Former President Trump said Wednesday that he may join the new social media or form his own platform, while also dismissing the idea of joining Parler.
The recent controversy over whether to put a permanent fence around the Capitol has sparked controversy. “Don’t look like a dictatorship,” said a member of the House of Representatives.
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates recently said all wealthy countries should eat 100 percent synthetic beef, and Rep. Hinson gave a strong rebuttal Monday, saying it would destroy the livestock farming industry.
On Thursday, the Biden administration tossed out a plan to naturalize more than 10 million illegal immigrants, but Democratic lawmakers are not ironclad, with some House members opposing it.
The Chinese Communist Party‘s hopes are going down the drain! The Chinese Communist Party had pinned its hopes on the Biden Administration to avoid a decoupling between the United States and China, but the latest study points out that political trust between the two countries has hit rock bottom and is heading for an inevitable decoupling.
Trump: May join new social media or form his own platform
Former President Donald Trump said in an interview with Newsmax Wednesday night (Feb. 17) that after being blocked by Twitter, he talked to many people about the topic and considered forming his own website.
We’re in talks with a lot of people and there’s another option to start our own website,” Trump said. Because we have more people (supporters) than anybody else. I mean you can absolutely build your own website.”
Trump also said, “They wanted me on Parler so badly.” He was referring to a statement made by Parler’s former CEO, John Matze. However, he speculated that Parler would not be able to handle the amount of site visits he would bring.
“Technically, they can’t handle the number of users,” Trump noted in the interview. “If you look at what’s happening with Twitter, I know it’s getting very boring and thousands of people are leaving.”
Trump said Twitter tags any statement he makes with a warning, but regardless of any bad perceptions from other countries.
Photo: Mark Meckler
Mark Meckler, interim chief executive officer (CEO) of social media outlet Parler, spoke about the former president in an interview with Fox News, saying, “He would be just as welcome on the platform as anyone else.” “We welcome all political views.”
“Don’t act like a dictatorship,” U.S. lawmaker proposes taking down Capitol fence
“Don’t look like a dictatorship” U.S. lawmakers propose tearing down Capitol fence
U.S. National Guard soldiers guard behind a protective fence on the perimeter of Capitol Hill, Jan. 9, 2021
U.S. Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-Washington, D.C., recently introduced a bill seeking to remove the fence still erected around the Capitol to ensure the capital “doesn’t look like a dictatorship. She argued that the authorities could protect the area in a more modern way.
Norton introduced a new bill last week that would ban permanent fencing around the Capitol. This is partly in response to a proposal by Capitol Police Chief Yogananda Pittman. Pittman proposed a permanent fence around the Capitol.
Norton told the Epoch Times, “I’m very aware that security officials believe that there is still some demand for fencing in the short term. And I understand that there is concern that it [the fence] may be in use for several months longer than I had previously anticipated. I’m sure that’s based on intelligence.”
“But my goal, the goal of my bill, is to make sure that the nation’s capital doesn’t look like a dictatorship and that the openness of the capital, which is one of the hallmarks of the capital, is not compromised because we failed to do our job on Jan. 6.”
Norton added, “If we’re not going to use a fence at the border, then why use a fence at the Capitol?”
Norton is by no means the only member of Congress to push for the removal of the fence. Earlier this month, 42 Republicans had asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to remove the wire fence and bring the National Guard Home.
Bill Gates pushes synthetic beef, U.S. lawmakers: He wants to destroy U.S. livestock industry
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates (Bill Gates) recently said that the United States and Western Europe and other rich countries should eat 100% synthetic beef. In response, U.S. Rep. Hinson of Iowa (Ashley Hinson) said Gates is trying to “completely destroy” the U.S. livestock industry and damage the U.S. economy.
Pictured is newly elected Iowa U.S. Rep. Ashley Hinson (D).
The billionaire Gates made the remarks in an interview with a reporter for the MIT Technology Review last week. The reporter asked him, “Do you think plant-based and lab-processed meat can fully address the global demand for protein, including in poor countries? Or do you think it can only be partial, given the love of hamburger Culture and the fact that animal agriculture is such an important part of the global economy?
Gates replied, “I don’t think the poorest 80 countries will consume synthetic meat, but I do think all rich countries should move to 100 percent synthetic beef. People can get used to the difference in taste (of synthetic beef) over Time, and over time (technology) will make (synthetic beef) taste better.”
Gates said he hopes to eventually change people’s behavior with “green premium” Food or use regulations to completely change people’s demand for food. He also believes that currently (synthetic beef) is indeed feasible in middle and upper middle-income countries and regions.
Gates also said it would be politically “challenging” to achieve his goal. He said, “All the regulations say it (the meat) has to be called lab garbage to be sold, and the government doesn’t want us to use the beef label (on synthetic beef).”
In response to Gates’ argument, newly elected Republican U.S. Rep. Hinson of Iowa gave a strong rebuttal Monday (Feb. 16). In addition to attacking Gates for destroying the U.S. livestock industry, she launched an online petition, “Please Leave Our Beef Alone,” calling on people to sign it at handsoffourbeef.com.
Singson said, “Please sign our petition against this radical policy and tell the Democrats: Leave our beef alone!”
Gates’ promotion of synthetic meat aims to reduce methane emissions. Methane is a greenhouse gas produced by grazing animals such as cattle and sheep as they digest pasture. He once admitted that it was politically “unpopular” to tell people “no more cattle,” but for the sake of his “environmental cause,” he argued “There’s no other way to do it but to eliminate livestock.
Biden’s Illegal Immigrant Naturalization Plan Splits Democratic Party
Top congressional Democrats on Thursday, Feb. 18, released a report on Joe Biden’s (D-N.Y.) illegal immigration plan. They said there is no reason to deny these illegal immigrants a permanent home in the U.S. The plan, which Joe Biden promised when he took office, would provide a path to citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants. The plan needs to be passed by Congress to be implemented, but that may not be promising because not only are Republicans opposed to it, but there is opposition within the Democratic Party as well, which they fear will cause political chaos.
Top Democrats say the bill, which has been blocked by Republicans for more than a decade, is now “long overdue. They point out that most of the illegal immigrants targeted by the bill, which Democrats call “undocumented immigrants,” have lived in the United States for many years and have homes, businesses and U.S.-born children and grandchildren.
Pictured is a line of illegal immigrants attempting to enter the United States on January 16, 2021.
The bill would provide an eight-year path to citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants.
Senior Democratic Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.Y.) said the bill would provide an eight-year path to citizenship for 11 million illegal aliens. Bob Menendez (D-N.Y.) said, “It’s time to bring all 11 million undocumented people out of the shadows.”
Biden’s illegal immigration plan would provide immediate “green cards,” or permanent residency, to Dreamers, TPS holders and farm workers so they can work legally.
For illegal immigrants living in the U.S. before Jan. 1, 2021, Biden plans to give them a five-year temporary legal status; after passing basic requirements such as background checks, they would receive a “green card” and then be able to apply for naturalization as U.S. citizens after another three years.
While top Democrats want to push hard for legislation on this immigration program, other Democrats are increasingly concerned that the Biden White House’s immigration reforms are too radical and a 180-degree change to former President Trump’s immigration policies is too fast, too much and too soon, which they fear will cause political chaos.
Democratic U.S. Rep. Vicente Gonzalez of Texas (D-Texas), who is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, said he is concerned that the Biden White House is too aggressive in reforming immigration policy and changing it 180 degrees too quickly, too much and too soon. Gonzalez (D-Texas) said, “What we’re doing now is disastrous, a recipe for another disaster during the Great Plague.”
He also worried, “Our party should be careful. If we get off track, it will be a bad thing for us. If Biden continues down this path, it shows that he is dealing with only a small circle in Congress.”
Another Democratic U.S. Rep. from Texas, Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), said he would not be able to get out of the way. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) said he has been expressing concern since before Election Day last Nov. 3 that a quick reversal of Trump’s policies would lead to an increase in immigration at the border.
Cuellar said, “‘Hey, we don’t want a border wall, but on other issues, we have to be careful not to give the impression that we have open borders’ because (illegal immigration) numbers are going to start going up. It’s safe to say that we’re starting to see the numbers go up.”
U.S. Chamber of Commerce Report: U.S.-China Economic Decoupling “Inevitable”
A study on U.S.-China economic relations by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and New York-based Rongding Consulting shows that political trust between the U.S. and China has hit rock bottom and is headed for an inevitable decoupling.
On Wednesday (Feb. 17), the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s China Center and New York-based research firm Rhodium Group released a joint report saying that political trust between Washington and Beijing has hit rock bottom, competition between the U.S. and China is set to intensify and decoupling will continue.
According to the report, “It is imperative to determine the true consequences and costs of decoupling, as initial steps have been taken toward such a move.”
The report said, “The United States is debating whether and how …… will continue to go forward. The prospect of U.S.-China decoupling has never been more real. But there is a strong case for limiting decoupling to areas of trade, investment, movement of people, and technology that seriously undermine U.S. national security, rather than acting for no reason without regard to economic welfare.”
Citing declines in trade, investment flows, tourism and student exchanges, the report said there has been “a degree of decoupling” between the two countries and that many U.S. businesses are making changes to prepare.
Foreign companies are also asking whether they would benefit from a separation or whether their own governments would follow suit, the report said.
The report found that because the U.S. and Chinese economies are intertwined in so many ways, it makes the cost of full decoupling “disturbingly high.
The researchers estimate that a 25 percent tariff on all trade between the two countries would cost the U.S. economy about $190 billion a year – and if U.S. companies halved their foreign direct investment in China, the U.S. economy would suffer a one-time loss of up to $500 billion.
A complete ban on Chinese tourists and students traveling to the United States would add an additional $30 billion in annual losses.
Nonetheless, the report argues that the Communist government has decoupled from free-market economic norms in its efforts to strengthen state control, discourage private enterprise and pursue high-tech self-reliance.
Daniel Rosen, head of China research at RTC Consulting and lead author of the report, said U.S.-China engagement has always hinged on shared free economic goals, but as the Communist government reverts to larger national programs, “a less permissive stance is necessary.
Recent Comments