63.9 F
San Francisco
Saturday, June 27, 2026
Home Blog Page 897

Michael Steele Slams Speaker Johnson Over Big Spending Bill

Reginald Edward
-
0
Michael Steele Slams Speaker Johnson Over Big Spending Bill

 

Key Takeaways:

  • Michael Steele criticizes Speaker Mike Johnson for defending a large spending bill.
  • Steele calls Johnson’s defense a “silly mind game” and questions the reliability of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
  • He accuses Republicans of planning to cut services for low-income families and the poor.
  • Steele believes the Senate will eventually give Donald Trump most of what he wants.
  • He also mocks Elon Musk’s influence and Trump’s strategy to avoid blame.

Steele Calls Out Johnson for Defending the Spending Bill

Michael Steele, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, recently criticized House Speaker Mike Johnson for his defense of a massive spending bill. Steele’s comments came after Johnson responded to criticism from Elon Musk about the bill’s size and cost.

On Thursday, Johnson told Fox News that he sent Musk a long text explaining that the bill can be both “big and beautiful.” He also dismissed Musk’s concerns by saying the budget projections come from the CBO, which he called “historically totally unreliable.”

Steele fired back during a Friday appearance on MSNBC. He mocked Johnson’s arguments, saying, “What is the speaker talking about? The CBO is totally historically unreliable. Why do you have them? Defund the operation. You want to save some money, get rid of an institution that doesn’t provide you with good information. What are you talking about?”

Steele Accuses GOP of Playing “Silly Mind Games”

Steele went on to describe the situation as a “silly mind game.” He believes the Senate will eventually give in to Donald Trump’s demands, passing a version of the bill that cuts services for low-income families and those in need of healthcare.

“The cuts are going to be made, and then they’re going to have to go out to the country and explain to our poor and those who are in dire need of healthcare,” Steele said. He also slammed Republicans for planning to cut programs like food assistance (SNAP) and healthcare services.

Steele argued that Republicans will struggle to justify these cuts to voters. “You can talk about a big, beautiful bill all day, but at the end of the day, the weight of that bill is going to land on the back of the very constituents that you clearly don’t care about,” he said.

Steele Criticizes Musk and Trump’s Roles in the Drama

Steele also commented on the roles of Elon Musk and Donald Trump in the situation. He compared Musk to someone “with a chainsaw, doing his thing,” while Trump sits back and lets others take the blame.

Steele described the situation as a political drama, saying, “That’s the drama in front of us as I see it.” He criticized the House for being “wholly feckless” in stopping the bill’s passage.

What’s Next?

As the spending bill moves to the Senate, the debate over its size and impact is likely to grow. Critics like Steele argue that the bill’s cuts will hurt vulnerable populations, while supporters like Johnson insist it’s necessary. Meanwhile, figures like Musk and Trump continue to influence the conversation, adding more drama to an already tense situation.

Steele’s comments highlight the challenges Republicans may face in selling this bill to voters, especially if cuts to essential services become a reality.

To watch Steele’s full commentary, click the link below or visit the YouTube channel.

How Politics Stalled Congressional Ethics Watchdog Groups

Jonathan Antonio Browne
-
0
How Politics Stalled Congressional Ethics Watchdog Groups

Watchdog in the Weeds: How Politics Stalled Congressional Oversight

  • House Speaker Mike Johnson delayed staffing a key ethics watchdog, leaving 4,000 complaints unresolved.
  • The Office of Congressional Conduct was paralyzed for months, its effectiveness seriously weakened.
  • Republicans have shown little interest in investigating the Trump administration.
  • Johnson now faces criticism for hampering oversight while targeting Democratic lawmakers.

The U.S. Congress is supposed to provide oversight, ensuring laws are followed and actions are ethical. But a recent report reveals that House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, has been slowing down a critical watchdog group meant to keep lawmakers in check. This delay has left thousands of complaints unaddressed, raising concerns about accountability in government.

A Key Watchdog Crippled

The Office of Congressional Conduct (OCC) is an independent group that investigates ethical issues involving lawmakers. Since 2008, it has played a vital role in holding members of Congress accountable. But under Johnson’s leadership, the OCC has been struggling to function.

For three months, Johnson did not appoint the required board members to oversee the OCC. Without this board, the office cannot start investigations, hire staff, or take action on complaints. This is the longest delay in appointing board members since the office was created.

The result? Over 4,000 complaints about lawmakers went unanswered and uninvestigated. These complaints could involve serious ethical violations, but due to Johnson’s delay, they were left in limbo. Even now, the board is not fully staffed, with two vacancies remaining. This means the current members must agree unanimously on any action, making it harder for the office to act effectively.

Why This Matters

This slowdown comes at a critical time. The Trump administration has been accused of attacking independent watchdogs across the federal government, undermining oversight. Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress have shown little interest in investigating the administration or using their oversight powers. Instead, they’ve handed over much of their authority to the president, who has been accused of ignoring checks and balances.

By crippling the OCC, critics argue that Johnson has weakened the only independent group that monitors congressional behavior. This raises questions about whether lawmakers are being held accountable for their actions.

Johnson’s Actions Spark Controversy

While the OCC remains in a weakened state, Johnson has been taking other controversial steps. For example, he threatened Democratic lawmakers who joined protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in New Jersey. Johnson suggested that these lawmakers could be expelled from Congress for their actions.

This has led to accusations that Johnson is more focused on targeting his political opponents than on ensuring ethical behavior within Congress. His delays in staffing the OCC have also sparked concerns about his commitment to transparency and accountability.

What’s Next?

The OCC is now partially operational, but its effectiveness remains limited. With two board vacancies, the remaining members must reach unanimous decisions, which could slow down investigations. This means that even if the office starts addressing the backlog of complaints, it may not be able to act quickly or decisively.

The situation highlights a broader issue in Washington: the erosion of independent oversight. When watchdog groups like the OCC are weakened, it becomes easier for elected officials to avoid scrutiny. This can lead to a lack of accountability and undermine public trust in government.

As the OCC struggles to regain its footing, Johnson’s actions will likely face more scrutiny. Critics are calling for greater transparency and accountability, arguing that Congress must do better to uphold ethical standards.

In the end, this story is about the balance of power in Washington and the importance of independent oversight. When that oversight is weakened, it raises questions about who is holding lawmakers accountable—and whether anyone is watching the watchers.

Elon Musk Cheers On at Trump’s Farewell: A Historic Moment in the White House

Brent Edward
-
0
Elon Musk Cheers On at Trump’s Farewell: A Historic Moment in the White House

Key Takeaways:

  • Elon Musk and Donald Trump shared a memorable moment at Trump’s farewell conference.
  • A video clip showcasing Trump’s achievements was shown, highlighting economic success.
  • Musk energized the event by encouraging applause from the press.

A Star-Studded Farewell: Trump and Musk Make Waves

In an unexpected twist, tech titan Elon Musk took on an unusual role as Donald Trump’s hype man during the former President’s farewell event at the White House. This surprising moment captured attention as Musk, known for his innovative ventures, joined Trump in celebrating his term’s milestones.

Setting the Scene: A Video Tribute

Trump’s farewell began with a video clip featuring CNBC’s Rick Santelli, who praised Trump’s economic policies. Santelli highlighted the significant reduction in trade deficits, a rare achievement that sparked interest and curiosity. This positive overview set a triumphant tone for Trump’s exit.

Musk Steps In: Encouraging Applause

As the clip concluded, a light applause broke out. Noticing the subdued reaction, Musk, standing alongside Trump, playfully urged the press for more enthusiasm. His lively gesture, complete with a laugh and a thumbs-up, amplified the energy in the room, turning a modest clap into a hearty round of applause.

The Aftermath: Reactions and Implications

This event marks a notable collaboration between two influential figures, blending politics and technology. Musk’s involvement might raise eyebrows, given his broad influence and Trump’s controversial legacy. The moment, while lighthearted, underscores the complex dynamics between these leaders and their public personas.

A Farewell to Remember

As Trump’s term ended, this farewell event with Musk became a memorable highlight. It showcased a blend of camaraderie and shared success, leaving a lasting impression on all present.

Conclusion: A New Chapter Unfolds

Though Trump’s farewell concluded a chapter, the interaction with Musk hints at future possibilities. As both figures move forward, their influence remains significant, shaping discourses in technology and politics.

This engaging event provided a unique glimpse into their relationship, leaving the audience with much to ponder about their future endeavors.

Trump Targets Harvard with Fresh Punitive Measures

Jonathan Antonio Browne
-
0
Trump Targets Harvard with Fresh Punitive Measures

Key Takeaways:

  • Trump convenes officials to plan new punishments for Harvard.
  • Allies fear backlash, but Trump continues his offensive.
  • Possible actions involve multiple federal departments.
  • Retaliation follows Harvard’s refusal to comply.
  • Previous measures include funding cuts and legal battles.

Introduction: President Trump is intensifying his campaign against Harvard University, gathering officials to devise new punitive strategies. Despite concerns about public sympathy for Harvard, Trump presses on, targeting the institution for its stance on diversity and protester policies.

What’s Happening? President Trump recently met with officials from over a dozen agencies to discuss escalating actions against Harvard. These talks may result in measures from the Departments of State, Treasury, Health and Human Services, and Justice. Potential actions include probing Harvard’s admissions practices or cutting funds to its medical affiliates. These steps could be implemented as early as next month.

Why Is This Happening? Tensions began when Trump demanded universities crack down on campus protests and adjust diversity hiring. While some schools, like Columbia, reached agreements, Harvard’s resistance led to escalated reprisals. Trump has already revoked research grants and sought to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status, also limiting international student enrollment.

What’s Next? Future actions may expand DOJ investigations into Harvard’s admissions or reduce funding for its medical institutions. These moves aim to penalize Harvard for not yielding to Trump’s demands, signaling a prolonged conflict.

Public Reaction and Legal Battles Trump’s allies worry his approach may rally support for Harvard. The university is fighting back, suing over the international student restrictions, which a judge has temporarily blocked. These legal challenges highlight Harvard’s determination to oppose Trump’s measures.

Conclusion: Trump’s conflict with Harvard exemplifies his assertive approach to dissent. As legal battles ensue, the situation remains tense, with broader implications for academic freedom and federal oversight. The outcome may shape how universities respond to political pressures, balancing autonomy with compliance.

Trump’s Steel Tariff Hike Sparks Debate

Reginald Edward
-
0
Trump’s Steel Tariff Hike Sparks Debate

Key Takeaways:

  • Trump Doubles Steel Tariffs: The U.S. increases steel tariffs from 25% to 50% to protect the industry.
  • Backlash from Allies: Former Trump advisor Stephen Moore criticizes the move, citing job losses in other industries.
  • Economic Impact Concerns: Higher tariffs may raise costs for manufacturers and car companies.

Trump Raises Steel Tariffs, But Not Everyone Agrees

President Donald Trump recently announced a big increase in tariffs on imported steel. Tariffs are taxes on imported goods, and Trump’s plan boosts the rate from 25% to 50%. The goal, he says, is to protect and strengthen the steel industry in the U.S.

During a speech in West Mifflin, Pennsylvania, Trump explained, “We’re going to bring tariffs on steel into the United States from 25% to 50%. This will further secure the steel industry in America. Nobody’s going to get around that.”

However, not everyone is happy with this decision—especially some of Trump’s former supporters. Stephen Moore, a well-known economist and ex-Trump advisor, criticized the move.

Why Critics Are Worried

Moore, who now works at the Heritage Foundation, expressed his concerns on CNN shortly after Trump’s announcement. He said, “I’m a little queasy about these steel tariffs.”

Moore explained that while the tariffs did save steel jobs during Trump’s first term, they also caused problems for other industries. “Manufacturers, car companies, and others who use steel faced higher costs,” he said.

As a result, Moore believes the tariffs backfired. “We lost jobs because of the steel tariffs,” he said. “I don’t think it’s going to work.”

What’s at Stake?

The debate over tariffs is about balancing the economy. On one side, higher tariffs can protect U.S. steelworkers and encourage domestic production. On the other side, they can make life harder for industries that rely on steel, like car manufacturers and construction companies.

When steel becomes more expensive, these industries may cut jobs or raise prices for consumers. That’s why critics like Moore argue tariffs aren’t the solution.

What’s Next?

For now, the focus is on how this policy will affect the economy. Supporters of the tariffs believe they’ll safeguard American jobs. Critics warn they’ll lead to higher costs and fewer jobs elsewhere.

As the debate continues, one thing is clear: Trump’s decision is a bold move that’s dividing opinions— even among his former allies.

(This article is a general summary of the event and does not express the views or opinions of Digital Chew.)

Elon Musk’s Alleged Drug Use During Trump Campaign Sparks Concerns

Jonathan Antonio Browne
-
0
Elon Musk’s Alleged Drug Use During Trump Campaign Sparks Concerns

Key Takeaways:

  • Elon Musk reportedly used ketamine almost daily while supporting Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign.
  • He allegedly mixed ketamine with ecstasy, mushrooms, and other substances.
  • Sources close to Musk say his drug use caused health issues, including bladder problems.
  • Musk carried a pill box with up to 20 pills, including one resembling Adderall.
  • The FDA warns ketamine can lead to addiction and other serious side effects.
  • Both Musk and the White House declined to comment on the report.

Elon Musk’s Daily Drug Use Raises Red Flags

Recent reporting has shed light on Elon Musk’s alleged drug use while he was campaigning for former President Donald Trump in 2024. According to a bombshell report, Musk used ketamine nearly every day and mixed it with other substances like ecstasy and psychedelic mushrooms. This news has sparked concern among people close to him and the public.

Ketamine is a powerful drug that can be used legally to treat depression and pain, but only under strict medical supervision. Musk has admitted to using ketamine in the past, saying he takes it every few weeks to manage depression. However, sources claim his use became much more frequent and worrying over time.

Sources Close to Musk Heighten Concerns

People close to Musk have come forward, describing his drug use as “near daily.” This went beyond just using ketamine occasionally—it became a regular habit that started to affect his health. For instance, the frequent use of ketamine allegedly caused bladder issues for Musk.

Musk was also reported to carry a pill box with up to 20 pills, including one that looked like Adderall. This has raised questions about his overall well-being and how his drug use might have impacted his behavior and decision-making.

The Risks of Ketamine Use

While ketamine can be helpful when used properly, the FDA has warned about its dangers when misused. Some of the serious side effects include addiction, bladder problems, and other health issues. The report highlights that Musk’s alleged drug use went beyond medical supervision, which could have put him at risk.

No Comment from Musk or the White House

When asked about the report, both Elon Musk and the White House chose not to respond. This silence has only added to the speculation and concern surrounding the story.

As more details come out, this story continues to raise questions about the behavior of public figures and the impact of drug use on their lives and decisions. Stay tuned for more updates as this situation unfolds.

Elon Musk’s White House Exit: What Really Happened?

Reginald Edward
-
0
Elon Musk’s White House Exit: What Really Happened?

Elon Musk’s White House Exit: What Happened?

  • Elon Musk had a physical fight with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, leading to his quick departure from the Trump administration.
  • The altercation started over disagreements about budget cuts and funding promises.
  • Musk shoved Bessent during the confrontation, according to former Trump adviser Steve Bannon.
  • The White House confirmed the incident but downplayed it as a normal part of the policy process.
  • Musk served in the White House for five months before leaving.

Elon Musk’s time in the Trump administration ended abruptly after a physical fight with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. The clash reportedly started over budget cuts and funding promises. Here’s what we know about the situation.

How It All Began

The trouble began when Bessent accused Musk of failing to deliver on a promise. Bessent reportedly said, “You promised us a trillion dollars in cuts, and now you’re at $100 billion, and nobody can find anything. What are you doing?” According to former Trump adviser Steve Bannon, this confrontation escalated quickly. He said, “Elon got physical. It wasn’t just an argument—it was a physical fight. He shoved Bessent.”

This incident was the final straw, leading to Musk’s quick exit from the administration. Musk served for only five months before leaving.

What Happened Next

After the altercation, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed the incident. She described it as a normal part of the policy-making process. “President Trump has put together a team of passionate people,” she said. “Disagreements happen, but ultimately, everyone serves at the pleasure of President Trump.”

President Trump himself thanked Musk for his service during an Oval Office address. Bessent also posted a message on X, thanking Musk for his work and vowing to keep the bureaucracy from slowing things down.

What’s Next?

The incident has sparked questions about how the White House handles disagreements and the role of strong personalities in policy-making. While the exact details of the altercation are still unclear, one thing is certain: Musk’s time in the White House was short but memorable.

This story shows how even the most powerful people in politics can have intense disagreements. It also highlights the challenges of working in high-pressure environments like the White House. For now, all eyes are on what’s next for Musk and how this incident will affect his future projects.

Stay tuned for more updates as this story unfolds!

Streaming Piracy Soars: Amazon Fire Sticks Allegedly Linked To Billions in Streaming Piracy

Jonathan Antonio Browne
-
0
Streaming Piracy Soars: Amazon Fire Sticks Allegedly Linked To Billions in Streaming Piracy

Key Takeaways:

  • Amazon Fire Sticks are linked to billions in streaming piracy.
  • Big Tech companies like Google and Facebook are involved.
  • Live sports events are major targets for pirates.
  • Piracy growth is a global issue, especially in Europe.

Streaming Piracy: A Growing Concern

Streaming is more popular than ever, with millions tuning in daily. However, a shadow looms over this booming industry—piracy, costing billions. Amazon Fire Sticks are at the center, enabling illegal streams of movies, shows, and live sports. But they’re not alone; tech giants like Google and Facebook are also implicated. A report reveals the issue is vast, with Europe as a focal point, but the problem is global.

Fire Sticks: The Piracy Pipeline

Amazon Fire Sticks are user-friendly, making them popular. However, they’re also a favorite for pirates. These devices can be modified to access paid content illegally, endangering the streaming industry. With a few clicks, users can watch premium content for free, leading to huge financial losses for media companies.

Live Events: A Pirate’s Goldmine

The real issue comes with live events. Sports, especially, are a target. Imagine a Champions League final with tens of thousands watching illegally. This trend is alarming, as more events are streamed live, making them prime targets for pirates. The ease of access is shocking, with multiple illegal streams available within moments.

Big Tech’s Role in the Problem

Tech giants like Microsoft, Google, and Facebook are inadvertently aiding piracy. Their platforms host illegal streams, and while they claim to combat piracy, the problem persists. These companies have the resources to act but seem unwilling. The report suggests they could do more to stop piracy but choose not to.

The Bigger Picture

Piracy’s impact isn’t just financial. It threatens jobs in the entertainment industry, from camera crews to actors. Imagine a world where your favorite shows disappear because producers can’t afford to make them. Piracy could lead to higher subscription fees or less content available.

Conclusion: Time for Change

Streaming piracy is a serious issue, and Big Tech must act. Protecting content isn’t just about money; it’s about preserving the entertainment industry. If not addressed, the consequences could be severe. The time for change is now.

Elon Musk Steps Down as Head of Government Efficiency Role

Jonathan Antonio Browne
-
0
Elon Musk Steps Down as Head of Government Efficiency Role

Elon Musk Steps Down as Head of Government Efficiency Role

Key Takeaways:

  • Elon Musk leaves his role as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge).
  • Musk promised $2 trillion in savings but failed to deliver.
  • His efforts have hurt his reputation and his companies’.
  • Former President Donald Trump praised Musk despite his departure.
  • Musk’s influence in Washington may be fading after a short but busy period.

Elon Musk, one of the most famous and wealthy people in the world, has stopped leading a special group called the Department of Government Efficiency, or Doge for short. For about four months, Musk worked with the U.S. government to try to make things run better and save money. However, his time in this role didn’t go as planned.

What Happened?

Musk promised to save $2 trillion for the government through his work with Doge. That’s a lot of money—enough to fund big projects like schools, roads, and even space exploration. But in the end, Musk and his team couldn’t even find a small part of that money.

This failure has hurt Musk’s reputation. People started to question whether he could deliver on his big promises. Even though he’s known for running companies like Tesla and SpaceX, his time in Washington didn’t make him look good.

What Did Trump Say?

Former President Donald Trump, who worked with Musk during his time in office, had kind words for him. Trump said he was sad to see Musk go but added that Musk “will always be with us, helping all the way.”

Why Does This Matter?

Elon Musk is a big name, and his actions often make headlines. His attempt to work with the government was seen as a way to show that businessmen could make a difference in politics. But it didn’t work out.

Musk’s time in Washington was short but busy. He tried to change how the government operates, but his ideas didn’t lead to the results he promised. Now, people are wondering if business leaders like Musk can really make a difference in politics.

What’s Next for Musk?

Even though Musk stepped down from his government role, he’s still running his companies. Tesla is working on new electric cars, and SpaceX is trying to send people to Mars. Musk’s focus might now shift back to these projects.

However, his time in Washington has left a mark. Many people feel that he overpromised and underdelivered. This could hurt his reputation and make it harder for him to work with the government in the future.

Musk’s legacy

Elon Musk is known for thinking big and taking risks. But his time in Washington shows that even the most successful people can face challenges when they step into politics.

Musk’s story is a reminder that running a country is very different from running a business. While he could innovate and make decisions quickly at Tesla or SpaceX, the government moves slower, and it’s harder to make changes.

What Can We Learn?

Musk’s experience teaches us that big promises need to be backed by action. It’s easy to say you’ll save $2 trillion, but actually doing it is much harder.

It also shows that working with the government is complicated. Even someone as powerful as Elon Musk can struggle to make a difference in Washington.

Conclusion

Elon Musk’s time as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency didn’t go as planned. He left without delivering on his promise of $2 trillion in savings, and his reputation took a hit.

But Musk is still a big name, and his companies are continuing to work on exciting projects. While his time in Washington didn’t go well, he’ll likely keep trying to make a difference—just maybe not in politics.

As for the government, Musk’s departure is a reminder that fixing problems in Washington isn’t easy, even for the most powerful businessmen.

Google vs. DOJ: Big Tech Showdown Heats Up

Jonathan Antonio Browne
-
0
Google vs. DOJ: Big Tech Showdown Heats Up

Key Takeaways:

  • The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is suing Google for anticompetitive practices.
  • Google might be forced to sell its Chrome browser.
  • The case could change the internet forever.
  • AI is playing a big role in the fight.
  • Smaller search engines might benefit if Google loses.

What’s the Story?

Google, the search engine giant, is in trouble with the U.S. government. The Department of Justice (DOJ) says Google did not play fair to stay on top of the search game. This legal battle has been going on for a long time, and now both sides have made their final arguments. The DOJ already won the first part of the case, and now they’re pushing for big changes.

What’s at Stake?

The DOJ wants to limit how Google does business and make it sell Chrome, its popular web browser. Selling Chrome would be a huge deal. It would weaken Google’s power and give smaller companies a chance to grow. But this case is complicated, and the internet has changed a lot since it started. It’s hard to imagine a world without Google as the top dog.

The Fight Over Search Deals and AI

During the closing arguments, Google and the DOJ debated how search deals and artificial intelligence (AI) could reshape the internet. Google argues that AI, like chatbots, might change how people search for stuff. The DOJ counters that Google’s practices are still unfair, even with new tech.

What Does This Mean for Google?

If Google loses, it could face big penalties. The government might force it to sell Chrome and change how it operates. This would be a major blow to Google’s grip on the internet. But Google is fighting back, saying it didn’t break any rules and that competitors are just trying to win in court.

What About Other Search Engines?

Smaller search engines like Bing or DuckDuckGo might win if Google is weakened. They could attract more users and advertisers if Google’s power is reduced. But it’s not clear if they can fill the gap Google would leave.

The Rise of AI in This Case

AI is a wild card here. Google says AI could make its search dominance less important. New tools like Bard or Bing Chat might change how people find information. The DOJ says AI doesn’t excuse Google’s past actions. They believe Google still acted unfairly to stay on top.

What’s Next?

The judge in the case, Amit Mehta, will decide the outcome. If the DOJ wins, Google’s business could be drastically changed. If Google wins, it keeps its dominance. Either way, the internet could look very different in the future.

Why Does This Matter?

This case is about more than just Google. It’s about how the internet works and who controls it. If Google loses, it might lead to more competition and innovation. If it wins, things might stay the same. Either way, this is a big moment for tech and the web.

Stay Tuned

This story is still unfolding, and the final decision could take time. Digital Chew will keep you updated as more news comes out. For now, one thing is clear: the internet’s future is on the line.

1...896897898...2,476Page 897 of 2,476

Explore

Trending

Follow us

© All Rights Reserved, Newspaper Theme.