Jrue Holiday credited God for Milwaukee Bucks’ victory in the 2021 NBA Finals.
Overwhelmed with his team’s success for clinching the championship, Holiday declared that the reason behind it was “only God,” CBN News reported.
“This is such a blessing, man. This is only God. Like I said before, as a kid, you only dream of this moment, so to be able to actually do it, to see the confetti, to do it with my brothers, there’s nothing like it,” he said.
The Bucks defeated the Phoenix Suns in Game 6 of the finals on Tuesday evening, 105-98, 50 years after the team captured its first championship.
“Everybody on my team is humble. Everybody on my team puts their head down and they work. Everybody on my team supports each other. There’s no envy or jealousy. Everybody loves to see everybody else succeed. I feel like that’s the biggest reason why we’re here,” he told the reporters.
A group of Indiana University students on Tuesday appealed a federal judge’s ruling denying their motion to put the university’s COVID vaccine mandate on hold pending the outcome of a federal lawsuit they filed last month.
A group of Indiana University (IU) students on Tuesday appealed a federal judge’s ruling denying their motion to put the university’s COVID vaccine mandate on hold pending the outcome of a federal lawsuit they filed last month.
The students also asked the district court to prevent the university from enforcing the mandate while the appeal is pending.
In a hearing on the preliminary injunction Monday, the district court found the students’ constitutional rights were at issue, but failed to acknowledge these rights were fundamental.
Judge Damon R. Leichty of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana said he weighed individual freedom against public health concerns in his ruling.
According to the New York Times, Leichty’s ruling appeared to be the first case in which a university’s coronavirus vaccine requirement has been upheld. Yet in delivering the ruling Leichty expressed his personal misgivings, citing individual freedom and self-determination.
The Times wrote:
“Somebody could point to ‘a certain Emersonian self-reliance and self-determination as preference — an unfettered right of the individual to choose the vaccine or not,’ Judge Leichty, who was appointed by President Donald J. Trump, wrote in his ruling. But he added that judicial restraint was required to avoid ‘superimposing any personal view in the guise of constitutional interpretation.”
“A ruling from the federal court has affirmed Indiana University’s COVID-19 vaccination plan designed for the health and well-being of our students, faculty and staff. We appreciate the quick and thorough ruling which allows us to focus on a full and safe return. We look forward to welcoming everyone to our campuses for the fall semester.”
While the lawsuit can proceed, the ruling denies a motion for an injunction on the policy for the fall semester unless the appellate court overturns the ruling.
In May, IU announced it would require all students, faculty and staff to receive COVID vaccinations before they could return to campus for the fall semester, with stringent and limited exemptions to the mandate for those with religious or medical exemptions.
Even those students granted an exemption are subject to rigorous extra requirements, regardless of why they received an exemption, The Bopp Law Firm, which is representing the plaintiffs, said in a press release.
Those who are granted an exemption have to undergo more rigorous COVID rules, including testing and mask-wearing when on campus. Masks are optional for those who are fully vaccinated, Fox 59 reported.
The policy was controversial right out of the gate, with some Indiana lawmakers urging Gov. Eric Holcomb to rescind it. Attorney General Todd Rokita said last month the policy “clearly runs afoul” to state law.
After Rokita’s announcement the school changed the policy from requiring students to upload documentation of their vaccine status to having to fill out an online form, but did not revoke the vaccine mandate.
The eight student plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit against the mandate include two incoming freshmen, two incoming sophomores, a senior, an incoming first-year law student, a student pursuing a master’s degree in business administration and a doctoral candidate, CNN reported.
Six of the students have received exemptions based on religious beliefs. The other two don’t qualify for exemptions, the lawsuit says. Several of the plaintiffs also object to mask requirements and other measures for unvaccinated students.
James Bopp Jr., lead counsel for the plaintiffs told CNN:
“They’re suing because they’re being stripped of their constitutional rights to make medical treatment decisions for themselves and to protect their own bodily integrity. After all, they are adults and they would like to weigh the risks and consequences of taking the vaccination or getting COVID.”
The Bopp Law Firm filed the lawsuit on behalf of IU students in the U.S. District Court in Indiana challenging IU’s mandate to preserve the students’ rights to bodily integrity and autonomy, due process and the right to consent to medical treatment.
The students sought a temporary injunction to stop the mandate from going into effect, and asked the school to make public documents, which IU has so far kept secret, revealing why IU mandated COVID vaccinations for all IU students, and how COVID infections and vaccinations have affected the university.
Bopp’s team submitted a public records request to IU asking for the same documents, but no documents have been released.
1st time platform has lost domestic customers in 2 years.
Netflix is down nearly half a million subscribers in North America this quarter, leading to a stock drop of nearly 5% on Wednesday — the company’s biggest slide since its last poor earnings report in April. This marks the first time the platform has lost domestic customers in two years.
The Financial Times, which ran the headline, “Netflix bleeds subscribers,” says the streaming platform’s failure to meet analyst projections has investors jumpy.
“The California-based company predicted it would add 3.5 [million] subscribers in the third quarter, disappointing investors who were looking for a stronger rebound in the second half of the year,” the outlet reported, adding, “Analysts had forecast that Netflix would add 5.9 [million] subscribers during the third quarter.”
In a shareholder letter, Netflix executives blamed their failure to meet projections this quarter on “unusual choppiness in our growth” and cited the pandemic, something CFO Spencer Neumann echoed on an earnings call. But CEO Reed Hastings had to assuage similar worries after disappointing numbers the previous quarter in April. At that time, too, the company claimed COVID was hurting business, with Hastings saying, “We had those 10 years that were smooth as silk, and we are just a little bit wobbly right now.”
Some people aren’t buying the coronavirus line, however, and blame other factors for Netflix’s poor performance.
Conservative radio host and commentator Todd Starnes believes pushing a woke agenda and filling original series and movies with hard-R-rated material could also be driving viewers away.
“They’ve gone woke,” said Starnes in an op-ed, pointing out the deal the company struck with Barack and Michelle Obama to create politically themed films and series, which he classified as “propaganda disguised as entertainment.”
Nancy Pelosi made a serious mistake yesterday by refusing to seat Jim Jordan (R., Ohio) and Jim Banks (R., Ind.) on the House committee investigating the January 6 Capitol riot, prompting Kevin McCarthy to take his ball and go home. This deprives Democrats of the talking point they scored when Republicans refused to agree to a bipartisan commission — now, she’s the one refusing to cooperate. It also sets up a further downward partisan spiral over whether the minority party will be permitted to investigate topics that Pelosi doesn’t want investigated.
There are usually two ways to go with investigations. One is the bipartisan commission route, which is typically spearheaded by people retired from active partisan politics. The 9/11Commission, for example, was co-chaired by ex-New Jersey governor Tom Kean and ex-Indiana Representative Lee Hamilton. Such commissions can gather evidence quietly through professional staff. The other is a committee that holds openly partisan public hearings where everybody grandstands, but at least the witnesses are forced into some made-for-TV soundbites. Pelosi wants to have it both ways here — a partisan circus that is treated by the media like an authoritative commission. Until this week, she could at least sustain the pretense that it was only Republican intransigence standing in the way of a thorough inquiry. The resulting process will be so consumed by partisan squabbles that it will be impossible for anyone to respect its work product.
As I noted at the time, while there are some legitimate lines of inquiry, much of what Democrats hope to accomplish is not really a good fit for a 9/11-style commission. This has been a fraught endeavor from the start, because not only have Democrats placed January 6at the center of all of their partisan rhetoric for the past six months, this is unlike prior investigations because a good deal of the focus will be on the investigation of Congress itself, not just oversight of the executive branch. Pelosi just confirmed that. While her formal statement is somewhat vague, the Democrats are more or less arguing that Jordan and Banks are disqualified from sitting on this committee because they voted against certifying the 2020 election. That theory goes too far — while Donald Trump’s push against certification on January 6 was one of the elements of his conduct that led to the riot, it is overreaching to argue that anybody who voted that way (including a majority of the House Republican caucus) is effectively an accessory to the riot. If that is Pelosi’s position — and it is a popular one with some factions of the Beltway media — it demands that she stop treating the Republicans as a legitimate part of the House. That is not a sustainable position with the general public, and will be even more unsustainable if Republicans — as may well happen — regain the majority in the chamber next November.
New national organization formed to represent College Republicans.
The College Republican National Committee (CRNC) has officially split, following the announcement of the formation of a ‘National Federation of College Republicans’.
The new National Federation currently has two members, the Texas Federation of College Republicans and the New York Federation of College Republicans, two of the largest and most conservative College Republican state federations, and was formed following a rigged election for state chairman of the CRNC. In a statement posted on Twitter, the National Federation invited “disaffected” College Republican state federations to align with their new entity, in order to “return our beloved organization to its founding principles and restores ethical leadership.”
In the next months, we will call a constitutional convention to organize and prioritize College Republicans who want to return our beloved organization to its founding principles and restore ethical leadership.
— National Federation of College Republicans (@NatFCR) July 21, 2021
However, the National Federation stressed that it was a purely interim body, and that free and fair leadership elections were planned at the “earliest possible date” to determine the ultimate board of the new entity.
To be clear for those asking in our DMs, we are only an 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚 body & will be organizing leadership elections at the earliest possible date.
Thanks!
— National Federation of College Republicans (@NatFCR) July 21, 2021
Hunter Biden will meet prospective buyers before he auctions his art this fall, despite the White House’s promise that sales will be anonymous. Fresh accusations of corruption have been leveled at the Biden family.
Hunter Biden, son of President Joe Biden, says he took up painting while recovering from a crack cocaine addiction. When news broke that he was planning on selling these paintings at a show in New York later this year, the Biden administration headed off conservative outrage with a convoluted scheme that it said would stop buyers using the sale to purchase favor from the Bidens.
“After careful consideration, a system has been established to allow Hunter Biden to work in his profession within reasonable safeguards,” Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters earlier this month. Psaki said that a gallery owner would price Hunter’s art, that the identity of buyers would be kept secret from Hunter and his family, and that bids above the asking price would be rejected.
Not any more. Hunter will in fact meet potential buyers before his paintings go to sale, CBS News reported on Wednesday. Georges Berges Gallery spokeswoman Robin Davis told CBS that Biden will be at two shows before the sale, one in Los Angeles and one at the Georges Berges Gallery itself in New York.
Davis said that attendees at the shows will be “vetted,” the White House said that “the president has established the highest ethical standards of any administration in American history,” and a source told CBS that “Hunter Biden will not discuss potential purchases, prices, or anything related to the selling of artwork.”
Yet the public will never know what Hunter and the buyers discuss. These discussions will be beyond the reach of the Freedom of Information Act, and the deal announced by Psaki includes no enforcement mechanisms. Regular Americans, who haven’t actually seen the ethics deal itself, are being asked to trust the White House and the Bidens at their word.
Conservatives are skeptical. “Turns out those ‘anonymous sales’ will be anonymous to everyone BUT Hunter Biden and the buyers,” Colorado Rep. Ken Buck (R) tweeted. “Sounds pretty shady to me.”
“Sounds like a very ethical and anonymous art sale!” Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton (R) tweeted.
“Hunter Biden will meet with prospective buyers of his absurdly overpriced, presidency-profiting art,”tweeted Walter Shaub, former head of the Office of Government Ethics during the Obama administration. “Good grief. The president has such a blind spot on this issue. I really hope he and his son come to their senses.”
Anybody defending this should just stop. Its ridiculous, period. Idc what Trump and his brood did. And lets be clear, even if he wasn't having events with the anonymous bidders, all any of them would have to do is tweet "I bought Hunter's painting" and whoops no longer anonymous. https://t.co/nRsqZtzDTC
Joe Biden is shifting blame for the rise in crime across the country while also claiming it’s Republicans that are lying about who’s behind the push to defund America’s police departments.
During his Town Hall on CNN Wednesday, Biden actually claimed crime is down, but then said gun violence and murder rates are up. He then focused on his reputation as a gun control senator during his time in congress while stating he’s looking to get rid of everything from 9mm pistols to rifles.
They're not hiding their intentions. Joe Biden says he wants to ban handguns — not merely AR-15s like their previous dishonest talking points suggested. Watch Biden stumble through this town hall answer. pic.twitter.com/DI3CDTN1wL
— (((Jason Rantz))) on KTTH Radio (@jasonrantz) July 22, 2021
“The idea that you need a weapon that can have the ability to fire 20, 30, 40, 50, 120 shots from that weapon whether it’s a 9mm, pistol or whether it’s a riffle is ridiculous,” said Biden. “I’m continuing to push to eliminate those things, but I’m not lucky enough to get that done in a near term.”
Democrats want to come home to Texas to talk about election laws in “good faith,” but that flew out the window along with their chartered plane to D.C.
As we previously covered, Texas Democrats fled the state as its Republican-dominated legislature was to pass an election security bill that would diametrically oppose the radical HR1 (for the people act) Democrats on the federal level wish to impose on the nation. This circus included a private plane, press appearances, try-hard tweetstorms, and COVID-19 spreading.
They wanted to tell you they were protecting the rights of voters, but HR1 is far from anything of the sort.
It would appear that at least one Democrat is ready to come home with the claim that he fled the state in solidarity with his fellow leftists, but now he’s ready to come home and talk about Texas’s voting standards in “good faith” according to a statement he released.
“I proudly stood with my Democratic colleagues and left Texas to ensure House Bill 3 would not be approved as introduced. A small working group of Democrats decided to begin active discussions here in Austin on improving HB 3 and asked that I return to establish open communication lines,” Cortez said. “I returned to Texas to try to engage in good faith dialogue about the aspects of the bill that I, and others, think are harmful.”
I respect and stood with my Democratic colleagues in Washington DC. I stand by my convictions about full and open access to voting for all Texans. I’m here to work on that immediately. #TXLegepic.twitter.com/DsNsFS2GC7
— Rep. Philip Cortez, Ph.D. (@CortezPhilip) July 21, 2021
