>Taking financial rewards? The article says she attended a fundraiser related to Jill Biden and she claims she was given permission to do so.

...permission by whom? You can't be given permission to violate the Hatch Act.

You also seem to be leaving out her being flown out to Hollywood by CAA for their party (the large talent agency), which yes is taking financial rewards. eg, a contractor doesn't have to physical hand a zoning commissioner money, he can just have a friend do some landscaping work for free or give them free stays in their hotel. That's why those rules exist.

You also seem to be ignoring her use of personal devices for official business, a huge issue for records and transparency and investigations.

I'm a little confused PPQue6, are you saying you're good with the allegations of prosecutors taking financial rewards from groups and want no investigation? Or because the investigation is still ongoing with the former President, no others should be?

How familiar with the Hatch Act are you, or why it was enacted?

>Dr Dubal predicted that in 10 years' time, Australia could be exporting both raw lithium and graphene batteries.

Another day, another company with a laboratory-scale battery that goes nowhere. Too many of these run through their initial funding and then turn to the press, and then people read a headline then act like it's a solved issue. It isn't.

The issues are immense, from energy density to cost to scalability to materials. We've poured huge amounts of money for small incremental improvements, and those were hard-won improvements.

Over the next 10 years we'll be fortunate to really get to solid-state, liquid-flow, Li-O2, or even Sodium-Ion and even then it will be relatively incremental. We don't even have much on the horizon for something game-changing, because the issues are just that daunting.

True, but there is the Kinder-Morgan pipeline, or any of the other projects including the nuclear plant? And then there's the fracking ban, which again Germany and the UK bought into after a huge push of propaganda often from Russian NGOs.

As a consequence, 2/3 of MA's energy generation is natural gas and we simply can't supply enough in the cold months via the SW pipeline, hence Russian tankers were sitting in the harbor to supply is us with LNG.

Repealing the Jones Act would be beneficial to everyone, as noted in other comments it is a poster child for protectionism at it's worst. The cost savings for goods would apply across the board.

Even though I'm paying it, it's hard to feel bad for us in MA. We voted for these policies that ended up with us paying Hawaii prices, but Hawaii doesn't have a winter. Other parts of the nation had no clue prices spiked last winter, but MA went and Germany's itself and had people having to pay $800-$1k to heat their homes. No real solutions, we literally just didn't want pipelines because it would lower prices and encourage use and affect the environment, and I'd poorer people can't afford $550/mo to heat their apartment oh well someone richer can.

We've known this is coming for months, and it was just ignored. You never go full Germany, who is getting their LNG from the same places we are (Africa and Caribbean now, Russia previously) and tearing down turbines to reopen coal mines