of the bloody conflict. Remember that America has been divided many times in our history, but we always emerge united and stronger than ever before. Let this speech from Abraham Lincoln help inspire us to reach out to our fellow American brothers and sisters of the opposite party and try to hear their points of view without automatically assuming they have no basis for their political views or beliefs. Abraham Lincoln: June 16, 1858 Springfield, Illinois -- Mr. President [of the Convention] and Gentlemen of the Convention, If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could then better judge what to do, and how to do it. We are now far into the fifth year, since a policy was initiated, with the avowed object, and confident promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only, not ceased, but has constantly augmented. In my opinion, it will not cease, until a crisis shall have been reached, and passed. "A house divided against itself cannot stand." ... --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/henry-gindt/support

As the sectional crisis gripped the United States, the rancor increasingly spread to the halls of Congress. Preston Brooks's frenzied assault on Charles Sumner was perhaps the most notorious evidence of the dangerous divide between proslavery Democrats and the new antislavery Republican Party. But as disunion loomed, rifts within the majority Democratic Party were every bit as consequential. And nowhere was the fracture more apparent than in the raging debates between Illinois's Stephen Douglas and Mississippi's Jefferson Davis. As leaders of the Democrats' northern and southern factions before the Civil War, their passionate conflict of words and ideas has been overshadowed by their opposition to Abraham Lincoln. But here, weaving together biography and political history, Michael E. Woods restores Davis and Douglas's fatefully entwined lives and careers to the center of the Civil War era.Operating on personal, partisan, and national levels, Woods traces the deep roots of Democrats' internal strife, with fault lines drawn around fundamental questions of property rights and majority rule. Neither belief in white supremacy nor expansionist zeal could reconcile Douglas and Davis's factions as their constituents formed their own lines in the proverbial soil of westward expansion. The first major reinterpretation of the Democratic Party's internal schism in more than a generation, Arguing until Doomsday shows how two leading antebellum politicians ultimately shattered their party and hastened the coming of the Civil War.-Michael E. Woods is an associate professor of history at the University of Tennessee and director of the Papers of Andrew Jackson project.

The Cornerstore spoke with Bianca and Raniya of VLA #ChangeTheName about their ongoing efforts to change the name of Douglas Park to honor Frederick & Anna-Murray Douglass instead of Stephen Douglas. Bianca walks us through the process of getting the name change completed; shares how this campaign came about; and more. Stay connected with The […]

“Four score and seven years ago…” Those are some of the most famous words in American history. Most of us know that President Abraham Lincoln spoke them in what is now known as the Gettysburg Address in 1863, at the official dedication of a cemetery for men who had fallen during the Battle of Gettysburg. And most of us know that Lincoln was referring to 1776 and the Founding Fathers who wrote the Declaration of Independence. But why did Lincoln mention that year and that event in the very first line of his speech that day? That is one of the questions that Lucas E. Morel answers in his short but illuminating book, Lincoln and the American Founding (SIUP, 2020). In a time when some Americans are vandalizing statues and other artistic representations of the Founding Fathers and even some of Lincoln and going so far as portraying the men of the founding generation as villains, Morel's book is vital reading. Morel tells us which of the founders Lincoln particularly admired, why the Declaration was of greater import to Lincoln's political thinking than the Constitution and how Lincoln turned to the Declaration again and again throughout his adult life as ammunition in his argumentation and as a source of personal inspiration and aspiration for the nation as a whole. Morel also brings into focus long-ago debates such as that over the Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854 and explains why Lincoln was so reluctant to declare himself an abolitionist but also why he was adamant that as the newly elected president and head of the quite new Republican party, he could not make any concessions to the Secessionists. Morel makes the case for Lincoln as master logician in his debates with Stephen Douglas in 1858 as Lincoln tried to persuade his fellow white Americans that not only was slavery unjust but that it was a unsustainable foundation on which to base governance in any part of the growing nation. This is a gem of a book by a scholar for a general audience in need of an understanding of how the founders influenced Lincoln and, thereby, all of us. Give a listen. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

7.15.20 #RolandMartinUnfiltered: COVID-19 crisis; Rep. Yvette Clark talks 2020 politics; Police chief on being Black while wearing 'Blue'; Virginia State Trooper terrorizes and assaults a Black man; George Floyd's family files lawsuit; Chicago lawmakers call for removal of Stephen Douglas statue; Asheville City Council apologizes to Black residents for city's role in slavery; CBS drops Nick Cannon; Racial discrimination at CDC; Entrepreneur Arion Long talks about her solution-based reproductive product line named Femly. Support #RolandMartinUnfiltered via the Cash App ☛ https://cash.app/$rmunfiltered or via PayPal ☛https://www.paypal.me/rmartinunfiltered #RolandMartinUnfiltered Partner: Ceek Be the first to own the world's first 4D, 360 Audio Headphones and mobile VR Headset. Check it out on www.ceek.com and use the promo code RMVIP2020 - The Roland S. Martin YouTube channel is a news reporting site covered under Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

7.9.20 #RolandMartinUnfiltered: Lt. Richard Collins' family to receive military death benefits; Houston cop asks bystanders for their help in subduing a man; Trump threatens to cut school funding if they don't reopen; Lady A sued by Lady Antebellum; Pastor Michael McBride who says the brutality of policing is reaching a breaking point; University of Chicago has removed 2 tributes to Senator Stephen Douglas; Nashville capitol commission votes to remove a bust of the KKK Grand Wizard; BLM mural painted in front of Trump Tower in New York Support #RolandMartinUnfiltered via the Cash App ☛ https://cash.app/$rmunfiltered or via PayPal ☛https://www.paypal.me/rmartcinunfiltered #RolandMartinUnfiltered Partner: Ceek Be the first to own the world's first 4D, 360 Audio Headphones and mobile VR Headset. Check it out on www.ceek.com and use the promo code RMVIP2020 - The Roland S. Martin YouTube channel is a news reporting site covered under Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Acclaimed biographer John Loughery tells the story of John Hughes, son of Ireland, friend of William Seward and James Buchanan, founder of St. John's College (now Fordham University), builder of Saint Patrick's Cathedral on Fifth Avenue, pioneer of parochial-school education, and American diplomat. As archbishop of the Archdiocese of New York in the 1840 and 1850s and the most famous Roman Catholic in America, Hughes defended Catholic institutions in a time of nativist bigotry and church burnings and worked tirelessly to help Irish Catholic immigrants find acceptance in their new homeland. His galvanizing and protecting work and pugnacious style earned him the epithet Dagger John. When the interests of his church and ethnic community were at stake, Hughes acted with purpose and clarity.In Dagger John, Loughery reveals Hughes's life as it unfolded amid turbulent times for the religious and ethnic minority he represented. Hughes the public figure comes to the fore, illuminated by Loughery's retelling of his interactions with, and responses to, every major figure of his era, including his critics (Walt Whitman, James Gordon Bennett, and Horace Greeley) and his admirers (Henry Clay, Stephen Douglas, and Abraham Lincoln). Loughery peels back the layers of the public life of this complicated man, showing how he reveled in the controversies he provoked and believed he had lived to see many of his goals achieved until his dreams came crashing down during the Draft Riots of 1863 when violence set Manhattan ablaze.To know "Dagger" John Hughes is to understand the United States during a painful period of growth as the nation headed toward civil war. Dagger John's successes and failures, his public relationships and private trials, and his legacy in the Irish Catholic community and beyond provide context and layers of detail for the larger history of a modern culture unfolding in his wake.John Loughery is the author of, Alias S. S. Van Dine, John Sloan: Painter and Rebel, The Other Side of Silence: Men's Lives and Gay Identities, a Twentieth Century History, the last two of which were New York Times Notable Books. His biography of John Sloan was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in Biography. His most recent book is Dagger John: Archbishop John Hughes and the Making of Irish America.

On March 24, 2011, Douglas R. Egerton delivered a Banner Lecture entitled Year of Meteors: Stephen Douglas, Abraham Lincoln, and the Election that Brought on the Civil War. In Year of Meteors, Douglas R. Egerton recreates the tumultuous presidential election year of 1860, which upset every conventional expectation and split the American political system beyond repair. At the beginning of the year, Senator Stephen A. Douglas, leader of the Democrats, the only party with a large following in both North and South, seemed poised to win. By fall the Democratic Party had disintegrated, enabling the upstart Republicans to put an untried but canny dark horse candidate in the White House. Year of Meteors tells the story of Abraham Lincoln's rise to power and the series of events that led to secession and ultimately civil war. Dr. Egerton teaches history at Le Moyne College in Syracuse, N.Y.(Introduction by Nelson D. Lankford) The content and opinions expressed in these presentations are solely those of the speaker and not necessarily of the Virginia Museum of History & Culture.