Monthly Archives: February 2021

Jeff Bezos speaking at Amazon SPheres Grand Opening in Seattle

Jeff Bezos’s Pledge to Addressing Climate Change: The Bezos Earth Fund

Founder of Amazon, Jeff Bezos, announced on Feb. 2 that he’d be stepping down as CEO of Amazon later this year to become its executive chair. Bezos explains his decision to focus his energy on his projects in a letter to his employees, including his $10 billion pledge to fight climate change through the Bezos Earth Fund. 

The Bezos Earth Fund, first launched last February, will be used to combat the effects of climate change by providing grants to fund scientists, activists, and other nongovernmental organizations in an attempt to “amplify known ways and to explore new ways of fighting the devastating impact of climate change.”

In November, Bezos announced in an Instagram post the first 16 recipients of the Earth Fund, committing to “protect Earth’s future.”

The initial recipients will receive $791 million from Bezos’s donation of $10 billion, accounting for only 7% of the allotted fund. 

Four of the most established environmental groups in the country — the Nature Conservancy, the Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the World Wildlife Fund, will be receiving $100 million from Bezos’s fund. 

Most grantees are being awarded money for specific projects, while others have been allowed to re-grant money to other nonprofits. “[World Resource Institute (WRI)] is pleased to announce that it has been selected to receive a grant from the Bezos Earth Fund for two major initiatives in support of global climate action,” says the company in a news release. 

The WRI announced on Mar. 9, its President and CEO, Dr. Andrew Steer, will be stepping down to become President and CEO of the Bezos Earth Fund. In a series of tweets, Steer offered up a few more details about the Earth fund, including that Bezos’s “goal is to spend it down between now and 2030.” This means that the Earth Fund will award about $1 billion a year for the next decade.

The WRI ($100 million), a global sustainability-research organization, will develop a satellite-based system that monitors carbon emissions and captures changes in the world’s wildlife. 

The Bezos Earth Fund has also awarded $151 million, so far, to groups that are dedicated to environmental justice. Those include; The Climate and Clean Energy Equity Fund ($43 million), Dream Corps Green For All ($10 million), The Hive Fund for Climate and Gender Justice ($43 million), NDN Collective ($12 million), and The Solutions Project ($43 million). 

The rest of the grantees are ClimateWorks Foundation ($50 million), Eden Reforestation Projects ($5 million), Energy Foundation ($30 million), Rocky Mountain Institute ($10 million), Salk Institute for Biological Studies ($30 million), and Union of Concerned Scientists ($15 million). 

Bezos’s Earth Fund comes after ‘ongoing concerns’ about Amazon’s environmental policies. Amazon has long faced pressures from within the company and others to address concerns surrounding its contribution to global carbon emission. 

In Sep. 2019, the company signed a climate pledge amid employee activism, asking for more comprehensive environmental policies. Amazon committed to being carbon neutral by 2030, 10 years earlier than the deadline set by the Paris Climate Accord. Amazon plans to operate with 100% renewable energy by 2025. The company will also invest $2 billion in technologies that will reduce carbon emissions. 

Amazon Employees for Climate Justice, a group of workers concerned with Amazon’s business within the oil and gas industry, praised Bezos Earth Fund and Amazon’s climate pledge- but said there’s still more to do in addressing the climate crisis. 

“We applaud Jeff Bezos’ philanthropy, but one hand cannot give what the other is taking away,” the activist group said in a statement on Feb. 17. “The people of Earth need to know: When is Amazon going to stop helping oil & gas companies ravage Earth with still more oil and gas wells?”

Image of a look inside the impeachment trial. Many people sitting at desks reviewing documents.

Impeachment Trial Review

Former President Donald Trump has been acquitted after being impeached for incitement of insurrection, alleging that he incited his followers to storm the U.S. Capitol building.

In February, the acquittal of the former President by the Senate was voted through. This was just days after the House Democrats voted to impeach Donald Trump an unprecedented second time.

Although seven Republican congressmen and women voted with the democrats, a different story was told in the Senate where Trump would not be acquitted. Senate Democrats and impeachment managers from Congress debated Trump’s behavior in the time leading up to the siege on the Capitol.

“Donald Trump surrendered his role as commander in chief and became the inciter in chief of a dangerous insurrection, … He named the date, he named the time, he brought them here, and now he must pay the price … He told them to ‘fight like hell … and they brought us hell that day.’” Lead Impeachment manager Dem. of Maryland James Raskin stated.

In Congress, the argument was focused on three main points: The Big Lie, which stated Donald Trump as the proprietor promoting false, baseless, and debunked claims questioning the integrity of the 2020 election. Stop the Steal, which was said to be Trump’s campaign delegitimizing President Biden’s term. Trump did this by suing numerous states, supporting the rejection and denial of the election results. Fight like Hell was the last point noting Trump’s words argued by democrats to directly incite rioters to the Capitol hours before the insurrection on Jan 6.

“The base was completely prepared to believe the kind of outlandish things that Trump said,” said Rick Hasen, a professor and election law expert at the University of California, Irvine, told NBC News.

Democrats pleaded the danger that fell before the Capitol, stating someone must be held responsible for the damage and harm condoned. “Perimeters were broken, and the Capitol was breached,” Congressman and impeachment manager Eric Swalwell said.

In the Senate trial, the impeachment managers used unseen audio, video, and security footage displaying visceral and explicit evidence of rioters ravaging the Capitol. In the footage shown, Senators and Capitol employees are seen running for their lives. This all was occurring while Capitol Police constantly fought to keep them safe.

“It looked like a medieval battle scene, some of the most brutal combat I have ever encountered. At one point, I got tazed. People were yelling at me. ‘Y’all, we got one! We got one!’” A 20-year veteran of Capitol Police officer Micheal Pinome

Pinome is seen on footage during the trial as just one of three officers dragged down the stairs of the Capitol. Rioters then stole his badge, his radio, ammunition magazine and tazed him, triggering a heart attack during the attack. 

Congressman Swalwell and Raskin ran through the timeline of the siege on the Capitol, footage of the timeline, and the course of the rioters from the initial break into the final Police securing of the Capitol. But their choice of argument and strategy of not using witnesses fell short. 

The Senate voted to acquit Trump, 57 Guilty to 43, Not Guilty. Raskin claimed he did not attempt to bring in witnesses because “The point is that no number of witnesses demonstrating Donald Trump continued to incite the insurrectionists even after the invasion of the Capitol would convince them, they wouldn’t be convinced,” James Raskins told the public.

Upon the arrival of the Senate, vote not to convict former President Donald Trump. Chuck Schumer, Majority leader of Democrats, was left with distaste as he said, “My Fellow Americans never forget that day, Jan. 6th. There is nothing more un-American, nothing more antithetical, nothing more insulting to the Americans that gave their lives … look at what Republicans have chosen to forgive … over half the Senate Republican conference has voted to condone … the most despicable act any President has ever committed and the Majority of Republicans cannot summon courage or morality to condemn it. This trial was not about choosing country over party. It was about choosing this country over Donald J. Trump, and they chose Trump.”

Senate minority leader of Republicans, Mitch McConnell, a staple in the GOP through the Senate floor for a surprise as his ending statement was pushing back against his party.

 “There is no question; none, that Donald Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the event of the day, the people who stormed this building thought they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their President. Rioters were assaulting Capitol in his name. The criminals were carrying his banner, hanging his flag, and screaming loyalty to him. It was obvious,” 

This may sound contradictory to his vote of acquittal, but “He didn’t get away with anything, yet,” McConnell said, noting that “we have a criminal justice system in this country. We have civil litigation. And former presidents are not immune from being [held] accountable by either one.”

The storming of the Capitol came after a speech on January 6 by former president Trump where he claimed that he won the election and his followers need to “fight like hell” to “stop the steal” of the election. Trump’s legal team argued that he used the term “fight” only a few times and every time the word was used figuratively. Not in a way to sway followers to physically fight.

The legal team pointed out that Donald Trump did not go with the mob to the capital or tell them to storm the building in his speech on January 6th.

There was even a question of the validity of the argument that Trump’s speech was inciting violence as he said during his speech, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building peacefully to patriotically make your voices heard.”

The defense team also played a video montage of democrats using the word fight in speeches of their own to show that it’s a common phrase in politics that is not meant to be taken literally.

Trump’s team also argued that impeaching the former president would violate his first amendment rights. The legal team claims that the speech was Donald Trump exercising his freedom of speech and cannot be impeached on this basis.

Another point made by the defense team was that the legislature had no jurisdiction to impeach a former official as Mitch McConnell in an email to his colleagues stated that “While a close call, I am persuaded that impeachments are a tool primarily of removal and we, therefore, lack jurisdiction.”

The validity of having an impeachment for a president no longer in office was the main topic of the first day of trial. Maintaining a verdict against impeachment is key in Trump’s plans to run for office again. With still more legal battles to come, the acquittal currently leaves the door open for a 2024 election campaign. Regardless of both sides arguing for or against, the trial continued the following days.

Trump’s team also argued that the trial should be thrown out as they were not afforded due process. The legal team argued that investigations should be held and depositions should be taken. 

The legal term Bill of attainder was brought into question on this trial. Bill of attainder is something that prohibits enacting a law that legislatively determines guilt and inflicts punishment upon an identifiable individual without provision of the protections of a judicial trial. 

Trump’s legal team is arguing that impeachment allows the legislature to attain a guilty verdict against Trump without a judicial trial as he is a private citizen who has a right to be tried for criminal prosecution before a judge. 

“Congress has no jurisdiction to try people who are not currently in office.” states political commentator and legal analyst Alan Dershowitz.

The conclusion of this trial may just be the beginning of a much larger trial, as we wait to see what will happen involving a criminal trial against Donald Trump.