Tag: Government

An Open Letter to Tucker Carlson

Image: RawStory

As a teenager in America, and in most people’s valid opinion, an American citizen, I do not know where to begin on the comments you have made.

I was born in Boston, Massachusetts and currently live in Erie, Pennsylvania. I have lived in the United States all my life, have a legal birth certificate, social security number, passport, and more… yet you still have the audacity to say that, because I am under the age of eighteen, I am not an “American citizen” as much as you, Donald Trump, Uncle Sam, or anybody else.

I am Jewish. I am Latino. I am American.

Being any of those things does not strip me of my American citizenship in the least, and neither does my age.

My religion is a part of who I am as an American. I love being Jewish—especially in a country that allows me to express my religion without the fear of persecution or punishment. I love getting to educate people and being the one that gets to help other people grow as individuals by teaching them about my religion and what it means.

My heritage is no less significant to me than my religion or citizenship. Being Latino is also a part of who I am. I am a product of my family who came from South America, and I love to brag about it because it makes me feel like I am a real contributor to what is the great, American “melting pot.” Nobody could ever take my culture, history, or family away from me—not even you. To me, none of this, in any way, makes me less American.

I still feel as proud to pledge allegiance to the American flag as anybody else.

I just want to know—if it isn’t my religion or ethnicity—then what is it that makes me less American than the people around me? According to you, I’m not an American—I’m just a teenager.

This is what you said a couple weeks ago:

Video: FOX News

I would like to clear the air here: We are ALL Americans.

If you genuinely think that teenagers are not Americans, then I think you are about to be pretty surprised.

Across the nation, we teens have organized school walkouts, protests, marches, and other events to exercise our First Amendment right. We are fighting together against ignorant people like you who think that, just because we are not eighteen, we cannot have an opinion, exercise our God-given right to protest or challenge arrogant people like you. We want to show that we have a say in our future and that people such as yourself do not deserve to speak for us—people who would rather let us take the fall (literally) just so you don’t have to lose your guns.

If you ever had any respect for us and stopped to listen to what we had to say, you would know by now that we never asked for anyone to lose their guns. We only asked for common sense gun laws—to put in place reasonable restrictions on the Second Amendment, just as there are the same restrictions on our rights to free speech and rights to privacy. If you think we are being unreasonable just look to the Supreme Court Heller decision, and you will see as plain as day, that while it holds that the right to bear arms is not related to service in a militia, it is not unlimited and that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated.

We teens have to live in fear at our schools. We don’t exactly think that this makes a ‘conducive’ environment for learning, do you? Nor do we think that arming our teachers makes for any more of a ‘conducive’ learning environment, but we already know that you don’t care. What you do care about is assisting the gun manufacturers to increase their revenue. You would prefer that you get to keep your guns—end of story.

I keep going over it in my head, but I just cannot answer this one question. I would really love it if you could answer it for me: Who exactly would it take to be killed in a shooting for you to realize that enough is enough?

Would it be a group of innocent civilians? No—we already saw that at the Pulse Nightclub, Las Vegas… (the list is way too big to count).

Would it be a group of church-goers like yourself? No—we already saw that in Charleston, Nashville, and Sutherland Springs.

Would it be a class full of high school students like myself? No—we already saw that at Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Marjory Stoneman Douglas.

Would it be a class full of kindergarteners? No—we already saw that at the tragic Sandy Hook shooting.

What would it take for you to realize that the one life person would be worth more than all the guns in America? I just struggle to understand how somebody who is adamantly “pro-life” can have such blatant disregard for all of our lives. Somebody who was really “pro-life” would care about the life of a human being after they are born. What is the point in fighting for their life before it is born if you are just going to let them be shot someday after they are born by somebody with an automatic weapon that they shouldn’t even have?

We are fighting for our rights—for our lives—and whether you like it or not, we are equal American citizens with free speech, the right to organize, the right to assemble, and the right to protest.

I would really love to learn more about what you think, and so, while I have been rather firm and harsh in this open letter, I would also like to invite you to an interview with WTP Magazine if possible to sit down and your thought process when you made the statement saying that we teens are not Americans. I am not asking this in an antagonistic way. I am only asking this because I genuinely want to learn why you believe this.

Hopefully, when we are done, you can realize that if we are old enough to be shot, then we are old enough to have an opinion on being shot.

If you are seriously interested, like I am, in taking me up on my offer for an interview, please send me an email at harrison.romero@wtpmag.com. I look forward to hearing from you.

How to Organize a School Walkout

Image: Missoulian

Students across the United States are rising up to demand stricter gun control laws after the Parkland shooting took 17 lives. How can you take part in the movement? The Parkland students have some ideas. One powerful way you can join the movement is by organizing a walkout. Just because March 14th has come and gone, it doesn’t mean that you can’t still get in on the action. Ignore what Tucker Carlson says, we are citizens and we have a say! Try using this handy guide for organizing a walkout at your own school:

Step 1: Research

Create a document showcasing why we need gun control. Have your argument for the cause clearly laid out. There is lots of information out there, here are some articles to check out first,

Step 2: Get a Team

Get together a group of supporters. Supporters can be a teacher, your friends or other kids who are interested. Start working on an action plan; decide exactly what you’re doing, how you will spread the message, when will you hold the walkout (the official walkout days are March 14 and April 20) and try to gauge how open your school administration will be to this idea so you can prepare for the next step…

Step 3: Talk to the Administration

Email your principal or talk to teachers and other people who work in your school about whether they would be open to a walkout. In my school the administration was very supportive of students walking out, however not all schools have been so happy about students taking part in political action. If they are not supportive that doesn’t mean you can’t walk out, remember schools can’t suspend a whole grade and may not bother trying with the threat of legal challenges. Also, many prestigious colleges have said they will not count a suspension caused by political action against prospective students when they apply, so continue without fear!

Step 4: Get the rest of your school on board

Either the hardest or easiest step. It seems like it would be hard to get a big group of high schoolers to do anything; especially if you don’t have the administration’s blessing and it could lead to punishment, but there have been reports of random walkouts with very little organization working very well. If you do not have the administration‘s blessing, try spreading the word through friend groups and social media. Make sure everyone knows exactly when it will be to avoid confusion. If you have the administration’s blessing make announcements and hold an assembly if you can.

Step 5: Alert the media

If a tree falls in the forest and nobody sees it or hears it, did it fall? Yes. But nobody cares. Your walkout doesn’t mean anything or make any effect if nobody sees it. Send an email to your local news channels and newspapers telling them when the walkout will be, who organized it and your reasons for walking out, also make sure you have a student documenting the experience. While you’re at it, register! Tell the movement you’re supporting that you’re having a walkout so they count you. You can register for the March 14 walkout here.

Step Six: Walk Out! (Try not to forget this part)

Bonus: Repeat

Now that you have some experience and a group of supporters, find a new cause you’re passionate about and do it all again!

A Problematic Religious Freedom Day

Image: Politicus USA

Freedom of religion has had roots in our history long before it was guaranteed by the constitution. We grow up with stories of William Penn dedicating Pennsylvania to people of all religions. Americans who opened their hearts and their land to welcome people of different faiths. It is utterly ingrained in our patriotic, opportunistic culture, the freedom to speak, write, express, and pray. Which may be why you either think this holiday is overkill, or you plain haven’t heard of it. To most,  it goes down as a holiday known only on the day of, fading in and out of fickle Twitter accounts like Squirrel Appreciation Day, Jan. 21National Organ Donor Day, Feb. 14, and… Panic Day, March 9. In fact, all Wikipedia has on religious freedom day is a meager 3 sentences:

National Religious Freedom Day commemorates the Virginia General Assembly‘s adoption of Thomas Jefferson‘s landmark Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom on January 16, 1786. That statute became the basis for the establishment clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and led to the freedom of religion for all Americans. Religious Freedom Day is officially proclaimed on January 16 each year by an annual statement by the President of the United States.

You probably care about its principles, but I’m not going to pretend you care about the holiday itself, and for years that meant that we’ve been so attuned to the normalcy of religious freedom, that we haven’t had to worry about protecting it. We should hope to see it next year and not bat an eyelash as it passes over us. We shouldn’t have to worry about its sanctity today, but the Trump administration’s press release has more than a few concerned.

It starts off as many Presidential Declarations have, exulting religious freedom’s virtues and vowing to protect it. It ends nicely as well,

The free exercise of religion is a source of personal and national stability, and its preservation is essential to protecting human dignity.  Religious diversity strengthens our communities and promotes tolerance, respect, understanding, and equality.  Faith breathes life and hope into our world.  We must diligently guard, preserve, and cherish this unalienable right.

What’s the problem? Many point to this quote from the president:

Our Constitution and laws guarantee Americans the right not just to believe as they see fit, but to freely exercise their religion.  Unfortunately, not all have recognized the importance of religious freedom, whether by threatening tax consequences for particular forms of religious speech or forcing people to comply with laws that violate their core religious beliefs without sufficient justification. These incursions, little by little, can destroy the fundamental freedom underlying our democracy.  Therefore, soon after taking office, I addressed these issues in an Executive Order that helps ensure Americans are able to follow their consciences without undue Government interference and the Department of Justice has issued guidance to Federal agencies regarding their compliance with laws that protect religious freedom.  No American—whether a nun, nurse, baker, or business owner—should be forced to choose between the tenets of faith or adherence to the law.

In the same speech proclaiming the ethics of respecting others, he subtly references the Masterpiece Cakeshop case. The case is supported by the Trump administration and a group called Alliance Defending Freedom whom the Southern Poverty Law Center deems a hate group. The story can be summed up as a baker unwilling to create a cake for a gay couple, citing his religious beliefs as the reason why. It was brought up in the supreme court to debate a business’s right to pick and choose customers. This right isn’t immoral in itself, it’s actually exceptionally important. Afterall, who would disagree with a business owner’s decision to kick out an angry, unreasonable customer who generally causes mayhem? Whereas the customer is causing harm to the owner, in circumstances such as Newman vs. Piggie Park enterprises, it’s the other way around. In the 1960’s, a barbecue owner refused service to a man established solely on the fact he was African American. He argued it was because of his religious values too. The lawsuit was a landmark piece of litigation that established that civil rights are more important than religious views.

I want to point out something: if Trump and his followers get his way in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, it could harm the people he’s trying to protect. If he believes that business owners should be allowed to discriminate based on religious beliefs, then he may unknowingly believe that the Christian bake shop proprietor can discriminate against someone of a different faith. The Buddhist refuses the Muslim, the Catholic refuses the Shintoist, and on and on and on. If he truly wants to protect “The right not just to believe as they see fit, but to freely exercise their religion,” He should understand the full repercussions of his statement.

With that, let’s hope for a more boring Religous Freedom day next year—a day that actually represents religious freedom.

“This Is Not a Drill”: False Alarm Terrorizes​ Hawaii

Image: The Australian

Imagine enjoying the glowing beaches of paradise one moment and fearing total, nuclear annihilation the next. Well, that’s exactly what happened to residents of Hawaii and vacationers Saturday morning.

img_4546
Notification sent to all phones in Hawaii at 8:07am HST

BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT INBOUND TO HAWAII. SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER. THIS IS NOT A DRILL.

That’s the message that was sent out to all of Hawaii via emergency alert notification. Many people began to panic, and wonder if North Korea’s Kim Jong-Un had finally reached his boiling point. As all activities came to a sudden halt, residents and tourists called loved ones, took shelter, and were preparing to die. Little did they know, in spite of what the message said, this was a drill, but it was also a colossal failure.

Moments after the alert was sent out the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency tweeted out that there was no missile threat to Hawaii, but it wasn’t until almost 40 minutes after the initial alert that a second one making the correction was sent. How could such a mistake be possible? A human error, according to officials.

“It was a mistake made during a standard procedure at the change over of a shift, and an employee pushed the wrong button,” stated Hawaiian Governor David Ige, while speaking to CNN on the alert broadcasted through television, radio, and emergency text message to all of Hawaii. Later, in a tweet, Ige has also promised to never let it happen again, but to many Hawaiians, his promise seemed empty and blame began to fall upon Ige, and his Twitter began to fill with angry responses like this one,

Responses like this are justified, considering that over a million people believed that today would be their last day on earth, all thanks to a careless mistake that could have been prevented.

To see the type of impact this alert had on Hawaii, this is a video from the Univeristy of Hawaii at Manoa showing people in a full sprint for safety after seeing the notification:

 

Official Army Twitter Account Likes Anti-Trump Post

On Saturday, the U.S. Army’s official Twitter account liked a tweet from actress Mindy Kaling, apparently mocking President Donald Trump’s claim that he’s “like, really smart.”

This tweet comes after Trump defended his mental fitness by claiming to be “Like, really smart” and “a stable genius.”

The Army later unliked the tweet and stated,

An operator of the Army’s official Twitter account inadvertently ‘liked’ a tweet whose content would not be endorsed by the Department of the Army. As soon as it was brought to our attention, it was immediately corrected.

This isn’t the first time a government social media page expressed anger over Trump. In early 2017, the National Park Service retweeted two photos of small crowds from Trump’s inauguration. Those retweets were later investigated.

Kaling later responded to the Army in a tweet using their signature slogan “Army strong.”

Now We Burn Art

Mansoor Adayfi, a freed prisoner from Guantanamo, said:

Everyone who could draw drew the sea(…) the sea means freedom no one can control or own, freedom for everyone.

The John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York City has put up a controversial art exhibit called “Ode to the Sea” that features 36 paintings, drawings and sculptures, all stamped with the words “Approved by US Forces.” The art was made by prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and the exhibition gained worldwide news coverage due to its artists. In November, the government stopped releasing any art from Guantanamo Bay, reportedly in response to the exhibit. Art from Guantanamo was already censored. No art that revealed anything about Guantanamo or that portrayed the United States negatively would be released, and the art was inspected by experts for secret messages. The US government gave no explanation for its change in policy. Apparently, it doesn’t have to, because, according to the Army, the government owns art created in Guantanamo, despite the fact the artists were held there without trial—against their will. Because of this policy, the government can do what it wants with the prisoner’s art. Prisoners cannot take their art with them when they are freed, so instead, the army burns it. A lawyer representing three Guantanamo Bay prisoners said, as quoted by the New York Times, said:

One of my clients was told that, even if he were ever to be released, that he would not be able to take his art with him, and that it would be incinerated.

Art in Guantanamo has never fared well. It has been forbidden, censored, and now it will be burnt.

The Third Reich hated modernism (what it called degenerate art). They deemed it insane and insulting to morality and society. The Nazis removed over 20,000 pieces of art from German museums and put them in a special museum created to mock the art. The “museum” showed the art as corrupt, evil, and nonsensical. Some of the art the Nazis sold, but much of itthey burned. Art made by Jewish artists faced the same fate. The Soviet Union also practiced strict censorship against art, it had a whole office dedicated to deciding what books and paintings the Soviet public could or could not see. Religious art and the books or paintings of people the government had killed or exiled were banned. More recently, ISIS has destroyed tons of art in order to destroy messages they don’t agree with. They burned books from libraries in Mosul that they believed promoted infidelity or disobeyed Allah and destroyed statues they believed promoted following false idols.

Governments destroy and censor art in order to get rid of its message. The Nazis hated modernism because it didn’t focus on an idealized image of Anglo-Saxon society. It blurred the lines between good and bad. It scorned the absolutes that the Third Reich was built upon. The Soviet Union censored any art that criticized the government or didn’t perfectly fit communist ideals. ISIS destroys art that promotes anything but following their beliefs. Governments also censor art because it connects and humanizes people, making it much harder to demonize an enemy. Nazis mocked and burned Jewish art, the Soviet Union banned the art of exiles and religious people, ISIS destroys the art of so-called sinners.

The United States government is censoring the art of prisoners from Guantanamo Bay for the same reasons. First, the United States didn’t release any art they didn’t agree with. Now, no art can leave their island “dungeon.” Our government would rather burn art made by prisoners than let it leave Guantanamo because it proves that the prisoners are humans—not monsters. Because the art depicts the views of the Guantanamo Bay prisoners and humanizes them, it makes the public ask questions about Guantanamo thatthey couldn’t when the prisoners were just “the worst of the worst.” The government has no good answers. 779 people have been kept at Guantanamo—forty-one remain. The Trump administration has freed none. Eight have been convicted in illegal military commissions. Of these eight, these three were completely overturned, and one was partially overturned. Only one prisoner was found guilty in a legal court case. Lawrence Wilkerson, a former senior State Department official, declared:

There was no meaningful way to determine whether [the prisoners] were terrorists, Taliban, or simply innocent civilians picked up on a very confused battlefield or in the territory of another state such as Pakistan.

The government offered thousands of dollars to anyone who brought in a person they said was a member of ISIS, and some prisoners weren’t even vetted by any Americans before being sent to Guantanamo to be tortured. Wilkerson testifies children as young as twelve and thirteen years-old were shipped to Guantanamo alongwith men in their 90s.In Guantanamo, prisoners were beaten by guards, forced into ice baths, and waterboarded. No communication with families was allowed, even for prisoners who had been found innocent and were just being held—sometimes for years—until a country would take them. Even with extreme security measures and constant supervision, seven prisoners managed to commit suicide. Yasser Zahrini was taken to Guantanamo when he was sixteen. He committed suicide at twenty-one, becoming the youngest person to die at Guantanamo. Many other prisoners attempted suicide, Majid Khan reported trying to commit suicide by chewing through his own arteries because the conditions at Guantanamo were so bad. On top of that, according to a Senate committee investigation, torture was a completely ineffective means to gain truthful information, and the CIA lied about the about gaining helpful information from torture.

The United States committed war crimes, now it is demonizing its victims. The Guantanamo Bay prisoners’ art is their best way to connect with the public, but our government would rather burn their art than let it reach the eyes of American citizens.

Will Michael Flynn be Prosecuted by the Logan Act?

Image: Toronto Star

On November 30th, Michael Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. This raised questions about the Trump administration and the “Logan act.” The Logan Act forbids Americans from unauthorized negotiations with foreign governments, especially those that seek to “defeat the measures of the United States” aimed at those same countries. In short, it protects the ability of the U.S. government to conduct foreign policy without interference from private citizens.”

The Logan Act accusations started in the summer of 2016 when Donald Trump told Russia to find Hillary Clinton’s missing emails. In February, the White House said that they were confident Michael Flynn didn’t say anything that violated the Logan Act. Should the Trump administration be worried? No, no one has ever been prosecuted through the Logan Act. It’s mainly just used as a political scare tactic. Newsweek wrote about how Michael Flynn probably won’t be convicted:

What the Act criminalizes is an unusually harmful subset of communications with foreign governments: ones intended to “defeat” concrete “measures” of the United States, or to undercut the authority of a sitting President by altering how foreign governments will resolve pending “disputes or controversies. In other words, the Logan Act’s limited domain ensures that transitional figures won’t be jailed for swapping pleasantries with foreign leaders or even engaging in substantive foreign-policy discussions with the United States.”

I don’t think Michael Flynn intended to do any of this especially since he’s a decorated general and was on the transition team.

Early Tuesday morning, a U.S District Court judge ordered Robert Muller to turn over any information on Michael Flynn tbe used for sentencing. A sentencing date has not been yet announced, but people have been speculating sometime in February. The majority of political sites are saying that it is going to be hard to prosecute Michael Flynn.

If they would try to prosecute Michael Flynn they would also have to prosecute Nancy Pelosi For violating the law when she went to Syria against the State Department’s wishes. Last year Robert F. Turner chimed in:

Ms. Pelosi’s trip was not authorized, and Syria is one of the world’s leading sponsors of international terrorism. It has almost certainly been involved in numerous attacks that have claimed the lives of American military personnel from Beirut to Baghdad.

Jimmy Carter also violated the Logan act. The OPU blog stated when he visited Hamas in 2008. He said that no one from the State Department told him not to, but Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had said:

The State Department had explicitly informed Mr. Carter that it opposed his plans to meet with leaders of Hamas.

Will these two ever be tried under the Logan Act?

The Fight for Net Neutrality

Image: CNBC

Do you have an idea that you want to develop? Do you fancy yourself an entrepreneur? Good for you! Your future is bright! Here in the Land of the Free, we are fortunate to be able to access information with ease. Just think of the treasure trove of help you can find with your budding business on the internet! But wait! Maybe not! Have you heard of Net Neutrality? Sounds boring? Well, stop snoring and take notice! The business you save may be your own!

The Facts

Net Neutrality is the idea that internet service providers (ISPs)—think of companies like Verizon, Spectrum, AT&T, and more—will provide the same access to an open internet, no matter the status of an individual. So when you question the almighty Google from your phone, you get the same results as some big shot company executive from her corner office. That sounds like a good idea for a variety of reasons. For example, if you really are trying to start your own business, the internet is a great place to advertise and sell your products or services. If you are a social activist, the internet gives you a platform to organize and communicate. These notions are dependent on a vital and open internet.

We currently have strong net neutrality protections here in the United States. In 2015, thanks to the strong support of millions of net neutrality activists, the Obama administration was able to draft net neutrality regulations, getting the ISPs classified as “common carriers” under Title II of the Communications Act. This allowed the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the authority to draft strong regulations protecting access to the internet. Now, however, these regulations are under attack, led by the current administrations FCC Chairman Ajit Pai. A vote by the FCC to rescind these regulations are currently scheduled for December 14. The Democrats have asked for a delay in the vote, but the FCC has denied that request.

What would happen if these protections are rescinded? Your internet access may begin to look more and more like your cable TV access. That means you may have different packages from which to choose, with each package providing you a different level of access to the internet. Additionally, an ISP may determine the speed at which the content is delivered. For example, the more you pay, the faster you play.

It is also critical to remember that in many areas of the US, ISP providers may not even exist. According to Dr. Brian Whitacre of Oklahoma State University, just over ½ (55%) of people living in rural areas of the United States can access internet speeds considered to be broadband! This percentage suggests there aren’t a heck of a lot of ISPs out there in rural America. If net neutrality goes out the window, and ISPs can dictate access, who is the competition in rural America? These folks will have to simply take what they are offered.

Proponents of rescinding the net neutrality regulations, AT&T being one of the most notable, indicate the current regulations hinders ISPs investments in innovation. Yet the evidence we see around us each day is that technology is improving. This argument seems to be lame when compared to the stifling effect rescinding can have on budding entrepreneurs, start-up businesses, activists, and others in dorm rooms and garages, dreaming big dreams and making great strides, thanks to our open internet.

What You Can Do

There is a wide variety of options for people like you—people who want to save net neutrality and save our internet—the first being signing this petition: Save the Internet. Save the Internet is an online petition with one simple goal: protecting our rights and providing every person that browses the internet equal access to every site that they browse. You can also even donate to their cause here.

You can call your senator by using this simple tool: Call My Congress. It will help you find all of the contact information of all of your elected officials. You must use it to urge your representatives and senators to vote net neutrality.

The truth is, we have almost no time left. The vote in the FCC is today, so we must act now. Now is our time to be heard before it’s too late.

A Dictator Damned

Image: CNN

Since 1987, Robert Gabriel Mugabe has been the President of Zimbabwe, a landlocked country located in Southern Africa. At the old age of 93, Mugabe was the oldest active head of state and government in the world, but that all changed after a military takeover resulted in his resignation on 21 November 2017.

On 14 November 2017, armored personnel carriers were seen on the outskirts of the African nation’s capital, Harare. That night the military took over the nation’s state-run broadcaster, ZBC. The next day, while Mugabe was under house arrest, the military announced via a spokesperson on ZBC that Mugabe is safe and that they are only arresting criminals around him. Their statement did not settle any rumors of the coup and just added fuel to the fire. Over the next few days, anti-Mugabe demonstrators gathered in Harare to protest the dictator, a move that would have cost them their life just days before the coup.

Mugabe’s government has been known to silence any critic of the President and was even accused of abducting a protester back in 2015, but ever since the coup took place, millions of Zimbabweans have taken to the streets to show solidarity with the nation’s military. This coup, however, has nothing to do with free speech, something guaranteed in the nation’s constitution. Instead, it’s politically driven—a grudge against the elites of the country. Just days before the coup, Mugabe fired his Vice President, Emmerson Mnangagwa, the favorite to replace Mugabe. His reason for removing Mnangagwa was disloyalty, but the nation’s ruling party ZANU-PF believed it was to make room for Mugabe’s wife to succeed him.

Grace Mugabe, also known as “Gucci Grace” by the people of Zimbabwe for taking lavish shopping trips to South Africa, married Mugabe on 17 August 1996. This came after Mugabe had a secret affair with Grace, who worked as his secretary at the time. The couple married after Mugabe’s first wife, Sally Hayfron, passed away from kidney failure. Ever since then, Grace Mugabe has moved up in the ranks of the ZANU-PF party despite criticism from other party leaders. Many leaders of ZANU-PF despise her for being a foreigner, her inexperience, and that she’s only there because of her relation to Mugabe, but these critiqued failed to silence the woman they call “Gucci Grace.”

Grace Mugabe has very little support in the ZANU-PF party, where many of the party leaders call her “Mad Women” and mock her openly. However, she does have support from the party’s youth league and the G40 Faction, but this support isn’t enough for the First Lady of Zimbabwe, just days before the coup began she attended a ZANU-PF rally on 4 November 2017 where her own party booed her. Instead of leaving the stage or remaining silent, Grace Mugabe began to shout back at the protesters.

The only person ruling this country is the President!

Grace Mugabe wasn’t in Zimbabwe the night of the coup, however. She reportedly fled to Namibia and hadn’t returned since or made any public comment on the situation. President Mugabe, unlike Grace, did speak to the public. While under house arrest he made a public appearance at a graduation ceremony and made a statement on ZBC. He managed to cause chaos with his ZBC appearance. Thousands of people around the country waited in anticipation for Mugabe’s arrival, where he would reportedly resign as President, but that moment never came. Instead, the President asserted his power and stated that he would stay in office. This triggered the nation’s elites to give Mugabe 48 hours to resign, or they would move to impeach him.

Mugabe has ruled Zimbabwe for over 37 years and stopped anyone who came in his way. Over his tenure, he fired two vice-presidents who he considered disloyal and muzzled the independent press. To many Zimbabweans his resignation seemed unlikely, that is until 21 November 2017. On this day something unexpected came, Robert Mugabe announced his resignation.

My decision to resign is voluntary on my part and arises from my concern for the welfare of the people of Zimbabwe and my desire for a smooth, non-violent transfer of power.

All over Zimbabwe, millions began to celebrate, the day they’ve been waiting for finally came. Over his reign, Mugabe crushed the countries economy, silenced the press, and jailed opponents of his. But the incoming President, Mnangagwa aka “The Crocodile,” is just as bad as Mugabe. While many Zimbabweans believe that they have found new freedom in their country, they might have just pushed themselves into a corner.

Alabama: A Man Who Allegedly Molested Eight Minors Is Probably Your Next Senator

Image: ABC News

A man who convicted a man of the murder of four children is currently losing to a man who allegedly molested/dated eight minors in a Senate race in Alabama—what a time to be alive!

It has been such a crazy month with the countless sexual assault allegations ever since #MeToo started trending. The charges of sexual assault on Roy Moore dropped a little over a week ago, but there’s no sign of them slowing down. Just last night, four more women came forward with claims against the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama.

Moore, born in 1947, was the oldest of five. Following high school, he attended the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York and graduated with a Bachelor’s degree in 1969. He subsequently served in the US Military, stationed in Vietnam, returning to his hometown of Gadsen in 1977.  That year, Moore began working for the office of the district attorney. He quit his job to run for the county’s circuit-court judge as a Democrat. He overwhelmingly lost in the primary to a fellow attorney, Donald Stewart. Shortly afterward, Moore left Gadsden to live in Australia for a year. He returned to Gadsen in 1985, the same year he got married.

In 1986, Moore decided to give it another shot and run for Etowah County’s district attorney, but he lost to fellow Democrat Jimmy Hedgspeth. Following his defeat, he decided to simply return to private practice in the city.

In 1992, the year that he had switched to the Republican Party, Etowah County’s circuit judge, Julius Swann, died in office, and the Governor of Alabama was to make a temporary appointment to fill the vacant seat. Jimmy Hedgspeth, Moore’s former political opponent who ran the D.A.’s office, recommended Moore, and Moore was installed in the position that he had failed to win in 1982. Moore ran as a Republican in the 1994 Etowah County election and was elected to the circuit judge seat.

Roy Moore was known as the “Ten Commandments Judge” for his refusal to take down a  plaque of the Ten Commandments that hung behind his bench. In 1995, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued him over the religious plaque and Moore’s tradition beginning sessions with prayers, saying such actions were unconstitutional and disregarded the separation of church and state. Moore told NPR:

Separation of church and state never meant to separate God from government. The First Amendment never meant to divide our country from an acknowledgement of God. It’s time to stand up and say, we have a right under our Constitution to acknowledge God.

The original case was dismissed, but in 1996, a Montgomery County Judge, Charles Price, initially ordered Moore to stop the prayer but he allowed the Ten Commandments plaque to be displayed. However, Price ordered the plaque removed after visiting Moore’s courtroom the following year. The case was again dismissed.

When Moore was elected to the Alabama Supreme Court in 2000, he took his fight over the Ten Commandments even further. Now, he was designing and planning a two-and-a-half ton granite obelisk inscribed with the Ten Commandments to be placed in the lobby of the Alabama Judicial Building. The Montgomery Advertiser states:

Moore had not told his fellow justices he was planning to install the monument, but brought a company into tape the installation of the monument in the Heflin-Torbert Judicial Building. Sales of the tapes later helped pay for his legal defense fund.

In 2002, a federal district judge ruled that the new statue was unconstitutional, violating the Establishment Clause of the Constitution. A deadline for removing the monument was instated and ignored by Moore in August 2003. A panel ruled that Moore had violated the judicial ethics code, and Moore was removed from the bench.

Just after a decade after being removed from the bench, Moore successfully won back his seat on the Alabama Supreme Court in 2012. No, he didn’t resurrect his Ten Commandments monument, but with the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2015 that legalized same-sex marriage, Moore ordered state judges to protest it and enforce the state’s ban on same-sex marriages instead. In response to Obergefell v. Hodges, Moore wrote:

The Court’s opinion speaks repeatedly of homosexuals being humiliated, demeaned, and being denied ‘equal dignity’ by a state’s refusal to issue them marriage licenses.

That attempt to defy yet another court order resulted in another appearance before Alabama’s Court of the Judiciary, and he was suspended for the rest of his term in 2016, however, Moore’s age has prevented him from any chance of running again in 2018.

Now, Moore has decided to run for Senate in Alabama, and many shocking and revealing allegations have been put against him. He has been accused by eight women of sexual assault, and people are not happy.

This story was broken by the Washington Post, but the saddest part of all this is that Moore will probably still win.

Nate Cohn, a writer at the Upshot and the New York Times’ political data guru, said:

I don’t see any reason to assume Moore is in serious jeopardy.

When asked how much does he think this scandal might affect Moore’s chances to be elected, Cohn said:

My honest answer is that I don’t know. Alabama is an extremely conservative state that is deeply polarized along racial lines. Hillary Clinton might not even have received 15 percent of the white vote in Alabama last year. For Doug Jones to win, he might need to double that number. So this is not an easy task at all for the Democrats.

Cohn was asked by Slate whether there is any other state in the union that would be more likely to elect Roy Moore than Alabama. To that, he responded:

No. In Mississippi, the white vote is more conservative, but black voters are a much larger share of the electorate. If you had a revolt against a Republican candidate and black turnout was high, I think you can imagine how the Democrats get over the top there in a way that is tougher to imagine in Alabama. The argument the other way is that Alabama has better-educated metropolitan areas like Birmingham or Huntsville where maybe you can imagine that a Republican revolt would be modestly more likely than it would in Mississippi. But no, I think Alabama is basically as tough as it gets for Democrats.

Seeing what the political expert has said, it’s heartbreaking to think that an alleged child molester could beat a perfectly qualified Democrat just because of the political polarization in our society.

Yes, it is possible that he could win and be kicked out of the Senate, something that hasn’t occurred in over 150 years, almost immediately, but it’s not about whether he serves or not. It’s about whether the citizens prefer a child molester and a man who has been kicked off the bench of the Alabama Supreme Court not once, but twice, over a perfectly qualified candidate, simply because they are too dedicated to their political party. I truly hope Alabama makes the right decision, but it’s their decision to make, not mine.

While the Alabama Republican Party has not taken back their endorsement of Roy Moore, many Republicans and Democrats alike have called for him to drop out of the race.

In the end, who knows whether he will win or not? This entire election is ensured to be a toss-up, even though it should just be handed on a silver platter to the one who is not a child molester.