Steve Howe was born on April 8‚ 1947‚ in Holloway‚ North London‚ England. He is a highly influential guitarist‚ best known for his work with the progressive rock band Yes‚ which he joined in 1970. His complex and distinctive guitar playing‚ encompassing a range of styles from classical to jazz to rock‚ was pivotal in shaping the sound of Yes on seminal albums like “Fragile” and “Close to the Edge.” Howe’s contributions helped Yes to achieve significant commercial success‚ including several gold and platinum albums. Apart from Yes‚ Howe has had a prolific solo career with albums like “Beginnings” and The post Complete List Of Steve Howe Solo Albums And Songs appeared first on ClassicRockHistory.com.

There’s nothing quite like seeing two A-list actors try to interview each other‚ and Variety knows it. The trade publication hosts a series of actor-on-actor interviews‚ and the latest batch has some fun pair-ups. Variety announced its latest round of “Actors on Actors” interviews on the platform formerly known as Twitter‚ and two of the pairings are especially delightful. The first is between Robert Downey Jr. and Mark Ruffalo who‚ of course‚ were in several Marvel Cinematic Universe movies together as Iron Man and the Hulk‚ respectively. How much they talk about the MCU‚ however‚ is unclear‚ as the two have impressive resumes beyond those films‚ including both being in Zodiac. Another fun pairing is between Margot Robbie and Cillian Murphy who‚ as you likely know‚ were on opposite sides of the Barbenheimer phenomenon this summer‚ with Cillian Murphy playing Barbie in Barbie and Margot Robbie playing Oppenheimer in Oppenheimer (okay‚ strike that and reverse the actors and their roles‚ but I would pay real dollars to see the two play their counterparts). While those two stand out for genre folks‚ there are also more than a few other fun pairings heading our way‚ including Emily Blunt and Anne Hathaway (The Devil Wears Prada)‚ Annette Bening and Julianne Moore (The Kids Are All Right)‚ and Emma Stone and Bradley Cooper (Aloha‚ unfortunately). You can see the whole list here‚ and you can watch them all over four episodes that will debut on PBS SoCal on Jan. 11 at 8 to 10 p.m PT. All episodes will also stream on pbssocal.org and the free PBS App after their premiere.

Remnant 2 has been one of the major soulslike titles to have been released this year‚ and fans of the game have been having a blast in the new DLC. However‚ some are hesitant to purchase the game and‚ thus‚ want to know if it is on Xbox Game Pass. Does Xbox Game Pass Have Remnant 2? Some players have yet to dive into the game due to hesitation on the price point‚ especially with how costly gaming can be. This is where Xbox Game Pass comes in handy‚ as more often than not‚ titles get released on this service for no charge at all – other than the monthly subscription fee‚ of course. Luckily for you‚ Remnant 2 has just joined the crew. Shadow-dropping to the surprise of many‚ not even six months after its release‚ Remnant 2 is now downloadable on Xbox Game Pass for players with an active subscription. Related: All weapons in Remnant 2 The Awakened King DLC Ranked Credit: Xbox They’ve also released the first Remnant‚ ...

Land Mines are one of the deadliest traps you will need to face while searching for scraps inside the facilities in Lethal Company. Apart from monsters‚ you will also have to face many deadly obstacles inside the moon’s facilities. One of the most troublesome among them is the Land Mines placed inside to blow up your crew. This guide will show you how to disable a Land Mine in Lethal Company. Related: How to deal with Quicksand in Lethal Company What is a Land Mine in Lethal Company Image: Picture Perfect As the name explains‚ Land Mines will blow you to pieces if detonated. They are disk-like and will have red and green lights on top. These are found inside the moon’s facilities. However‚ due to their size and color‚ most of them in Lethal Company can be seen from a distance. You can also walk past most of these landmines by carefully avoiding their contact. How to disable Land Mine in Lethal Company Just like tur...

The free world’s dependence on trade with China gave the communist regime the financial power it brings to an “authoritarian axis” with Russia and Iran‚ a prominent British politician said during a Heritage Foundation event.   “The financial power China now wields comes from the free world’s astonishing and continuing dependence on China trade‚” said Sir Iain Duncan Smith‚ former leader of the United Kingdom’s Conservative Party‚ adding later: “Nothing China does is left to chance.”  And despite Iran’s denials‚ that Islamist regime was behind Hamas terrorists’ “brutal … attack on innocent Israeli citizens” Oct. 7‚ said Smith‚ who represents the Chingford and Woodford Green areas of London in Parliament.  “Importantly‚ though‚” he said Tuesday of Iran’s ruling mullahs‚ “they’re also close allies of China and Russia‚ part of an axis‚ a new axis of totalitarian states‚ which poses the greatest threat to our principles of democracy [and] human rights.”  As this “authoritarian axis” grows‚ the free world must actively defend itself‚ Smith said. “We need to recognize the threat of this new axis and face up to it before it is too late.”  Smith sat down with Nile Gardiner‚ director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at The Heritage Foundation‚ to discuss the threats posed by the three authoritarian nations during an event at the think tank’s Capitol Hill headquarters titled “The New Authoritarian Axis: The Growing Threat to the Free World from China‚ Russia‚ and Iran.” (The Daily Signal is Heritage’s news outlet.)  In her introduction of the conservative British lawmaker‚ Victoria Coates‚ vice president of Heritage’s Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy‚ said China is bankrolling the activities of Russia in Ukraine and Iran throughout the Middle East.  “The future of the Ango-American alliance … has never been more important than it will be in these coming years as we battle this threat together‚” Coates‚ a national security official during the Trump administration‚ said.  Smith explicitly tied China‚ Russia‚ and Iran together.  “The war in Ukraine‚ the war in Gaza against Hamas‚ and China’s overt threat to invade Taiwan are all of a piece‚” Smith said. “They are linked inexorably through this axis. To ignore one of these threats is to multiply the danger in the others.”  Israel has a right to defend itself‚ Smith insisted. “And those terrorists that carried out that attack‚ they do have to be hunted down and stopped because [otherwise] this will just repeat itself all over again‚” he said.  The free world must support the cause of freedom for other nations‚ Smith said. If Ukraine were to fall to Russia‚ the cost would be far greater than the cost of helping it‚ he said.  The U.S.‚ the U.K.‚ and other allies need to make the case that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Iran’s backing of Hamas’ terrorist attacks on Israel must be stopped‚ Smith said‚ adding that he has hope for a new U.S.-U.K. trade deal in coming years.   “The world is a safer place when the U.S. and the U.K. are together‚ working for freedom‚” Smith said.   On Iran‚ Smith said the U.K. government should proscribe the regime’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps‚ which the U.S. State Department designated as a foreign terrorist organization in 2019. Under British law‚ proscription defines an organization as a terrorist threat‚ making it subject to the U.K. government’s freezing of assets and seizure of resources.   “We should seize the assets while we’re at it‚ until the West unites together on these threats‚” Smith said of Iran.   He said the U.K. should walk away from the Iran nuclear deal of 2015 negotiated largely by the Obama administration and officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. In the U.S.‚ the Trump administration decided to pull out of that international agreement‚ crafted to put off Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons. While the threat of the authoritarian axis of China‚ Russia‚ and Iran grows‚ the U.S. and other Western nations are distracted on their domestic fronts by the ongoing culture war‚ the British conservative leader added.  “At home‚ the West is engaged in a damaging culture war where one group is pitted against the other‚ smashing tolerance and responsibility in the pursuit of absolute rights‚” Smith said. “This is tearing Western societies apart‚ much to the delight of the axis. Often fomented by them as their‚ quote‚ useful idiots scream and shout at Western governments‚ the axis sees the benefits from a divided West.”  Watch the entire Heritage program on the “authoritarian axis”: Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com‚ and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.  The post Axis of 3 Nations Threatens the Free World‚ UK Lawmaker Warns  appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis‘ office has rebutted the Southern Poverty Law Center’s insinuation that he revived the Florida State Guard as an analog to far-right militias like the Oath Keepers. In the Nov. 16 article “The Dangers of DeSantis’ Militia‚” the SPLC quoted a Georgetown Law policy counsel‚ Jacob Glick‚ who called the Florida State Guard a “state-backed carbon copy of how a lot of these illegal‚ private militia groups operate.” Glick claimed that anti-government extremists “fantasize about being recruited by far-right authoritarian politicians to do their dirty work” and expressed concern that the guard “establishes a structure whereby such groups as the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys can terrorize their perceived enemies with the air of state-sanctioned legality.” “The SPLC’s claims are absurd and part of a continued mischaracterization by left-wing organizations and media of the Florida State Guard’s purpose‚” Julia Friedland‚ deputy press secretary to DeSantis‚ a Republican‚ told The Daily Signal in a written statement Wednesday. “Twenty-three states and territories have active state-level defense forces like the Florida State Guard‚ including red and blue states‚” she added. “The list includes California‚ Georgia‚ New York‚ Maryland‚ Oregon‚ Virginia‚ and Texas. Many of these state defense forces have a defined mission outlined in law‚ much like Florida.” Friedland cited Florida law stipulating that the guard aims “to protect and defend the people of Florida from all threats to public safety and to augment all existing state and local agencies.” The law caps the state guard at 1‚500 members and stipulates that it answers only to the governor‚ who enjoys the sole authority to activate it. DeSantis reestablished the guard in June 2022‚ to supplement the Florida National Guard‚ which he claimed is understaffed. “The U.S. military has been kicking out great service members over the Biden administration’s unacceptable COVID vaccine mandate‚ and they are even targeting members of the National Guard‚” DeSantis said at the time. “The bureaucrats in D.C. who control our National Guard have also refused to increase the number of guardsmen despite our increasing population‚ leaving Florida with the second worst National Guardsman-to-resident ratio. By reestablishing the Florida State Guard under the leadership of Lieutenant Colonel [Chris] Graham‚ we have a great opportunity to expand our capability to help people in times of need or disaster.” Friedland noted that the Florida National Guard has had 12‚000 members since 1958‚ when the Sunshine State had fewer than 5 million people. At that time‚ the civilian-to-guardsman ratio was 375:1. In 2023‚ as Florida’s population has surged to around 22 million‚ the ratio has ballooned to 1‚750:1. “In a natural disaster-prone state such as Florida with potentially active hurricane seasons on the horizon‚ there is a clear and present need for a more significant civilian emergency response force that can augment manpower and help Floridians in need‚” Friedland said. President Joe Biden‘s White House did not respond by publication time to a request for comment on DeSantis’ claim that the Florida National Guard is understaffed. Friedland noted that the Florida State Guard helped deliver meals‚ operate a point of distribution for much-needed supplies‚ and distribute donated goods to suffering Floridians during Hurricane Idalia. Guardsmen also helped assess the damage of the storm and clear debris in the areas hardest hit. The SPLC suggested that DeSantis would use the Florida State Guard to enforce his conservative agenda‚ which the liberal organization framed in harsh and hyperbolic terms. “Since taking office‚ DeSantis has claimed to lead this battle by trampling on the civil rights of women‚ students‚ educators‚ immigrants‚ and LGBTQ+ people‚” Maya Henson Carey‚ a research analyst at the SPLC‚ wrote. “He has signed several bills restricting voting rights‚ sometimes expressly overriding the desire of Florida voters‚ and used police officers to arrest past felons who weren’t aware that their right to vote had been revoked.” This framing echoes the SPLC’s leftist agenda. As I wrote in my book‚ “Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center‚” the SPLC has leveraged its track record of suing Ku Klux Klan groups into bankruptcy to develop a “hate map” that it uses to brand mainstream conservative and Christian organizations as hateful‚ plotting them on the map alongside Klan chapters. It targets conservative groups that oppose its agenda on immigration‚ LGBTQ issues‚ and parental rights in education. Former employees have said the “hate” accusations are a “highly profitable scam‚” and the SPLC has an endowment of over $740 million‚ with bank accounts in the Cayman Islands. The SPLC used this framing to suggest that DeSantis’ use of law enforcement to enforce the law represents a draconian attack on rights. Carey paired DeSantis’ decision to use state police to send illegal immigrants to New York with his “restrictive legislation targeting health care‚ education‚ and paths to citizenship for immigrants.” DeSantis signed a law requiring Florida hospitals to ask immigrants about their legal status‚ and he proposed a law eliminating out-of-state tuition fee waivers for illegal immigrants. The governor framed these moves as a response to the border crisis. Carey also claimed that DeSantis has “set forth proposals for using deadly force at the border‚ ending birthright citizenship‚ deputizing state and local law enforcement to help manage immigration‚ requiring asylum seekers to wait in Mexico‚ and deploying the military to assist at the U.S. Southern border.” She framed these moves as “anti-immigrant” without differentiating between legal and illegal immigration. “With the FSG [Florida State Guard] solely under the governor’s control‚ it is possible that DeSantis could deploy the guard in similar ways—which is a concern of experts interviewed by Hatewatch‚” Carey added‚ referencing the name of the SPLC program that produces the “hate map.” She cited Jason Van Tatenhove‚ a former high-ranking official in the Oath Keepers‚ which the FBI describes as a “large but loosely organized collection of militia who believe that the federal government has been coopted by a shadowy conspiracy that is trying to strip American citizens of their rights.” Van Tatenhove claimed that the Florida State Guard “seems to be playing the same public relations game his old militia group did.” Carey also quoted a leftist organization called Task Force Butler‚ which claims that the guard performs “Oath Keepers training.” She did not present any evidence to demonstrate this claim. Neither the SPLC nor Task Force Butler responded to requests for evidence for this claim by publication time. Carey also insinuated that the Florida State Guard “has been a bit of a revolving door.” She did not mention the reasons for the leadership changes‚ namely that retired Marine Chris Graham‚ the first director of the guard‚ committed suicide and that Navy Reserve Captain Luis Soler stepped down for personal reasons after graduating the first class of soldiers since 1947. Last month‚ DeSantis appointed 35-year Marine veteran Col. Mark Thieme to lead the guard. “Unlike the SPLC‚ which exists to push a leftist political agenda‚ the Florida State Guard consists of volunteers who wish to serve the people of their state‚” Friedland told The Daily Signal. Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com‚ and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.  The post ‘ABSURD’: DeSantis Sets Record Straight on SPLC Insinuation That Florida State Guard Is a Far-Right Militia appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Will ill-advised precedent or fundamental constitutional principles prevail when the right to a jury trial is at stake? After two hours of oral argument Wednesday morning in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy‚ that was the important issue confronting the Supreme Court. That‚ and whether the modern desire to empower the administrative state overcomes yet another constitutional check on the growth of an invasive central government. That’s because‚ as Alexis de Tocqueville aptly said‚ “The institution of the jury … places the real direction of society in the hands of the governed … and not in that of the government.” The case arises from the SEC’s efforts to prosecute hedge fund manager George Jarkesy. The SEC alleges that he overestimated the value of his assets and made false claims to investors.  Tort of Fraud Under Common Law The wrongs Jarkesy allegedly committed are strikingly similar to the centuries-old tort of fraud under common law. Had the commission or anyone else sued Jarkesy for his misrepresentations in court‚ the Seventh Amendment would have guaranteed Jarkesy the right to have a jury decide his case. Yet‚ the SEC chose not to go to court. Instead‚ it pursued its enforcement action under federal law through an in-house proceeding‚ in which an administrative law judge appointed by the commission would decide all questions‚ including whether Jarkesy was guilty of securities fraud. To no one’s surprise‚ the commission enjoys a decidedly better win rate when one of its own is deciding the dispute.   Jarkesy challenged the commission’s decisions in court‚ and the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in his favor on three grounds: First‚ the agency proceeding violated Jarkesy’s Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial; second‚ Congress had impermissibly delegated lawmaking authority to the commission; and third‚ the SEC’s administrative law judges were unconstitutionally protected from removal by the president. The government appealed all three rulings to the Supreme Court‚ but it was the jury question that dominated nearly the entire oral argument.  ‘Public Right’ Deputy Solicitor General Brian Fletcher of the U.S. Department of Justice‚ representing the commission‚ maintained that the Seventh Amendment imposes no restriction on the executive branch’s ability to enforce federal law through administrative tribunals so long as the executive is enforcing a “public right‚” one created by Congress and integrated within a federal regulatory scheme. Here‚ Fletcher argued‚ federal law doesn’t protect the right of an individual to recover for losses caused by fraud‚ but rather‚ the public’s right to securities markets free from deception. If the distinction sounds too fine‚ Fletcher at least had solid support in the Supreme Court’s past decisions; specifically‚ the 1977 decision in Atlas Roofing v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission. There‚ the justices blessed both Congress’ creation of statutory rights closely related to the common law tort of negligence and the decision to have these new federal rights adjudicated in juryless administrative courts. Yet the availability of that precedent did little to assuage the justices’ concerns. Chief Justice John Roberts posed hypotheticals searching for some limit on the government’s ability to create public rights and thereby avoid the Seventh Amendment’s jury right. What About Car Crashes‚ Medical Malpractice? Would the government’s interest in the interstate highway system allow it to implement legislation requiring all cases arising from vehicle accidents to be adjudicated in an administrative court? Would the government’s interest in regulating health care permit Congress to send all medical malpractice cases to a juryless tribunal? Fletcher conceded that under Atlas Roofing‚ those scenarios were constitutionally permissible if Congress decided that the traditional tort claims covering accidents and medical injuries did not adequately protect the public. Justice Neil Gorsuch took the theme further. In his hypothetical‚ the government had revived the long-reviled Sedition Act‚ a 1798 statute that criminalized criticism of the government and was enacted by the Federalist-controlled Congress to target members of the opposing Democratic-Republican Party. The hypothetical Congress had assigned all defamation claims under the new Sedition Act to an administrative judge‚ who would decide them without a jury. Gorsuch asked Fletcher whether the lack of a jury for persons accused of defaming the government raised a constitutional problem. Answering by Evasion   Palpably uncomfortable with the question‚ Fletcher sought to evade it by insisting that the First Amendment would prevent the hypothetical. But an audibly frustrated Gorsuch would not permit that evasion: “Forget about the First Amendment … too easy. We’re talking about the Seventh Amendment and the right to a jury trial‚ and that—that is an important and ancient right‚ too.”  Lacking further avenues for retreat‚ Fletcher fell back on Atlas Roofing and insisted that the Sedition Act scenario raised no Seventh Amendment problems because the jury right applies only in courts‚ not in administrative tribunals. In answering one question‚ Fletcher raised another‚ however. Justice Samuel Alito asked: Doesn’t that seem like a pretty patent evasion of the Seventh Amendment to say this protection‚ which was regarded at the time of the adoption of the Bill of Rights as sufficiently important to merit inclusion in the Constitution‚ can be nullified simply by changing the label that is attached to a tribunal? Fletcher resisted Alito’s concern‚ noting that Article III of the Constitution as well as the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment set some (indeterminate) limit on Congress’ ability to consign claims to juryless forums. But Alito commented that whatever protections Article III and the Due Process Clause provide‚ the Constitution’s ratifiers found them inadequate because they insisted on adding the Seventh Amendment’s jury requirement.  Arguments Unmade Are Forfeited The questions Fletcher fielded from the bench indicated a broad skepticism about the correctness of Atlas Roofing‚ but Jarkesy had not asked the court to overrule that case. Arguments not made in the lower courts are typically forfeited. Constrained by that omission‚ Michael McColloch‚ counsel for Jarkesy‚ had to argue that Jarkesy could win even under Atlas Roofing.  McColloch maintained that Atlas Roofing permitted juryless decisions of new federal rights‚ whereas in this case‚ Congress simply codified a right closely analogous to common law fraud. He argued further that the court had undermined Atlas Roofing in subsequent decisions‚ leaving Congress less leeway to avoid jury trials by creating public rights.  Two possible answers arose from McColloch’s colloquy with the court. The first is that securities law allows the federal government to pursue conduct that would not meet the definition of fraud‚ but the specific conduct for which it pursued Jarkesy was quintessential fraud.  Therefore‚ the commission could pursue non-fraudulent misrepresentations internally‚ but it must bring traditional fraud claims in courts‚ where jury rights attach. The second possibility was posited by Alito‚ who mused that the elements of the federal cause of action may be a logical subset of the common law claim.  If so‚ the logical connection between the federal right and the common law would be close enough to require the protection of the Seventh Amendment. Questions Not Always Indicative of Votes The court is still months away from a decision in this case‚ and the tenor of questions are not always reliable indicators of a justice’s vote. Roberts and Alito‚ as well as Gorsuch and Justice Clarence Thomas‚ sounded consistently skeptical of the government’s arguments. Jarkesy’s failure to ask for the overruling of Atlas Roofing‚ however‚ may leave them without an avenue for channeling those frustrations into doctrinal change. Meanwhile‚ questions from Justices Sonia Sotomayor‚ Elena Kagan‚ and Ketanji Brown Jackson indicated an inclination to hold that Atlas Roofing resolves Jarkesy’s case in the commission’s favor. Several justices‚ including Kagan‚ were concerned by the apparent ease with which the federal government can avoid the right to a jury trial. Still‚ it’s uncertain that Jarkesy has distinguished his case from Atlas Roofing‚ and it is unlikely the court will risk overruling that case when it was not asked to do so. But counterbalancing the regard for precedent is the regard for the judiciary’s traditional role as defender of the guarantees integral to American liberty. The founding generation placed the utmost importance on the guarantee of jury rights even in civil cases. That the federal government can so easily render that right nugatory would surely have dismayed them. Perhaps the current court‚ sharing that dismay‚ will reconsider its approach in Atlas Roofing and ensure that the Seventh Amendment cannot be so easily evaded.  Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com‚ and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The post Supreme Court Must Decide Whether Right to Jury Trial Disappears in Federal Agencies appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Rep. Dan Goldman: Hunter Biden Laptop Is Not Genuine

Hamas Claims Responsibility for Shooting at Jerusalem Bus Stop‚ 3 Dead

Lab was reportedly on congressman's radar months before it was 'discovered' by a local code enforcement officer O’Keefe Media Group founder James O’Keefe recently confronted a congressional staffer for a California Democrat congressman and revealed he’d been caught on hidden camera making shocking remarks about a controversial Chinese biolab in The Golden State. The lab‚ owned by a shady Chinese company‚ housed 900 genetically engineered mice designed to catch and carry COVID-19 as well as at least 20 potentially infectious agents‚ including‚ HIV‚ hepatitis and herpes. The illegal laboratory was only discovered after a local code enforcement officer saw a garden hose sticking through a hole in the wall of the building. Democrat California Congressman Jim Costa’s top congressional staffer‚ Daniel Sepulveda‚ told an undercover reporter he knew about the lab “for a few months before anybody else did.” Sepulveda also claimed there is a recording of a guy who worked at the lab admitting he was doing work for the Chinese government.VasoBeet is now 40% OFF! This beetroot-based supplement was created to provide you with all the benefits of this nutrient-dense vegetable in one easy dose! Regarding Congressman Costa‚ the staffer said the Democrat politician thinks the lab was a national security threat. However‚ Sepulveda said the ordeal was over since the guy who was caught running the lab has been jailed. This of course doesn’t account for the potential of other labs existing around the country. How did the staffer know about the national security threat “months before” it was discovered and what did his boss know? Perhaps this OMG report will lead to further investigation.