I agree with many of the points made by Aksel Gerber in his article A Major Topic of Concern for Americans: "The Wall"A Major Topic of Concern for Americans: "The Wall". He states several pros to the wall between The United States of America and Mexico such as keeping the country "safer" and protecting the jobs of the Americans. However, I feel that he missed the most important factor to the wall. There are countless Mexican families, waiting to move to the United States legally and the illegal immigrants are making the legal immigration process much more difficult. Additionally, the lack of screening of illegal immigrants makes it virtually impossible to determine who should be allowed into our country and who should not be based on their past criminal activities.  I see no problem with immigrants, in fact, our country is made up of immigrants. But I feel it’s unfair to the men and women trying to enter the country legally, and I think that the main purpose of the wall is to allow for a legal immigration process. He also discusses the cons of increasing the national debt by up to 15 billion and harming our relationship with Mexico. These are some serious cons to be considered. Overall I think this is a very informative article about why and why not to build the wall.

Donald Trump recently stated that he would "totally be willing" to shut down the government if he does not get the required funding for the wall. There was a recent bill that would allocate 5 billion dollars in government funds to build the wall to fight immigration. He also stated that the 5 billion is only for a physical barrier and more security would be needed. However, Trump has suggested that he is open to suggestions on what to do if the funding bill does not go through. There is a large gap to fill though as the Democrats are willing to put up 1.6 billion dollars but as you may know, President Trump can be rather stubborn. He has stood by his demand for 5 billion consistently. The president even stated that he "was in no mood" to reach a compromise with the Democrats on the deal. While he is being extremely stubborn, I almost have to respect the tenacity to do what he said he would during his campaign. This is something that is far too uncommon with today's politicians. Despite this, he has continued to show interest in keeping the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program to protect young undocumented immigrants brought over as children. Both the Democrats and Republicans have had many years in recent memory where one party controlled the Presidency and both houses of Congress, yet they were unable to pass a comprehensive immigration policy. As far as all this current crisis goes, negotiations are underway and hopefully, they will be able to find a solution without a government shutdown.

I largely agree with the article posted by Nicanor Ruiz Jaimes titled “Fake News?”. However when Trump is saying that the fake news is causing violence, he means the way the media twists his already arrogant words. For example if Trump says that an issue was caused by gang violence the media might change it to say he blamed it on black gang violence. While this is not much different from what he said it implies a more racist connotation and makes him look more racist. This causes violence because it adds more tension to an already tense racial situation in America. Now I am in no way saying everything he is saying is true but I am saying that a lot of the commotion is amplified by the media. They are the cause of a lot of the racial violence in America.

Freedom of speech was one of the basic ideas that the United States was founded upon. Prior to the foundation of the United States, people could be imprisoned or even executed for words they said or wrote. What would happen if we didn't have free speech? One main issue if free speech was lost is: the incumbent house would have too much power over the country. Imagine if Trump had the ability to enforce punishment on those who spoke out against him. He could choose what the media reports and doesn't. If the government had the power to choose what was in the media they would ultimately have the power to decide the next election. This would defeat the entire purpose of a democracy.

This does not mean that our words do not have consequences. Public figures often deal with a great amount of backlash when commenting on controversial topics. They can often lose their job over comments that they made. However while freedom of speech protects people from legal persecution for their comments, it cannot protect them from the natural consequences for their actions.

The ability to openly criticize the government without fear of persecution is one of the things that makes this country great. Free speech gives people much more power over the government than just voting. Anyone can start a political movement for a cause that they believe in. Thanks to free speech, at the end of the day, the power remains in the hands of the people, just how our founding fathers intended it.

On October 17, 2018, Ann Coulter published an article on her blog titled FAKE NEWS AUTOPSY. Ann Coulter is a conservative social and political commentator so her views are biased towards the right wing. Her audience is conservative voters and readers of her blog. She is arguing that CNN is purposely misinterpreting President Trump's statements. According to her article, they are changing his words to make him sound even more racist and insensitive. She proves her point by stating that Trump’s original quote said: “It’s a very scary time for young men in America when you can be guilty of something that you may not be guilty of.”  Then CNN and many other news outlets quoted him as saying “it's a very scary time for young men in America". He was referring to the recent increase in rape accusations. However, when CNN’s Ann Cabrera reported it, it was changed to "White men have a lot to fear right now.” This puts a much more negative and racially divisive connotation to his statement as white men are the generally the most privileged people in America. This just fuels the fire of racial turbulence in America. Another point of evidence for her argument is that if it were a mistake, it would have been corrected almost immediately. This makes it seem as though they are purposely trying to damage his already unfavorable reputation. This is significant because a large portion of the American people use CNN for their daily news. President Trump has been talking about "fake news" coming from CNN since the beginning of his campaign. I personally agree with Ann Coulter on this situation, I believe that it’s wrong to twist someone's words to slander them. While I do not necessarily support Trump, I believe it is unethical and unwise for the media to be dishonest.. Especially about Donald Trump because he provides the media with many genuinely foolish quotes on his own.

On October 4, 2018, USA today posted an editorial article by Catherine Cherkasky titled Christine Blasey Ford is no poster child for women's rights: A female attorney's perspective. Catherine Cherkasky is an extremely credible source due to the fact that she is both an attorney and a female. Cherkasky's opinion has a slight bias because she was a criminal defense attorney. Her intended audience is everyone who is unsure about the legitimacy of Christine Blasey Ford's testimony. The claim that she is making is about the weakness of her argument and the holes in her story. She provides evidence for her argument by calling attention to the fact that the FBI is unlikely to find any actual evidence because it supposedly happened in 1982 and there are several issues. For example, she doesn't remember the date or location. There is also no way to prove that the man there was Brett Kavanaugh. She also proposes the argument that perhaps Ford's memory is distorted, an event such as a sexual assault can put a lot of strain on a person mind, leading them to truly believe something that is false. I personally agree with Cherkasky. I have no way of knowing whether or not what she is saying is true but I am a big supporter of the tenet that one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. An accusation is not the same as being guilty and I feel like a lot of people don't know the difference. I also think that she has hurt her credibility a lot by waiting 30 years to come forward with this information, right when he was nomination for the supreme court was moving to a vote.

On September 17, 2018, The Washington Post published an article by Colby Itkowitz titled Senate passes sweeping opioids package. Colby Itkowitz is a reporter for the Washington Post, she covers subjects relating to health. This article is describing the passage of 70 Senate bills created in an effort to combat the opioid epidemic occurring in the United States that caused near 50,000 deaths last year.

The vote was 99-1 with only Sen. Mike Lee in opposition. The package of 70 bills cost 8.4 billion dollars and is largely aimed at preventing the drug fentanyl from being transported around the country through the US Postal Service. They are also allowing doctors to prescribe more medications designed to help addicts with their withdrawal symptoms. This article is extremely informative and I recommend it to anyone interested in the current opioid epidemic in our country today.