Untitled by Gabbie S.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48102647

Donald Trump and his three oldest children have sued two different banks to keep them from handing over information to the House of Representatives. The House had issued a subpoena for Trump’s financial records, and the banks refused to hand over the documents. The family has joined their lawsuits together against Capital One and Deutsche Bank to prevent them from handing over their financial records to the Democratic House, saying the subpoenas "have no legitimate or lawful purpose" in the filing.

Both the banks have a long history with Trump’s team and his businesses. This subpoena is asking for virtually all of Trump’s financial records for years.

These subpoenas were ordered by The House Intelligence and Financial Services Committees to look "into allegations of potential foreign influence on the US political process". Trump and his team are fighting against this subpoena in saying that the investigation is “meritless” and holds no substance.

Trump’s lawsuit against these subpoenaed banks is successfully stalling the House of Representatives on their motives to find out about Trump’s financial history. This could stall Congress from much more than that, however. If they are so focused on this one problem, are they really paying attention to much else going on that their constituents need?

Is it right for the House to issue subpoenas for Trump’s financial information? Are there more important things Congress could be doing? What are the grounds that financial subpoenas should be legal in the political process?

Bad Bill Bar by Daniel W.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/30/politics/william-barr-robert-mueller-mueller-report/index.html

If you have been watching the news for the past month, you have most likely heard “Barr”, “Mueller”, “collusion”, “obstruction”, “exonerate,” every day. On some news stations the Mueller Report has been covered on a daily basis for two years; others decided to wait until facts came out. So, when Attorney General Barr released his summary and eventually a redacted version of the Mueller Report, most people expected a clear decision on whether Trump’s team colluded with Russians. Barr’s summary was straightforward, and he even used a quote from the report. “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” Barr also reported that Mueller would not draw a conclusion on whether Trump commited obstruction, thus leaving it up to Barr to make a decision. The media has unsurprisingly continued to push the story of Trump colluding and obstructing despite the two-year investigation’s findings. Recently, they have been reporting that Mueller’s team has been unhappy with the way Barr has been portraying the findings. Today, Barr is set to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee and respond to accusations from Democrats that he attempted to present the investigation’s results in Trump’s favor. This issue is important to the nation because it displays how politics is being infused into justice. This hearing could possibly result in new laws affecting how presidential investigations are handled in the future.

Do you believe politics are invading justice, or has it always been this way? Should the media focus on evidence supporting the prosecution, or should they focus on the result? Do you believe the left-wing media will focus on this through the 2020 election, or will they find something else to rile up voters? Do voters still need to make a decision on whether Trump is guilty or not, or should they trust the ultimate findings of Mueller’s team?

O’Rourke Announces Plan to Fight Climate Change by Dougie D.

https://apple.news/ALYIdUYIzSeCA-7PkU14NQw

On Monday, O’Rourke announced his $5 billion dollar plan to get to net zero emissions by 2020. He claims climate change is "the greatest threat we face" and outlined a four-part framework to address this "existential threat" and "growing emergency."

If elected, O’Rourke’s first bill will “mobilize $5 trillion over 10 years — spurred by the single largest investment to fight climate change in history — to transform our aging infrastructure, accelerate innovation, and empower our people and communities to lead the climate fight," according to the plan.

O'Rourke's $5 trillion mobilization would be "directly leveraged by a fully paid-for $1.5 trillion investment," and the bill he will introduce would be funded "changes to the tax code to ensure corporations and the wealthiest among us pay their fair share and that we finally end the tens of billions of dollars of tax breaks currently given to fossil fuel companies."

He plans to take action against climate control starting on his first day. His actions would include re-entering the Paris agreement.

Climate change has been a major issue for the 2020 Democrats. The focus comes from a 2018 UN report that stated we only have until 2030 to save the world from the catastrophic effects of climate change.

Do you believe climate change is a real issue?
Would O’Rourke’s plan be effective in fighting climate change?
Is the bill being unfair to the rich?