yy777 casino real money

yy777 casino real money The states that saw the most active attacks against election certification two years ago certified the results of this year’s races without controversy this week, prompting the Arizona secretary of state to proclaim that “election denialism” is a thing of the past. Others said they weren’t so sure. Certification proceeded normally this year in part because won the presidential race, quieting his supporters after he had making that he could . The statewide certification votes Tuesday in Nevada and New Mexico follow a vote Monday to certify the results in Arizona. In all three states, the was tumultuous during the when Democrats won most statewide offices. Those controversies followed attempts by Trump and his allies to in Michigan, Georgia and in 2020, disrupting what until then had been a routine administrative process. This year, some who have been the most vocal in questioning the integrity of elections have instead been celebrating Trump’s victory. “The results are being accepted in the manner that they are, in part, because those who have been eroding trust or casting doubt on the integrity of U.S. elections have a result they feel good about,” said David Levine, a former local election official in Idaho who now advises on election administration issues. “Hopefully we can get back to a place where Americans can feel confident in the results even if it’s one they disagree with.” On Tuesday, Nevada and New Mexico certified their statewide results with little discussion. During Monday’s certification in Arizona, reflected on the lack of controversy this year. “I think the age of election denialism, for all intents and purposes, is dead,” he said. Sitting next to Fontes, state Attorney General Kris Mayes, a fellow Democrat, said she was more skeptical. Her Republican opponent in 2022 spent two years . “Do I think election denialism is dead? No, I don’t,” she said. “We’ll see over the next couple of election cycles what happens, but I don’t think we’re there yet.” Public confidence in elections has dropped since Trump challenged his loss in 2020 and made false claims of widespread fraud, . Some Republicans began targeting the certification process, when local and state boards certify the results after local election officials provide them with the final tally of votes. A firestorm erupted in Georgia over the summer when the state election board, with a new pro-Trump majority, the certification process with changes later blocked by the courts. While certification battles did not surface , a vocal segment within the Republican Party remains deeply skeptical of election processes, particularly of the availability of mail ballots and the use of ballot scanners to tally votes. During a forum Monday on the social platform X led by the group Cause of America, the group’s director expressed doubt about voting equipment. Shawn Smith, who also is a retired Air Force colonel, argued the certification process suppresses legitimate concerns and goes against “the sovereignty of the people.” Although not as widespread as four years ago, this sentiment did surface sporadically at the local level this month. In Washoe County, Nevada, which includes Reno and voted narrowly for Vice President Kamala Harris, the vote to certify the results was 3-1 with one abstention. Commissioner Jeanne Herman has consistently voted against certification and did not make a public comment about her vote this year. Commissioner Mike Clark, a staunch Trump supporter who had also previously voted against certification, said he would abstain and left before the vote. “I am not an election denier and clearly the person I wanted to win, won this state,” Clark said before leaving the meeting. “However, that does not mean that all the protocols were followed and that we can truly certify the election.” Such skepticism, whether in Nevada or elsewhere, leaves the door open to certification disputes during future elections. The questioning of election results isn’t limited to Republicans. Even though Harris quickly conceded after , online posts among her supporters continue to raise concerns about her loss. One Reddit community that has amassed 23,000 members features a steady drumbeat of Democrats scrutinizing a result they can’t believe is real. Some posting in the group have issued calls to contact Harris and her running mate to ask them to demand a recount or otherwise object to the outcome. Among the battlegrounds, Michigan was among those where and his allies for Democrat Joe Biden amid false claims of fraud and manipulation. Two Republican members of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers who initially opposed certification eventually relented. The state board of canvassers eventually voted to certify, even after one Republican member abstained. This year, the state board voted on Nov. 22 in favor of certifying and praised the state’s election workers. In Georgia, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger certified his state’s results on Nov. 22. Four years ago, the Republican state official was facing from Trump and his allies to investigate their unsubstantiated claims of fraud. Also certifying results Tuesday, and doing so unanimously, was the state Board of Elections in North Carolina. It was the only presidential battleground state won by Trump in 2020 — and the only one where he and his allies didn’t make claims of fraud. ___ Cassidy reported from Atlanta. Associated Press writers Susan Montoya Bryan in Albuquerque, New Mexico, Ken Ritter in Las Vegas, Scott Sonner in Reno, Nevada, and Ali Swenson in New York contributed to this report.Judge weighs whether to order Fani Willis to comply with lawmakers’ subpoenas over Trump case

TV sport commentator says there's a problem with Indian cricket star Jasprit Bumrah that everyone is too 'politically correct' to say out loudJonas Foundation names Arts-in-Education grant recipientsThe states that saw the most active attacks against two years ago certified the results of this year’s races without controversy this week, prompting the Arizona secretary of state to proclaim that “election denialism” is a thing of the past. Others said they weren’t so sure. Certification proceeded normally this year in part because won the presidential race, quieting his supporters after he had making that he could . The statewide certification votes Tuesday in Nevada and New Mexico follow a vote Monday to certify the results in Arizona. In all three states, the was tumultuous during the when Democrats won most statewide offices. Those controversies followed attempts by Trump and his allies to in Michigan, Georgia and in 2020, disrupting what until then had been a routine administrative process. This year, some who have been the most vocal in questioning the integrity of elections have instead been celebrating Trump’s victory. “The results are being accepted in the manner that they are, in part, because those who have been eroding trust or casting doubt on the integrity of U.S. elections have a result they feel good about,” said David Levine, a former local election official in Idaho who now advises on election administration issues. “Hopefully we can get back to a place where Americans can feel confident in the results even if it’s one they disagree with.” On Tuesday, Nevada and New Mexico certified their statewide results with little discussion. During Monday’s certification in Arizona, reflected on the lack of controversy this year. “I think the age of election denialism, for all intents and purposes, is dead,” he said. Sitting next to Fontes, state Attorney General Kris Mayes, a fellow Democrat, said she was more skeptical. Her Republican opponent in 2022 spent two years . “Do I think election denialism is dead? No, I don’t,” she said. “We’ll see over the next couple of election cycles what happens, but I don’t think we’re there yet.” Public confidence in elections has dropped since Trump challenged his loss in 2020 and made false claims of widespread fraud, . Some Republicans began targeting the certification process, when local and state boards certify the results after local election officials provide them with the final tally of votes. A firestorm erupted in Georgia over the summer when the state election board, with a new pro-Trump majority, the certification process with changes later blocked by the courts. While certification battles did not surface , a vocal segment within the Republican Party remains deeply skeptical of election processes, particularly of the availability of mail ballots and the use of ballot scanners to tally votes. During a forum Monday on the social platform X led by the group Cause of America, the group’s director expressed doubt about voting equipment. Shawn Smith, who also is a retired Air Force colonel, argued the certification process suppresses legitimate concerns and goes against “the sovereignty of the people.” Although not as widespread as four years ago, this sentiment did surface sporadically at the local level this month. In Washoe County, Nevada, which includes Reno and voted narrowly for Vice President Kamala Harris, the vote to certify the results was 3-1 with one abstention. Commissioner Jeanne Herman has consistently voted against certification and did not make a public comment about her vote this year. Commissioner Mike Clark, a staunch Trump supporter who had also previously voted against certification, said he would abstain and left before the vote. “I am not an election denier and clearly the person I wanted to win, won this state,” Clark said before leaving the meeting. “However, that does not mean that all the protocols were followed and that we can truly certify the election.” Such skepticism, whether in Nevada or elsewhere, leaves the door open to certification disputes during future elections. The questioning of election results isn’t limited to Republicans. Even though Harris quickly conceded after , online posts among her supporters continue to raise concerns about her loss. One Reddit community that has amassed 23,000 members features a steady drumbeat of Democrats scrutinizing a result they can’t believe is real. Some posting in the group have issued calls to contact Harris and her running mate to ask them to demand a recount or otherwise object to the outcome. Among the battlegrounds, Michigan was among those where and his allies for Democrat Joe Biden amid false claims of fraud and manipulation. Two Republican members of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers who initially opposed certification eventually relented. The state board of canvassers eventually voted to certify, even after one Republican member abstained. This year, the state board voted on Nov. 22 in favor of certifying and praised the state’s election workers. In Georgia, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger certified his state’s results on Nov. 22. Four years ago, the Republican state official was facing from Trump and his allies to investigate their unsubstantiated claims of fraud. Also certifying results Tuesday, and doing so unanimously, was the state Board of Elections in North Carolina. It was the only presidential battleground state won by Trump in 2020 — and the only one where he and his allies didn’t make claims of fraud. ___ Cassidy reported from Atlanta. Associated Press writers Susan Montoya Bryan in Albuquerque, New Mexico, Ken Ritter in Las Vegas, Scott Sonner in Reno, Nevada, and Ali Swenson in New York contributed to this report. Christina A. Cassidy, The Associated Press

Luka Doncic returns to Dallas Mavericks' lineup after missing two games with left heel contusion

PKL Season 11: Chauhan’s stellar show leads U Mumba to easy win over Puneri PaltanRich Lister charged in park asbestos contamination

(The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.) Erran Carmel , American University Kogod School of Business (THE CONVERSATION) An estimated 18 million Americans are invested in cryptocurrency , according to the Federal Reserve. And the United States just elected a pro-crypto president . Cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin have become a trendy digital asset . Supporters claim that crypto subverts capitalism because it bypasses traditional bankers. Crypto can offer quick riches along with an air of high-tech sophistication. Early adopters reaped enormous rewards, many becoming millionaires and billionaires. Currently, there are about 100,000 crypto millionaires . Cryptocurrency wealth, furthermore, has built Fairshake , the largest crypto lobbying group in the U.S. During the recent election, it claims it helped elect 253 pro-crypto candidates . But is cryptocurrency a good ethical investment? As a business professor who studies technology and its consequences, I’ve identified three ethical harms associated with cryptocurrency that might give investors pause. The three harms The first harm is excessive energy use , most notably by Bitcoin, the first decentralized cryptocurrency. Bitcoins are created, or “mined,” by tens of thousands of computers in massive data centers, contributing significantly to carbon emissions and environmental degradation . Bitcoin mining, which represents the lion’s share of crypto energy consumption, uses as much as 0.9% of global demand for electricity – similar to the annual energy needs of Australia. Second, unregulated and anonymous crypto is the payment system of choice for criminals behind fraud, tax evasion , human trafficking and ransomware – the latter costing victims an estimated $1 billion in extorted cryptocurrency payments. Until about a decade ago, these bad actors generally moved and laundered money through cash and shell companies. But around 2015, many transitioned to cryptocurrency, a much less troublesome form of handling dirty money anonymously . A bank cannot hold or transfer money anonymously. By law, a bank is passively complicit in money laundering if it isn’t enforcing know-your-customer measures to restrict bad actors, such as money launderers. In the case of a crypto coin, however, legal and ethical accountability cannot be transferred to a bank – there is no bank. So, who is complicit ? Anyone in the crypto ecosystem may be viewed as ethically complicit in enabling illicit activities. I believe these first two harms are the most ethically troublesome. The first one harms the Earth and the second undermines global systems of trust – the interplay of institutions that underpin economic activity and social order. Cryptocurrency’s third problem is its predatory culture. A predatory system, especially without regulatory oversight, takes advantage of small investors. And some cryptos have enriched their founders while taking advantage of investors’ lack of knowledge about the virtual currency. Some cryptocurrencies, especially the smaller coins and initial coin offerings, have characteristics of Ponzi schemes . The now defunct Bitconnect, for example, promised large profits to investors who exchanged their Bitcoins for Bitconnect tokens. New investor money paid out “profits” to the first layer of investors with money from later investors. Ultimately, Satish Kumbhani, the Bitconnect founder, was indicted by a federal grand jury , and as of 2024 his whereabouts are unknown . Pernicious myth Besides cryptocurrency’s ethical harms, a pernicious myth surrounds the digital coin. It is the myth of inclusion, that cryptocurrency has the power to benefit society’s disadvantaged, especially the unbanked . The global poor who don’t have bank accounts, and who could use cryptocurrency for international money transfers to family back home, do not necessarily benefit from crypto’s advantages. That’s because of the need to pay fees when converting and transferring , say, dollars to crypto and then from crypto to the local currency of the person receiving the money transfer. In reality, the distribution of crypto assets is highly concentrated among the wealthy. A 2021 study found that just 0.01% of Bitcoin holders control 27% of its value. Democratizing finance is often framed as a movement to break the dominance of traditional financial institutions – private banks and government central banks. However, this narrative has not played out. Instead, a new elite has emerged: cryptocurrency’s creators , early backers and maintainers , who tweak the crypto’s software code and influence its future direction. This group holds disproportionate control, including over the crypto coin’s governance. All of this replicates the concentration of power that crypto was meant to dismantle. A bit more ethical? To be fair, the crypto community hasn’t ignored the criticism, including calls for more environmental awareness. In early 2021, members of the community founded the Crypto Climate Accord . The group enlisted some 250 crypto firms to reduce environmental harm. The following year, Ethereum, with its Ether coin, took the most significant step. It reduced its energy consumption by over 99% by migrating to a coin mining mechanism called “ proof-of-stake ,” which doesn’t require miners to solve complex, energy-guzzling puzzles to validate transactions. This was a brave move. However, Bitcoin, the largest cryptocurrency, hasn’t followed Ethereum’s lead. Bitcoin stands out because its energy consumption surpasses any other crypto coin. To address cryptocurrency’s other harms, some regulatory bodies began controlling the crypto market in 2023. The European Union, United Kingdom and United States began attempting to curb illegal activities and protect investors. In January 2024, U.S. regulators permitted exchange-traded funds , which are popular investment funds, to invest in crypto. This move was meant to help small investors trade in a safer marketplace. But normalizing crypto trading can create perverse ethical repercussions. For example, the most successful 2023 “ethical” fund, Nikko Ark Positive Change Innovation Fund , prospered with a 68% return because it made a bet on crypto. Its manager rationalized this investment by repeating the myth that cryptocurrency allows “ provision of financial services to the underbanked .” Where does all this leave the ethical investor? Investors, I believe, have two clear ethical choices on cryptocurrency: They can divest from Bitcoin or, at the very least, invest in other cryptocurrencies that minimize harms, especially harms that jeopardize the environment. But even so-called ethical investments come with hidden ethical issues. Many ethical investors invest in so-called ESG funds that stress social or environmental impact. Some of these ESG funds may avoid shares in petroleum companies while investing directly or indirectly in crypto. This doesn’t seem ethically consistent. While cryptocurrency offers exciting opportunities and the potential for high returns, its environmental impact, association with illegal activities and predatory nature all present significant ethical challenges. This article was updated to correct the description of Fairshake. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article here: https://theconversation.com/crypto-is-soaring-after-trumps-election-but-is-it-a-good-ethical-investment-212747 .Jurors end 1st day of deliberations without a verdict in the YSL gang and racketeering trial

Amicorp to Challenge 1MDB's $1 Billion Claims Amid Scandal FalloutChirco: Lions’ offense is gift that keeps on giving

The states that saw the most active attacks against election certification two years ago certified the results of this year’s races without controversy this week, prompting the Arizona secretary of state to proclaim that “election denialism” is a thing of the past. Read this article for free: Already have an account? To continue reading, please subscribe: * The states that saw the most active attacks against election certification two years ago certified the results of this year’s races without controversy this week, prompting the Arizona secretary of state to proclaim that “election denialism” is a thing of the past. Read unlimited articles for free today: Already have an account? The states that saw the most active attacks against election certification two years ago certified the results of this year’s races without controversy this week, prompting the Arizona secretary of state to proclaim that “election denialism” is a thing of the past. Others said they weren’t so sure. Certification proceeded normally this year in part because Donald Trump won the presidential race, quieting his supporters after he had spent the campaign making unsubstantiated claims that he could lose only through widespread cheating. The statewide certification votes Tuesday in Nevada and New Mexico follow a vote Monday to certify the results in Arizona. In all three states, the certification process was tumultuous during the 2022 midterms when Democrats won most statewide offices. Those controversies followed attempts by Trump and his allies to halt or challenge certification in Michigan, Georgia and other battleground states in 2020, disrupting what until then had been a routine administrative process. This year, some who have been the most vocal in questioning the integrity of elections have instead been celebrating Trump’s victory. “The results are being accepted in the manner that they are, in part, because those who have been eroding trust or casting doubt on the integrity of U.S. elections have a result they feel good about,” said David Levine, a former local election official in Idaho who now advises on election administration issues. “Hopefully we can get back to a place where Americans can feel confident in the results even if it’s one they disagree with.” On Tuesday, Nevada and New Mexico certified their statewide results with little discussion. During Monday’s certification in Arizona, Secretary of State Adrian Fontes reflected on the lack of controversy this year. “I think the age of election denialism, for all intents and purposes, is dead,” he said. Sitting next to Fontes, state Attorney General Kris Mayes, a fellow Democrat, said she was more skeptical. Her Republican opponent in 2022 spent two years challenging his loss. “Do I think election denialism is dead? No, I don’t,” she said. “We’ll see over the next couple of election cycles what happens, but I don’t think we’re there yet.” Public confidence in elections has dropped since Trump challenged his loss in 2020 and made false claims of widespread fraud, particularly among Republicans. Some Republicans began targeting the certification process, when local and state boards certify the results after local election officials provide them with the final tally of votes. A firestorm erupted in Georgia over the summer when the state election board, with a new pro-Trump majority, attempted to politicize the certification process with changes later blocked by the courts. While certification battles did not surface after the Nov. 5 election, a vocal segment within the Republican Party remains deeply skeptical of election processes, particularly of the availability of mail ballots and the use of ballot scanners to tally votes. During a forum Monday on the social platform X led by the group Cause of America, the group’s director expressed doubt about voting equipment. Shawn Smith, who also is a retired Air Force colonel, argued the certification process suppresses legitimate concerns and goes against “the sovereignty of the people.” Although not as widespread as four years ago, this sentiment did surface sporadically at the local level this month. In Washoe County, Nevada, which includes Reno and voted narrowly for Vice President Kamala Harris, the vote to certify the results was 3-1 with one abstention. Commissioner Jeanne Herman has consistently voted against certification and did not make a public comment about her vote this year. Commissioner Mike Clark, a staunch Trump supporter who had also previously voted against certification, said he would abstain and left before the vote. “I am not an election denier and clearly the person I wanted to win, won this state,” Clark said before leaving the meeting. “However, that does not mean that all the protocols were followed and that we can truly certify the election.” Such skepticism, whether in Nevada or elsewhere, leaves the door open to certification disputes during future elections. The questioning of election results isn’t limited to Republicans. Even though Harris quickly conceded after losing all seven presidential battleground states, online posts among her supporters continue to raise concerns about her loss. One Reddit community that has amassed 23,000 members features a steady drumbeat of Democrats scrutinizing a result they can’t believe is real. Some posting in the group have issued calls to contact Harris and her running mate to ask them to demand a recount or otherwise object to the outcome. Among the battlegrounds, Michigan was among those where Trump and his allies pressed to halt certification of the 2020 election for Democrat Joe Biden amid false claims of fraud and manipulation. Two Republican members of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers who initially opposed certification eventually relented. The state board of canvassers eventually voted to certify, even after one Republican member abstained. Winnipeg Jets Game Days On Winnipeg Jets game days, hockey writers Mike McIntyre and Ken Wiebe send news, notes and quotes from the morning skate, as well as injury updates and lineup decisions. Arrives a few hours prior to puck drop. This year, the state board voted unanimously on Nov. 22 in favor of certifying and praised the state’s election workers. In Georgia, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger certified his state’s results on Nov. 22. Four years ago, the Republican state official was facing immense pressure from Trump and his allies to investigate their unsubstantiated claims of fraud. Also certifying results Tuesday, and doing so unanimously, was the state Board of Elections in North Carolina. It was the only presidential battleground state won by Trump in 2020 — and the only one where he and his allies didn’t make claims of fraud. ___ Cassidy reported from Atlanta. Associated Press writers Susan Montoya Bryan in Albuquerque, New Mexico, Ken Ritter in Las Vegas, Scott Sonner in Reno, Nevada, and Ali Swenson in New York contributed to this report. Advertisement AdvertisementGame changersSouthwest states certify election results after the process led to controversy in previous years