genie lamp drawing

genie lamp drawing ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox . Months before voters went to the polls in November, a group of election skeptics based in North Carolina gathered on a call and discussed what actions to take if they doubted any of the results. One of the ideas they floated: try to get the courts or state election board to throw out hundreds of thousands of ballots cast by voters whose registrations are missing a driver’s license number and the last four digits of a Social Security number. But that idea was resisted by two activists on the call, including the leader of the North Carolina chapter of the Election Integrity Network. The data was missing not because voters had done something wrong but largely as a result of an administrative error by the state. The leader said the idea was “voter suppression” and “100%” certain to fail in the courts, according to a recording of the July call obtained by ProPublica. This novel theory is now at the center of a legal challenge by North Carolina appeals court Judge Jefferson Griffin, a Republican who lost a race for a state Supreme Court seat to the Democratic incumbent, Allison Riggs, by just 734 votes and is seeking to have the result overturned. The state election board dismissed a previous version of the challenge , which is now being considered in federal court . Before the election, a Trump-appointed judge denied an attempt by the Republican National Committee to remove 225,000 voters from the rolls based on the same theory. The latest case is getting attention statewide and across the country. But it has not yet been reported that members of the group that had helped publicize the idea had cast doubt on its legality. “I don’t comment on pending litigation,” Griffin wrote to ProPublica in response to a detailed list of questions. “It would be a violation of our code of judicial conduct.” Embry Owen, Riggs’ campaign manager, disputed the challenge and called on Griffin to concede. “It’s not appropriate for this election to be decided in court, period. NC voters have already made the decision to send Justice Riggs back to the Supreme Court,” she said. The theory Griffin is citing originated with a right-wing activist, Carol Snow, who described herself to ProPublica in an email as “a Bona Fide Grade-A Election Denier.” Snow promoted it with the help of the state chapter of the Election Integrity Network, a national group whose leader worked with President Donald Trump in his failed effort to overturn the 2020 election. The network also was behind extensive efforts to prepare to contest a Trump loss this year in other states, as ProPublica has reported , as well as in North Carolina, according to previously unreported recordings and transcripts of meetings of the state chapter. State election officials have found that missing information on a voter’s registration is not disqualifying because there are numerous valid reasons for the state’s database to lack that those details. Those reasons include voters registering before state paperwork was updated about a year ago to require that information or using alternate approved documents, such as a utility bill, to verify their identities. What’s more, voters must still prove their identity when casting a ballot — most often with a driver’s license. “There is virtually no chance of voter fraud resulting from a voter not providing her driver’s license or social security number on her voter registration,” attorneys for the state election board wrote in response to the RNC lawsuit. Bob Orr, a former GOP state Supreme Court justice who left the Republican Party in 2021 , said he too doubts the theory. “I appreciate fighting for every vote: If you honestly think illegal votes have been cast, it’s legitimate to try to prove that,” he said. “But the bottom line is: Did anyone vote illegally? Have you been able to prove one person voted illegally? At this point, no. And we’re weeks past the election and multiple recounts, and there’s no evidence of that.” In modern history, the state board’s decision on who wins elections has been final, said Chris Cooper, a professor specializing in North Carolina politics at Western Carolina University. That includes an even tighter race in 2020, when a Democratic justice conceded to a Republican after protesting her 401-vote loss to the board. “We’re used to close elections, we’re used to protests, we’re used to candidates pushing every legal action up to the point the state election board rules,” Cooper said. But, he added, there is an important difference with Griffin’s petition, which goes beyond the state election board to the courts. “This is basically saying the state elections system is wrong, and we’re going to court to try to change the rules of the game after the game has been played — which is unprecedented.” In July 2024, the North Carolina chapter of the Election Integrity Network convened online to plan its efforts ahead of the presidential election. Worried about a surge of voter registrations from nonwhite voters who they believed would back Democrats, the activists discussed how to assemble a “suspicious voters list” of people whose ballots they could challenge. Then, one of the group’s board members, Jay DeLancy, said he had another idea “that’s a lot slicker.” DeLancy said that if a candidate lost a close election, the loss could be overturned by questioning the validity of voters whose registrations are missing their driver’s license and Social Security information. “Those are illegal votes,” he claimed. “I would file a protest.” Jim Womack, the leader of the chapter, immediately pushed back: “That’s a records keeping problem on the part of the state board. That’s not illegal.” Later in the call Womack said, “I’m 100% sure you’re not going to get a successful prosecution.” And he told the group, “That’s considered to be voter suppression, and there’s no way a court is going to find that way.” But DeLancy asked for backup from the originator of that theory: Carol Snow. She argued that her theory could in fact overturn the outcome of an election. “I guess we’re gonna find that out,” Snow said. Snow is a leader of the conservative activist group North Carolina Audit Force and lives in the state’s rural mountains. After Trump’s loss in 2020, she threw herself into questioning the election’s results. In 2022, she accompanied a pair of far-right activists to a North Carolina election office where the two men unsuccessfully tried to forcefully access voting machines, and she participated in a failed pressure campaign to oust the election director who resisted them, ProPublica previously reported . She also began filing overwhelming numbers of records requests and complaints to state election officials, an effort that Womack praised on the July call: “I think Carol has shown a way of really harassing — not that we want to do it for harassment purposes — but really needling the Board of Elections to do their jobs by just constantly deluging them.” Since late 2021, the state elections board had spent far more time on her requests and complaints than those of any other individual, spokesperson Patrick Gannon said in a statement. “Ms. Snow’s constant barrage of requests and complaints causes other priorities and responsibilities to suffer,” Gannon said. Snow described her work to ProPublica as “simply taking the time to learn about my state’s electoral process” and acting for the public good. “The records I’ve requested are owned by the public. In other words, I’m asking for what belongs to me,” Snow wrote to ProPublica . “If government agencies are understaffed and unable to comply with this state’s Public Records law, they should address the issue with the entities that fund them.” In the fall of 2023, Snow filed a complaint alleging that North Carolina’s voter registration form did not clearly require voters to provide their driver’s license number and the last four digits of their Social Security number, as required by federal law — instead that information was coded as optional. Snow later described the missing information as a “ line of attack ” through which bad actors could cast fraudulent votes using fake identities. (A right-wing conspiracy theory holds that this was how Biden won the 2020 election.) But she was not able to demonstrate that the missing information had led to anyone improperly voting. After obtaining public records for hundreds of thousands of voter registrations, Snow provided the state board with only seven examples of what she called potential double voting. The state board found all seven to be innocuous things like data entry errors . The state board quickly updated the form to require the information. But from late 2023 through the fall of 2024, six complaints , some of which were partly based on Snow’s theory, were filed with the state election board. Aside from the updates to the form, the state board dismissed the complaints. By the time of the July call, some of Snow’s peers seemed dismissive as well. “I’m not suggesting that we can’t arm a candidate that loses a short, a close race with the information they need to file a protest using this,” Womack said on the call. “But I would just suggest to you that that’s not the way to win on this thing.” Yet the information did end up in the Republican National Committee’s lawsuit trying to disqualify 225,000 voters, a challenge DeLancy filed against Riggs’ victory in North Carolina’s most populous county, and, the day after that was dismissed, Griffin’s challenge to over 60,000 voters. DeLancy wrote to ProPublica that he filed the challenge on his own and did not coordinate with Griffin. He also said he disagreed with Womack’s description of such challenges as “voter suppression.” Instead, he said, he saw it as “a proper response” to the state election board’s “violation of federal law.” “Carol Snow deserves an Order of the Long Leaf Pine for exposing this treasonous behavior on the part of the election officials,” he wrote, referring to an award bestowed by North Carolina’s governor . Womack wrote to ProPublica that the group he leads “is a non-partisan, neutral organization” that does “not favor one party over another.” He also said that recordings of the group’s calls are “prohibited and violate our internal policies” and “whatever bootleg recording you may have is unauthorized and may well be altered.” ProPublica has seen a video recording of the call and verified portions of it with some participants. Though Griffin’s challenge of Riggs’ victory is now being considered in federal court, legal experts say it could still end up back where he intended: in front of the state Supreme Court. Griffin’s petition is making what experts describe as extreme asks to the Supreme Court: to allow him to bypass the lower courts, to allow ballots to be thrown out without proving that voters did anything knowingly wrong and to essentially decide whether to change its composition to six Republicans and one Democrat. “Even if they do their best to be open-minded and independent, the facts of the potential conflicts of interest are just too obvious to the public,” said Orr, the former Republican justice. Griffin has described Republican Supreme Court Chief Justice Paul Newby as a “good friend and mentor,” and Newby promoted Griffin’s 2020 run for the court of appeals. What’s more, a ProPublica review of campaign finance reports show that the spouses of three justices, including Newby’s wife, donated over $12,000 to Griffin’s most recent or previous campaigns. (The husband of the Supreme Court’s other Democratic justice donated to Riggs.) Newby and other justices did not respond to a detailed list of questions sent to spokespeople for the Supreme Court. When announcing his candidacy for the Supreme Court , Griffin declared, “We are a team that knows how to win — the same team that helped elect Chief Justice Paul Newby and three other members of the current Republican majority.” A cartoon illustration that hangs in the Supreme Court depicts all the Republican appellate jurists as superheroes from the Justice League, with Newby caricatured as Superman and Griffin as the Flash.

Indigenous leaders voice hope and skepticism at COP29

How Baddie Hub is Transform Social Media By Story ViewerThroughout his campaign, President-elect Donald Trump promised national prosperity and global peace, saying he would quickly drive down the cost of groceries in local supermarkets and bring deadly overseas wars to an abrupt end. He echoed that rosy message during a wide-ranging news conference Monday, saying his second term "will be the most exciting and successful period of reform and renewal in all of American history, maybe of global history." "The Golden Age of America, I call it," he said. "It's begun." Then again, maybe not. Trump also offered a caveat — a warning that things could go badly wrong, such as when the COVID-19 pandemic erupted "out of nowhere" during his first term in office. "We hope we don't have any intervening problems," he said, "because things happen." The remarks were the latest example of Trump's idea of himself as the strongman fixer of all the world's problems running headlong into his penchant for pessimism — for casting the world as a dangerous place, the nation as a crumbling wreck and himself as the undeserving victim of political ill will and plain bad luck. Since his victory last month, those dueling worldviews have collided repeatedly, as he has softened the assured rhetoric of his stump speeches, walked back some of his more grandiose campaign promises and doubled down on some of his more dire warnings about a future filled with chaos. In his victory speech, Trump said he would "govern by a simple motto: Promises made, promises kept. We're going to keep our promises. Nothing will stop me from keeping my word to you, the people." During a more recent interview with Time magazine, Trump cast fresh doubt on his ability to bring down grocery prices — a key campaign promise — by saying, "It's hard to bring things down once they're up." After a campaign that spent millions on ads about the alleged threat posed by the nation's small population of transgender people, he also suggested the issue has been overblown, saying "it gets massive coverage, and it's not a lot of people." During his Monday news conference, Trump said he'd recently had a "very good conversation" with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is leading a brutal campaign against Hamas in Gaza and beyond, and that he believes "the Middle East will be in a good place" soon. However, he also said that if hostages taken from Israel during the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack that precipitated the war aren't returned by his inauguration on Jan. 20, "all hell's going to break out." Asked to clarify, he simply said: "It won't be pleasant." Trump also said that Russia's war on Ukraine — which he promised to end in a day during the campaign, saying "I'll have that done in 24 hours" — will be "actually more difficult" than addressing the Middle East tensions. He said the fighting was producing the "worst carnage this world has seen" since World War II, and that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy must be "prepared to make a deal" with Russian President Vladimir Putin to end it. Asked directly if he thinks Ukraine should "cede territory" to Russia in that deal, he said he would let people know once he takes office and begins having meetings as president. Then he suggested the territory isn't worth fighting over. "There are cities that there's not a building standing. It's a demolition site. There is not a building standing," he said. "So people can't go back to those cities. There's nothing there. It's just rubble." According to historians and experts in political speech, Trump's wildly vacillating rhetoric is unique among presidents — many of whom have overpromised or shifted positions, but few so wildly. "The president-elect has spoken on both sides of so many issues that it's impossible to know what he will do after being inaugurated. It's a brilliant strategy, leaving him free to move in any direction," said H.W. Brands, a prominent historian, author and history professor at University of Texas at Austin. "His predecessors, wherever they are, must be watching in envy." Brands noted that Trump has less of a mandate than he claims, having won but not by much and failing to secure a popular majority. His "margin of error is slim," Brands said. But as long as his "appeal to his base remains firm," Brands said, "he will continue to be largely immune from ordinary expectations of political leaders." One limit, Brands said, is that "the longer he is in government himself, the less persuasive his efforts to blame government for what his base doesn't like." Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania and co-author of "Presidents Creating the Presidency: Deeds Done in Words," which considers how presidents have defined the office through their speech, said Trump "lives in an all-or-nothing world," and it is reflected in his stark pronouncements about the direction of the country and the world. "Trump on average is far more hyperbolic than candidates have traditionally been," she said. Presidents and presidential candidates of all stripes "routinely claim that they will do something that they actually can't do alone, that requires Congress," Jamieson said — such as Vice President Kamala Harris promising to sign a bill that would restore the protections of Roe vs. Wade. "That's a routine part of presidential discourse, that's not unusual," Jamieson said. But Trump does something different, she said, in that he promises to accomplish things that are "completely unrealistic," then works to "reframe" the promise in the eyes of his followers once he fails to fulfill it. His first-term promise that Mexico would pay for a border wall, for example, morphed into a promise Mexico would pay for a piece of the wall, then transformed into an argument that Mexico had in fact paid for the wall by agreeing separately to deploy troops to the border. Trump is able to get away with such shifts for a few reasons, Jamieson said. One is that he has made good on other big promises, like overturning Roe vs. Wade. Another is that his followers understand and accept his speech as bluster — "not as literal statements" but as "statements that he is going to do something that is bigger and more impactful than what other people are going to do," Jamieson said. That Trump has already started walking back promises about the economy is new, she said, adding that she will be interested to see how he handles the other economic promises he has made about decreasing or eliminating taxes — including the federal income tax, tax on tips and tax on Social Security benefits — and increasing tariffs without costs being passed on to consumers. "Unless mainstream economists are wrong," Jamieson said, "that's impossible." One of the first major opportunities for Trump to describe his view of the world heading into his second term will be his inauguration. Presidents have traditionally offered a hopeful view of the country at inaugurations, but not Trump. He shocked many political observers during his first inaugural speech in 2017, when he spoke of "American carnage" and a suffering nation. During a recent interview with NBC, he said "carnage" would not be his message this time around, but "unity." Some experts, including Jamieson, were doubtful, as unity messages have not come easily to Trump before. "It's as if he only has one mode, it's campaign mode, and he only has one focus, it's himself," Jamieson said. Unity speeches are generally "centered on something other than yourself," she said, "and he seems to have trouble with it."

"Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum." Section 1.10.32 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum", written by Cicero in 45 BC "Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium, totam rem aperiam, eaque ipsa quae ab illo inventore veritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipit laboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur? Quis autem vel eum iure reprehenderit qui in ea voluptate velit esse quam nihil molestiae consequatur, vel illum qui dolorem eum fugiat quo voluptas nulla pariatur?" 1914 translation by H. Rackham "But I must explain to you how all this mistaken idea of denouncing pleasure and praising pain was born and I will give you a complete account of the system, and expound the actual teachings of the great explorer of the truth, the master-builder of human happiness. No one rejects, dislikes, or avoids pleasure itself, because it is pleasure, but because those who do not know how to pursue pleasure rationally encounter consequences that are extremely painful. Nor again is there anyone who loves or pursues or desires to obtain pain of itself, because it is pain, but because occasionally circumstances occur in which toil and pain can procure him some great pleasure. To take a trivial example, which of us ever undertakes laborious physical exercise, except to obtain some advantage from it? But who has any right to find fault with a man who chooses to enjoy a pleasure that has no annoying consequences, or one who avoids a pain that produces no resultant pleasure?" 1914 translation by H. Rackham "But I must explain to you how all this mistaken idea of denouncing pleasure and praising pain was born and I will give you a complete account of the system, and expound the actual teachings of the great explorer of the truth, the master-builder of human happiness. No one rejects, dislikes, or avoids pleasure itself, because it is pleasure, but because those who do not know how to pursue pleasure rationally encounter consequences that are extremely painful. Nor again is there anyone who loves or pursues or desires to obtain pain of itself, because it is pain, but because occasionally circumstances occur in which toil and pain can procure him some great pleasure. To take a trivial example, which of us ever undertakes laborious physical exercise, except to obtain some advantage from it? But who has any right to find fault with a man who chooses to enjoy a pleasure that has no annoying consequences, or one who avoids a pain that produces no resultant pleasure?" Thanks for your interest in Kalkine Media's content! To continue reading, please log in to your account or create your free account with us.WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — First it was Canada, then the Panama Canal. Now, Donald Trump again wants Greenland. The president-elect is renewing unsuccessful calls he made during his first term for the U.S. to buy Greenland from Denmark, adding to the list of allied countries with which he’s picking fights even before taking office on Jan. 20. In a Sunday announcement naming his ambassador to Denmark, Trump wrote that, “For purposes of National Security and Freedom throughout the World, the United States of America feels that the ownership and control of Greenland is an absolute necessity.” Trump again having designs on Greenland comes after the president-elect suggested over the weekend that the U.S. could retake control of the Panama Canal if something isn’t done to ease rising shipping costs required for using the waterway linking the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. He’s also been suggesting that Canada become the 51st U.S. state and referred to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as “governor” of the “Great State of Canada.” Stephen Farnsworth, a political science professor at the University of Mary Washington in Fredericksburg, Virginia, said Trump tweaking friendly countries harkens back to an aggressive style he used during his days in business. “You ask something unreasonable and it’s more likely you can get something less unreasonable,” said Farnsworth, who is also author of the book “Presidential Communication and Character.” Greenland, the world’s largest island, sits between the Atlantic and Arctic oceans. It is 80% covered by an ice sheet and is home to a large U.S. military base. It gained home rule from Denmark in 1979 and its head of government, Múte Bourup Egede, suggested that Trump’s latest calls for U.S. control would be as meaningless as those made in his first term. “Greenland is ours. We are not for sale and will never be for sale,” he said in a statement. “We must not lose our years-long fight for freedom.” Trump canceled a 2019 visit to Denmark after his offer to buy Greenland was rejected by Copenhagen, and ultimately came to nothing. He also suggested Sunday that the U.S. is getting “ripped off” at the Panama Canal. “If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to the United States of America, in full, quickly and without question,” he said. Panama President José Raúl Mulino responded in a video that “every square meter of the canal belongs to Panama and will continue to,” but Trump fired back on his social media site, “We’ll see about that!” The president-elect also posted a picture of a U.S. flag planted in the canal zone under the phrase, “Welcome to the United States Canal!” The United States built the canal in the early 1900s but relinquished control to Panama on Dec. 31, 1999, under a treaty signed in 1977 by President Jimmy Carter. The canal depends on reservoirs that were hit by 2023 droughts that forced it to substantially reduce the number of daily slots for crossing ships. With fewer ships, administrators also increased the fees that shippers are charged to reserve slots to use the canal. The Greenland and Panama flareups followed Trump recently posting that “Canadians want Canada to become the 51st State” and offering an image of himself superimposed on a mountaintop surveying surrounding territory next to a Canadian flag. Trudeau suggested that Trump was joking about annexing his country, but the pair met recently at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida to discuss Trump’s threats to impose a 25% tariff on all Canadian goods. “Canada is not going to become part of the United States, but Trump’s comments are more about leveraging what he says to get concessions from Canada by putting Canada off balance, particularly given the precarious current political environment in Canada,” Farnsworth said. “Maybe claim a win on trade concessions, a tighter border or other things.” He said the situation is similar with Greenland. “What Trump wants is a win,” Farnsworth said. “And even if the American flag doesn’t raise over Greenland, Europeans may be more willing to say yes to something else because of the pressure.”