By John Q. Hosedrinker 
This article details the detention of several journalists in Cameroon, who were allegedly subjected to interrogation and had their equipment confiscated by police. Three of the detained journalists were working for the Associated Press, while another was a freelancer who has worked for the BBC. The individuals, none of whom are Cameroonian citizens, reportedly held U.S. court protection orders against deportation to their home countries due to fears of persecution. Despite claims of minor injury by the AP, others reported that one journalist appeared to have been beaten, and some were held in a cell for hours before their release.
Read the original article here
It appears there’s a significant development regarding a substantial sum of taxpayer money and a new initiative spearheaded by Donald Trump. The revelation is that Trump is reportedly allocating $10 billion of taxpayer funds towards a new board he has established. This endeavor is described as an organization that he himself created, where he holds the position of self-appointed chairman and possesses the sole authority to veto decisions.
This move has sparked considerable discussion, particularly in light of past Republican rhetoric concerning wasteful government spending and deficit concerns. The apparent shift in focus, from a strong stance against such expenditures to this considerable allocation of public funds, is seen by many as a stark departure from previous pronouncements. It raises questions about the consistency of political stances and the prioritization of public resources.
Furthermore, the establishment of this board and the appropriation of these funds are being met with considerable skepticism and accusations of impropriety. The sheer amount involved, $10 billion, is viewed by many as an astronomical sum, and its channeling towards an organization controlled by a single individual, with ultimate decision-making power, is being characterized as deeply concerning and potentially corrupt.
The process by which this funding is being allocated is also a point of contention. There are significant questions being raised about whether this expenditure has received proper congressional approval. The Constitution, specifically Article 1, Section 1, grants Congress the exclusive legislative power, including the authority to tax and spend. The perception that such a substantial sum can be declared for expenditure without explicit legislative action is viewed as a direct challenge to this fundamental principle, and in fact, as illegal and unconstitutional.
The intended purpose of this $10 billion allocation is also a subject of much debate and speculation. While some of the input suggests a connection to international matters, such as development or reconstruction, the focus remains on the origin of the funds and the unchecked nature of their dispersal. The idea that taxpayer money, which could potentially be used for domestic needs like healthcare, is instead being directed towards a new, privately controlled board raises significant concerns about priorities and fairness.
The motivations behind this considerable financial maneuver are being closely scrutinized. There is a prevailing sentiment that this is another instance of what is described as a “grift,” intended to enrich the Trump family and their associates. The assertion is that this is a calculated effort to secure funds for personal benefit, particularly as a potential end to his tenure approaches. The notion of “burning it all down on his way out” and accumulating personal wealth is a recurring theme in these discussions.
The sheer scale and perceived lack of transparency surrounding this $10 billion allocation have led some to describe it as a form of grand corruption. The argument is being made that this represents a significant looting of public resources, occurring while the public is preoccupied with other, often divisive, issues. This diversion of funds, from potential domestic needs like healthcare to an opaque board, is seen as a profound betrayal of public trust.
In essence, the revelation that Donald Trump is taking $10 billion in taxpayer money for a new board he controls is being met with widespread alarm and condemnation. The concerns center on the unconstitutional nature of the appropriation, the potential for corruption and self-enrichment, and the deviation from principles of fiscal responsibility and legislative oversight. The question of accountability and the future implications for the use of public funds are at the forefront of this ongoing discussion.