Apr 25

Today’s News 25th April 2024

  • Iran Vs Israel: What Happens Next Now That Shots Have Been Fired?
    Iran Vs Israel: What Happens Next Now That Shots Have Been Fired?

    Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

    In October of 2023 in my article ‘It’s A Trap! The Wave Of Repercussions As The Middle East Fights “The Last War”’ I predicted that a multi-front war was about to develop between Israel and various Muslim nations including Lebanon and Iran. I noted:

    “Israel is going to pound Gaza into gravel, there’s no doubt about that. A ground invasion will meet far more resistance than the Israelis seem to expect, but Israel controls the air and Gaza is a fixed target with limited territory. The problem for them is not the Palestinians, but the multiple war fronts that will open up if they do what I think they are about to do (attempted sanitization). Lebanon, Iran and Syria will immediately engage and Israel will not be able to fight them all…”

    So far, both Lebanon and Iran have directly engaged Israeli military forces and civilian targets. Syrian militias are also declaring they will once again start attacking US military bases in the region. In my article ‘World War III Is Now Inevitable – Here’s Why It Can’t Be Avoided’ published on April 5th I noted that:

    “I warned months ago…that the war in Gaza would expand into a multi-front conflict that would probably include Iran. I also warned that it would be to Israel’s benefit if Iran entered the war because this would eventually force the US to become directly involved. To be sure, Iran has already been engaging in proxy attacks on Israel through Lebanon, but Israel’s attack on the Iranian “embassy” or diplomatic station in Syria basically ensures that Iran will now directly commit to strikes on Israeli targets.”

    Iran did indeed commit to a large scale missile and drone based attack on Israel, a situation which has had some curious consequences. Of course, US naval forces aided Israel’s Iron Dome in shooting down the majority of drones and missiles sent by Iran. However, even though there are several videos showing that some cruise missiles hit their targets, the Israelis have been reticent to admit that any damage was done.

    I suspect it’s because the cruise missiles struck military targets instead of civilian targets and Israel doesn’t want to release any information on what was hit. Iran’s drones were likely meant to act as decoys for anti-air defenses. They are much cheaper than the missiles used by Israel and the US to shoot them down.

    Whether or not these strikes had any real affect on Israeli offensive capabilities we’ll probably never know. What we do know is that Israel’s counter-strike was much smaller than most analysts expected. Does this mean that the tit-for-tat is over and both sides are going hands-off? That would probably be the smart decisions, but no, that’s not what’s happening here.

    Israel’s limited response was likely due to a lack of clarity on how much the US government under Biden is willing to participate in the war during an election year. What we will see in the next six months is a steady escalation towards winter, followed by new bombardments with far more extensive destruction than we recently witnessed.

    In other words, spring is just the dress rehearsal for what will happen in winter.

    Here are the most probable scenarios as 2024 rolls forward…

    Air Strikes On Iran

    I have little doubt that Israel will commit to extensive aerial strikes on Iran this year or very early in 2025, and we’ll see very quickly if Russian air defense technology sold to the Iranians is effective or ineffective. Iran’s drone program may be useful in helping to even the playing field against Israeli fighter jets, but then again, the technology gap could be extensive.

    The Israeli public position will be that their strikes are focused on taking down any existing Iranian nuclear labs. There is no solid evidence that Iran has made much headway in developing nukes (they might have dirty bombs), but the notion of nukes is more than enough in terms of public relations and justification for the war.

    Iran Blocks The Strait Of Hormuz

    The Strait of Hormuz would be at the top of the list of primary targets for Iran. It is the narrowest point of access to the Persian Gulf and oversees the passage of around 25%-30% of the world’s total oil exports. Blocking it is relatively easy – All Iran has to do is sink a few tankers into the shallow waters or destroy enemy ships passing through, creating a barrier that will make transport of oil impossible.

    This would also make naval operations for Israel or the US difficult. Clearing obstructions would take time and expose forces to Iranian artillery which can be fired from up to 450 miles away. Once artillery is locked in on a narrow point or pasage, nothing is going to get through. As we’ve seen in Ukraine, a blanket of artillery fire is essentially unstoppable.

    Anti-ship missiles wouldn’t even be necessary and would probably prove less effective, unless they are hypersonic. Iran can also utilize its small fleet of diesel submarines to deploy naval mines in the strait.

    Once the Hormuz is disrupted and global oil shipments slow down the US military will join the war if they haven’t done so already.

    Israeli Attack Leads To Ground War With Iran/Lebanon

    A ground war between Iran and Israel is inevitable if the tit-for-tat continues, and much of it will be fought (at least in the beginning) in Lebanon and perhaps Syria. Iran has a mutual defense pact with both countries and Lebanon is generally a proxy for Iranian defense policy.

    Iran will have active troops or proxy forces in all of these regions, not to mention the Houthis in Yemen striking ships in the Red Sea. There are questions in terms of how Iraq will respond to this situation, but there’s not a lot of love between the current government and Israel or the US.

    The Iraq government did not initially condemn the attack by Hamas against Israel on October 7th and has voiced support for the Palestinians in Gaza. It’s unlikely that they would willingly allow the use of their territory for projecting an offensive against Iran. The use of Saudi Arabian and Kuwaiti territory is possible for invasion IF the US gets involved, and the Persian Gulf would be a primary point of attack. But, both the US and Israel lack enough regional bases needed to project large scale ground forces into Iran (keep in mind that bases in Afghanistan are now gone).

    Turkey is another staging ground for US forces but they certainly don’t like Israel, meaningTurkey is going to be off limits. Like Iraq, I think it will be difficult to convince Turkey, a vocal defender of Gaza, to support an invasion force or exploit their border for operations.

    What about Pakistan? No, not a chance. It’s important to remember that many of these nations have worked with the US in the past, but they have angry populations to deal with. Support for an attack on Iran could lead to civil unrest at home.

    The war would mostly be fought by air and by sea with US and Israel seeking to dominate the Persian Gulf. A lot of the ground fighting will be done in neighboring countries. A direct invasion of Iran would be an exhaustive affair with mountain terrain that must be reached by going through allied territories.

    Can it be done? Yes. Could the US and Israel/allies win? Yes, as long as the goal is destruction and not occupation. Would it be costly? Absolutely. Far too costly to be acceptable to the western public these days, and a war that would require extensive military recruitment or a draft which Americans in particular will not tolerate.

    Gas Prices Skyrocket

    Think gas prices are high now? Just wait until 25% of the world oil exports are locked out of the market for months at a time. We might see double the prices at the pump; perhaps even triple, and that’s not counting the inflationary conditions already ongoing in the west.

    This would be a disaster for the economy as energy prices affect EVERYTHING else. Costs on the shelf will climb right along with oil.

    Military Draft And Attacks On Liberty Activists

    Below the surface, there are many benefits to expanding the war in the Middle East for the globalists. War can be blamed for the inflationary collapse they created. War can be used as an excuse to implement even more aggressive censorship standards in Europe and the US. War can be used to create a military draft which will trigger great unrest in the US and some parts of the EU. War could invariably be used to rationalize martial law. And, it could even be used to stall or disrupt elections.

    At bottom, the war in Ukraine, the war in the Middle East and the many other regional wars that will probably erupt in the next few years have a cumulative effect that causes confusion and chaos. All that is needed is a short period of disarray and a lot of economic panic and the public may even forget who created the mess in the first place Liberty activists caught in the middle of these events will take action to defend their freedoms, and I have no doubt we will be accused of “aiding foreign enemies” or working as “agents of the Russians, Iranians, etc.”

    Russian Involvement And World War

    Given that NATO has seen fit to engage in a proxy war in Ukraine it makes sense that Russia would return the favor and engage in a proxy war in Iran. Don’t be surprised to see a lot of discussion in the media in the coming months about Russian “advisers” in Iran as well as Russian weaponry. Russia already has military bases in Syria and defense agreements with Iran. It would appear that the US and allies are being set on a collision course with Russia that will lead to direct kinetic interactions.

    At this stage world war will already be well underway. Russia and the US may never actually try to strike each other’s territory and nuclear exchange makes little sense for anyone (especially the globalists who would lose their financial and surveillance empire in the blink of an eye) but they will be fighting each other in regional wars in multiple spots across the globe. It seems to me that this process has already been set in motion, and once the avalanche starts, it’s very hard to stop.

    *  *  *

    If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

    Tyler Durden
    Thu, 04/25/2024 – 02:00

  • Divide And Conquer: The Government's Propaganda Of Fear And Fake News
    Divide And Conquer: The Government’s Propaganda Of Fear And Fake News

    Authored by John and Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

    “It is the function of mass agitation to exploit all the grievances, hopes, aspirations, prejudices, fears, and ideals of all the special groups that make up our society, social, religious, economic, racial, political. Stir them up. Set one against the other. Divide and conquer. That’s the way to soften up a democracy.”

    – J. Edgar Hoover, Masters of Deceit

    “Nothing is real,” observed John Lennon, and that’s especially true of politics.

    Much like the fabricated universe in Peter Weir’s 1998 film The Truman Show, in which a man’s life is the basis for an elaborately staged television show aimed at selling products and procuring ratings, the political scene in the United States has devolved over the years into a carefully calibrated exercise in how to manipulate, polarize, propagandize and control a population.

    Take the media circus that is the Donald Trump hush money trial, which panders to the public’s voracious appetite for titillating, soap opera drama, keeping the citizenry distracted, diverted and divided.

    This is the magic of the reality TV programming that passes for politics today.

    Everything becomes entertainment fodder.

    As long as we are distracted, entertained, occasionally outraged, always polarized but largely uninvolved and content to remain in the viewer’s seat, we’ll never manage to present a unified front against tyranny (or government corruption and ineptitude) in any form.

    Studies suggest that the more reality TV people watch—and I would posit that it’s all reality TV, entertainment news included—the more difficult it becomes to distinguish between what is real and what is carefully crafted farce.

    “We the people” are watching a lot of TV.

    On average, Americans spend five hours a day watching television. By the time we reach age 65, we’re watching more than 50 hours of television a week, and that number increases as we get older. And reality TV programming consistently captures the largest percentage of TV watchers every season by an almost 2-1 ratio.

    This doesn’t bode well for a citizenry able to sift through masterfully-produced propaganda in order to think critically about the issues of the day.

    Yet look behind the spectacles, the reality TV theatrics, the sleight-of-hand distractions and diversions, and the stomach-churning, nail-biting drama that is politics today, and you will find there is a method to the madness.

    We have become guinea pigs in a ruthlessly calculated, carefully orchestrated, chillingly cold-blooded experiment in how to control a population and advance a political agenda without much opposition from the citizenry.

    This is how you persuade a populace to voluntarily march in lockstep with a police state and police themselves (and each other): by ratcheting up the fear-factor, meted out one carefully calibrated crisis at a time, and teaching them to distrust any who diverge from the norm through elaborate propaganda campaigns.

    Unsurprisingly, one of the biggest propagandists today is the U.S. government.

    Add the government’s inclination to monitor online activity and police so-called “disinformation,” and you have the makings of a restructuring of reality straight out of Orwell’s 1984, where the Ministry of Truth polices speech and ensures that facts conform to whatever version of reality the government propagandists embrace.

    This “policing of the mind” is exactly the danger author Jim Keith warned about when he predicted that “information and communication sources are gradually being linked together into a single computerized network, providing an opportunity for unheralded control of what will be broadcast, what will be said, and ultimately what will be thought.”

    You may not hear much about the government’s role in producing, planting and peddling propaganda-driven fake news—often with the help of the corporate news media—because the powers-that-be don’t want us skeptical of the government’s message or its corporate accomplices in the mainstream media.

    However, when you have social media giants colluding with the government in order to censor so-called disinformation, all the while the mainstream news media, which is supposed to act as a bulwark against government propaganda, has instead become the mouthpiece of the world’s largest corporation (the U.S. government), the Deep State has grown dangerously out-of-control.

    This has been in the works for a long time.

    Veteran journalist Carl Bernstein, in his expansive 1977 Rolling Stone piece “The CIA and the Media,” reported on Operation Mockingbird, a CIA campaign started in the 1950s to plant intelligence reports among reporters at more than 25 major newspapers and wire agencies, who would then regurgitate them for a public oblivious to the fact that they were being fed government propaganda.

    In some instances, as Bernstein showed, members of the media also served as extensions of the surveillance state, with reporters actually carrying out assignments for the CIA. Executives with CBS, the New York Times and Time magazine also worked closely with the CIA to vet the news.

    If it was happening then, you can bet it’s still happening today, only this collusion has been reclassified, renamed and hidden behind layers of government secrecy, obfuscation and spin.

    In its article, “How the American government is trying to control what you think,” the Washington Post points out “Government agencies historically have made a habit of crossing the blurry line between informing the public and propagandizing.”

    This is mind-control in its most sinister form.

    The end goal of these mind-control campaigns—packaged in the guise of the greater good—is to see how far the American people will allow the government to go in re-shaping the country in the image of a totalitarian police state.

    The government’s fear-mongering is a key element in its mind-control programming.

    It’s a simple enough formula. National crises, global pandemics, reported terrorist attacks, and sporadic shootings leave us in a constant state of fear. The emotional panic that accompanies fear actually shuts down the prefrontal cortex or the rational thinking part of our brains. In other words, when we are consumed by fear, we stop thinking.

    A populace that stops thinking for themselves is a populace that is easily led, easily manipulated and easily controlled whether through propaganda, brainwashing, mind control, or just plain fear-mongering.

    Fear not only increases the power of government, but it also divides the people into factions, persuades them to see each other as the enemy and keeps them screaming at each other so that they drown out all other sounds. In this way, they will never reach consensus about anything and will be too distracted to notice the police state closing in on them until the final crushing curtain falls.

    This Machiavellian scheme has so ensnared the nation that few Americans even realize they are being brainwashed—manipulated—into adopting an “us” against “them” mindset. All the while, those in power—bought and paid for by lobbyists and corporations—move their costly agendas forward.

    This unseen mechanism of society that manipulates us through fear into compliance is what American theorist Edward L. Bernays referred to as “an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.”

    It was almost 100 years ago when Bernays wrote his seminal work Propaganda:

    “We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of… In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”

    To this invisible government of rulers who operate behind the scenes—the architects of the Deep State—we are mere puppets on a string, to be brainwashed, manipulated and controlled.

    All of the distracting, disheartening, disorienting news you are bombarded with daily is being driven by propaganda churned out by one corporate machine (the corporate-controlled government) and fed to the American people by way of yet another corporate machine (the corporate-controlled media).

    “For the first time in human history, there is a concerted strategy to manipulate global perception. And the mass media are operating as its compliant assistants, failing both to resist it and to expose it,” writes investigative journalist Nick Davies.

    So where does that leave us?

    Americans should beware of letting others—whether they be television news hosts, political commentators or media corporations—do their thinking for them.

    A populace that cannot think for themselves is a populace with its backs to the walls: mute in the face of elected officials who refuse to represent us, helpless in the face of police brutality, powerless in the face of militarized tactics and technology that treat us like enemy combatants on a battlefield, and naked in the face of government surveillance that sees and hears all.

    As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, it’s time to change the channel, tune out the reality TV show, and push back against the real menace of the police state.

    If not, if we continue to sit back and lose ourselves in political programming, we will remain a captive audience to a farce that grows more absurd by the minute.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 23:30

  • Everything You Need To Know About EMPs From A NASA Expert
    Everything You Need To Know About EMPs From A NASA Expert

    Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

    EMPs (Electromagnetic Pulse) are a trope that is often used in prepper fiction.

    We often think of an EMP attack as the worst-case, end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it scenario that is just around the corner.

    There’s little doubt that it would change everything, but what’s the truth?

    Here’s what an expert has to say about EMPs

    Nobody knows this better than Dr. Arthur T. Bradley. Dr Bradley is a NASA engineer and the leading expert on EMPs in the preparedness community. He’s the author of Handbook to Practical Disaster Preparedness and the must-have Disaster Preparedness for EMPs and Solar Storms. I’ve had the opportunity to speak with him before myself, and you couldn’t ask for a nicer, more down-to-earth person. He really knows what he’s talking about and he shares information without hyperbole. He is the person I trust the most for information in this genre.

    In this compelling interview, Brian Duff interviews Dr. Bradley to get the real answers. If you want to separate fact from fiction, watch this video.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 22:50

  • Are Pro-Palestinian Protests Being Hijacked By Marxists To "Destroy Capitalism, Freedom & Democracy"? 
    Are Pro-Palestinian Protests Being Hijacked By Marxists To “Destroy Capitalism, Freedom & Democracy”? 

    Just over a week ago, we asked our readers a very straightforward question: Who is funding this chaos? This question followed incidents where pro-Palestinian protesters disrupted critical infrastructure, such as shutting down airport terminals, blocking bridges, causing major traffic congestion on highway arteries, and targeting the distribution networks of major corporations. 

    So, what does shutting down critical infrastructure have to do with helping poor Palestinian children? It has absolutely nothing and more to do with a Marxist movement, similar to the Black Lives Matter movement several years ago, with the one goal to crash the US economy, destroy freedom, and abolish democracy.

    Mike Shelby, a former military intelligence non-commissioned officer and contractor, and now the CEO of intelligence services company Forward Observer, sheds more color on a leftist revolutionary group that is very active today and responsible for some of the chaos in 2020 called “A15.” 

    “A15 is actually a reprise of efforts from Antifa and the far-left revolutionary class we saw in 2020. these activists and militants were making plans to oust then-President Donald Trump if he stayed in office,” Shelby wrote on X.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    He said, “Their plan was to effectively shut down the US economy to force Trump out of the White House,” adding, “Activists publicly stated they would keep the economy disrupted until Trump caved to public pressure and resigned.” He warned, “That was their plan and probably still is.” 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Shelby said the group has circulated literature on critical chokepoints that, if hit by an attack, could trigger a massive shock to the US economy. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    He continued: “A15 is connected to the Tides Center + Foundation — the social justice organization central to the 2020 uprisings — through ActBlue, a political action committee and fundraising arm for the democratic party.” 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Shelby warned with the “2024 election less than 7 months away,” there are mounting risks of “mass mobilizations” of these bad actors. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    As Marxist revolutionary groups plot their next attacks on critical infrastructure, we would like to remind readers about the surge in news stories in recent years about train derailments, food processing fires, power grid disruptions, and other incidents on critical infrastructure, which some seemed like accidents – but it’s not against the law to question if these mysterious incidents were attempts by leftist groups to disrupt the economy. Even one month after the container ship slammed into a bridge in Baltimore and collapsed, it’s still not against the law to question if that was an attack on America’s infrastructure by foreign adversaries. 

    According to Bloomberg data, headlines in the corporate press featuring train derailments have surged over the last 4.5 years. 

    Coincidence, who knows? 

    Let’s gravitate back to pro-Palestinian protests that have a weird obsession with doing absolutely nothing for the poor Palestinians overseas but more to do with trying to disrupt critical infrastructure.

    Former US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman recently warned on X that these protests have “nothing to do with Israel or the Palestinians—most of the protesters are entirely ignorant of those issues.”

    Friedman continued, “It is a Marxist movement to destroy capitalism, freedom and democracy. The protesters have cleverly hijacked a complex issue and tapped in to the ever-present vein of antisemitism.” 

    “Make no mistake, these Marxists are not just after Israel. Their real goal is to destroy our Western values and way of life,” Friedman concluded.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    And the latest A15 disruptions: 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    And Gulf sources too? 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Besides A15, we recently pointed out that a little-known international organization called Samidoun could be behind some protests. The Israeli government declared Samidoun a terrorist organization in 2021.

    “They support terrorism, and they want to gain public opinion — support — for terrorism,” Yossi Kuperwasser, the former chief of the research division in the Israel Defense Forces’ military intelligence unit, recently said. 

    Who is funding this chaos that appears to be ramping up ahead of summer? Is it dark Soros money or Gulf sources? 

    Also, why is Biden’s Department of Justice publicly silent on this increasing national security threat? 

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 22:30

  • Biden Calls For Record High 44.6% Capital Gains Tax Rate
    Biden Calls For Record High 44.6% Capital Gains Tax Rate

    By John Kartch of Americans For Tax Reform

    President Biden has formally proposed the highest top capital gains tax in over 100 years.

    Here is a direct quote from the Biden 2025 budget proposal: “Together, the proposals would increase the top marginal rate on long-term capital gains and qualified dividends to 44.6 percent.”

    Yes, you read that correctly: A Biden top capital gains and dividends tax rate of 44.6%.

    Under the Biden proposal, the combined federal-state capital gains tax exceeds 50% in many states. California will face a combined federal-state rate of 59%, New Jersey 55.3%, Oregon at 54.5%, Minnesota at 54.4%, and New York state at 53.4%.

    Worse, capital gains are not indexed to inflation. So Americans already get stuck paying tax on some “gains” that are not real. It is a tax on inflation, something created by Washington and then taxed by Washington. Biden’s high inflation makes this especially painful.

    Many hard working couples who started a small business at age 25 who now wish to sell the business at age 65 will face the Biden proposed 44.6% top rate, plus state capital gains taxes. And much of that “gain” isn’t real due to inflation. But they’ll owe tax on it.

    Capital gains taxes are often a form of double taxation. When capital gains come from stocks, stock mutual funds, or stock ETFs, the capital gains tax is a cascaded second layer of tax on top of the current federal corporate income tax of 21%. (Biden has also proposed a corporate income tax hike to 28%).

    The proposed Biden top capital gains tax rate is more than twice as high as China’s rate. China’s capital gains tax rate is 20%. Is it wise to have higher taxes than China? And with Biden’s combined federal-state capital gains rate of 59% in California, residents will face a rate nearly three times as high as China.

    The capital gains tax was created as its own tax in 1922, at a rate of 12.5%. See the chart below to see how Biden’s proposed capital gains tax for 2025 puts the United States in uncharted territory.

    Biden’s proposed capital gains tax hike will also hit many families when parents pass away. Biden has proposed adding a second Death Tax (separate from and in addition to the existing Death Tax) by taking away stepped-up basis when parents die. This would result in a mandatory capital gains tax at death — a forced realization event.

    As previously reported by CNBC:

    “When someone dies and the asset transfers to an heir, that transfer itself will be a taxable event, and the estate is required to pay taxes on the gains as if they sold the asset,” said Howard Gleckman, senior fellow in the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. 

    Biden’s proposal to take away stepped-up basis has already been tried, and it failed: In 1976 congress eliminated stepped-up basis but it was so complicated and unworkable it was repealed before it took effect.

    As noted in a July 3, 1979 New York Times article, it was “impossibly unworkable.”

    NYT wrote:

    “Almost immediately, however, the new law touched off a flood of complaints as unfair and impossibly unworkable. So many, in fact, that last year Congress retroactively delayed the law’s effective date until 1980 while it struggled again with the issue.“

    As noted by the NYT, intense voter blowback ensued:

    “Not only were there protests from people who expected the tax to fall on them — family businesses and farms, in particular — bankers and estate lawyers also complained that the rule was a nightmare of paperwork.“

    Biden’s 2025 budget calls for about $5 trillion in tax increases over the next decade.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 22:10

  • Russia Vetoes US-Authored UN Resolution Banning Nuclear Weapons In Space
    Russia Vetoes US-Authored UN Resolution Banning Nuclear Weapons In Space

    Russia has just vetoed a very rare and interesting resolution set before the United Nations Security Council focused on banning nuclear weapons in space:

    The treaty bars signatories, including the U.S. and Russia, from placing “in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction” or anywhere else in outer space.

    On Wednesday Russia registered the lone veto which shot down the draft resolution aimed ultimately at preventing a future nuclear arms race in outer space.

    Illustration via bne IntelliNews

    China was the only abstention while the US was among the 13 UNSC members that voted in favor. It had been drafted and brought forward by the US and Japan.

    In February the US government alleged that Russia was preparing to deploy a ‘space weapon’ which might be nuclear, which subsequently set off a frenzy of media speculation. 

    Reuters  had reported at the time, “The space-based weapon U.S. intelligence believes Russia may be developing is more likely a nuclear-powered device to blind, jam or fry the electronics inside satellites than an explosive nuclear warhead to shoot them down, analysts said.”

    The Kremlin has blasted what it characterized as a “malicious fabrication”. It claimed US officials were seeking to distract the public and ram through more foreign aid and defense spending in Congress.

    The US press release summarizing Wednesday’s failed resolution included the following description:

    The detonation of a nuclear weapon in space would destroy satellites that are vital to communications, agriculture, national security, and more worldwide, with grave implications for sustainable development, and other aspects of international peace and security. The diverse group of cosponsors of this resolution reflects the strong shared interest in avoiding such an outcome.

    Additionally National Security Council spokesman John Kirby warned that in the absence of any international prohibition or treaty, nukes in space could cause “physical destruction” on Earth.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    US Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield after Moscow’s no vote lashed out at Russia’s ambassador: “Today’s veto begs the question: why? Why, if you are following the rules, would you not support a resolution that reaffirms them? What could you possibly be hiding,” she said.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 21:50

  • COVID-19 Vaccine Protection Among Children Plummets Within Months: CDC Study
    COVID-19 Vaccine Protection Among Children Plummets Within Months: CDC Study

    Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

    Children who received an original COVID-19 vaccine have little protection against hospitalization just months after vaccination, according to a new study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    Children initially have 52 percent protection against hospitalization but that estimated effectiveness plummeted to 19 percent after four months, according to the paper.

    Protection against so-called critical illness also dropped sharply, from 57 percent to 25 percent, researchers found.

    The researchers include CDC employees and the paper was published in the CDC’s weekly digest on April 18.

    The study covered children who received two or more doses of the original Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines from Dec. 19, 2021, through Oct. 29, 2023.

    The study involved children aged 5 to 18 who were hospitalized with acute COVID-19 and tested positive for the illness and compared them to a control group of children hospitalized with COVID-19-like symptoms but who tested negative for COVID-19.

    Researchers drew data from the Overcoming COVID-19 Network, which includes health care sites in most of the United States, and ended up with 1,551 case patients and 1,797 in the control group.

    The study found that “receipt of ≥2 original monovalent COVID-19 vaccine doses was associated with fewer COVID-19–related hospitalizations in children and adolescents aged 5–18 years; however, protection from original vaccines was not sustained over time,” Laura Zambrano, a CDC epidemiologist, and her co-authors wrote.

    It also recorded a similar drop in protection against critical illness, defined as being placed on mechanical ventilation, vasoactive infusions, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or dying.

    The researchers asserted that the results highlighted the current CDC guidance that all people aged 6 months and older receive one of the newest COVID-19 vaccines, which were introduced in the fall of 2023 with clinical data from just 50 humans and no efficacy estimates. The CDC only publishes papers in its weekly digest, the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, after they’re shaped to “comport with CDC policy.” The papers are not peer-reviewed.

    Ms. Zambrano did not respond when asked for data suggesting that the currently available shots provide longer-lasting protection than the original vaccines.

    The CDC’s website says, in promoting vaccination, that COVID-19 vaccines are “effective at protecting people from getting seriously ill, being hospitalized, and dying” but the hyperlink that ostensibly supports the statement goes to a page that is not live.

    U.S. authorities have been moving COVID-19 vaccines to a once-a-year model, similar to influenza vaccines. The model features updating the formulation of the vaccines on an annual basis, in an acknowledgment that any protection the vaccines give quickly wanes. The formulation is typically updated in the fall.

    Just 14 percent of children, and 23 percent of adults, have received one of the newest vaccines as of April 6, according to CDC estimates. The available vaccines are messenger RNA (mRNA) shots from Pfizer and Moderna and an alternative from Novavax.

    Dr. Jane Orient, executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, noted that, according to the new paper, the maximum effectiveness estimates against hospitalization were 61 percent, regardless of how the data were sliced, that more deaths were recorded among the case patients, and the median hospitalization duration was four days for both groups.

    “I do not see how a clinician whose concern is treating patients and whose job does not depend on pushing mRNA vaccines would find this a basis for recommending shots—quite the contrary,” Dr. Orient, who was not involved in the research, told The Epoch Times in an email.

    “It reeks of conflict of interest.”

    Stated limitations of the paper include not assessing post-infection immunity and a lack of sequencing data.

    The conflict of interest section runs 688 words and includes some of the authors reporting funding from Pfizer and Moderna or ownership of Pfizer stock.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 21:30

  • Biden's $60BN Can't Fix Ukraine's Manpower & Recruitment Crisis
    Biden’s $60BN Can’t Fix Ukraine’s Manpower & Recruitment Crisis

    With Biden’s $60 billion in funding for Ukraine now fully authorized and implemented, the question is now what? The US President on Wednesday announced just after signing the bill that the Pentagon will start sending equipment to Ukraine “in the next few hours” straight from the US stockpile.

    The Kremlin in response is vowing to push back the front lines deeper into Ukraine, and says that newly infused American weapons will burn. Russian Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov has said in fresh remarks that “The American aid won’t save Zelensky. New weapons will be destroyed, and the special military operation goals will be achieved.”

    The diplomat continued, “the military shipments of the US and its satellites have been burned, are being burned and will be burned by the Russian Armed Forces.”

    Getty Images

    Wednesday afternoon comments by Biden’s national security adviser Jake Sullivan hailed that the long sought defense aid for Kiev has finally become a reality, but also cautioned that Russia could still break through Ukrainian defensive positions soon.

    “It was a long road to secure this funding, and I have to say standing here today, it was too long, and the consequences of the delay have been felt in Ukraine,” Sullivan told reporters, and explained that troops have had to resort to rationing ammunition, resulting in lost ground in the east.

    “And while today’s announcement is very good news for Ukraine, they are still under severe pressure on the battlefield. And it is certainly possible that Russia could make additional tactical gains in the coming weeks,” he warned.

    The reality is that Ukraine is fundamentally suffering a severe crisis of manpower. This essentially means that even as US weapons and equipment arrive, there are fewer and fewer troops experienced enough to actually man and operate them.

    This is a grim trend which has especially been on display this week, for example in a Tuesday announcement by  Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba, who said the government would be cutting off consular services for military-age men living abroad. The move is to encourage them to return home and fight for their country.

    “How it looks like now: a man of conscription age went abroad, showed his state that he does not care about its survival, and then comes and wants to receive services from this state,” the top diplomat wrote on X. “It does not work this way. Our country is at war.”

    “The obligation to update one’s documents with the conscription centers existed even before the new law on mobilization was passed,” Kuleba also explained. The new policy requires that all men 18 to 60 must update their information with a state office – and if they don’t comply then they get cut off from all consular services abroad.

    According to The New York Times, US weapons could start arriving in Ukraine within days. But on parts of the front line, Ukraine’s situation is desperate. And it still has a major problem that aid can’t fix: a lack of troops.

    “The most important source of Ukrainian weakness is the lack of manpower,” Konrad Muzyka, director of the Rochan military consultancy in Poland, told Reuters. –Business Insider

    Meanwhile, inside Ukraine military officials are trying to get creative amid the ongoing manpower shortage. Reuters reports, “As Ukraine’s efforts to conscript enough men to fight Russia are stymied by public skepticism, defense officials and military units are embarking on a multi-pronged charm offensive to recruit a citizens’ army to resist the invasion.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “This softer call-up is being conducted on job-search sites and outreach centers, as well as billboards and social media, and offers a wartime novelty: an element of choice,” the report continues. “Candidates can select their precise unit and roles suiting their skills, for instance, as well as how long they will serve.”

    And yet we are likely to still witness more examples of recruitment officers brutally seizing young men off the streets, as was seen at various times over the course of the first two years of the war.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 21:10

  • ATF Rule-Change Creates A Trap For The Unwary
    ATF Rule-Change Creates A Trap For The Unwary

    Authored by Christopher Roach via American Greatness,

    On Friday, the 31st anniversary of the massacre of Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas, the ATF issued new regulations that make it more difficult to comply with federal laws regulating gun dealing and background checks.

    Since the 1930s, federal law has required gun dealers to be registered as Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL). The requirements hinged on the meaning of “engaged in the business of” gun dealing. This language has always been ambiguous, and there has never been (even after the announcement of the new rules) a true “bright line” that distinguishes when one graduates from selling a few guns from one’s personal collection into full-fledged gun dealing.

    The law previously required the primary purpose of sales to be “livelihood and profit.” The new rules reduce the requirements to seeking profit alone, tracking the a congressional amendment to existing law in 2022. The changes are more extensive than the legislative guidance, though, by stating that selling guns in the original packaging or shortly after purchase create a rebuttable presumption of being “engaged in the business.”

    The potential risk is substantial, as violations are felonies. Flipping a gun for a price higher than one paid, even if one originally intended to keep it, now may turn one into a dealer, making any such sale unlawful if it does not involve all the licensing and paperwork that govern FFLs.

    The War on Gun Collecting

    The new rule is the latest salvo in the ATF’s longstanding war on gun shows and private transfers. In the 1980s, the ATF wanted to make it easier to become a dealer because that meant fewer private transfers as well as more records and tax revenue. In those days, it only took $10 and filling out some forms to become an FFL. These were sometimes referred to as the “kitchen table” dealers, and the numbers of FFLs increased substantially.

    Then, during the Clinton years, the ATF wanted to limit FFLs, so it began requiring a larger fee as well as a storefront. They realized a lot of guns were being sold by these guys, and these measures cut down FFLs considerably. Clinton thought gun control was a great wedge issue to peel off suburban moderates from the Republican coalition.

    Now, with a Democrat again at the helm, the ATF wants to further limit private sales with the threat of criminal punishment by expanding the definition of gun dealing while leaving it vague enough to dissuade private sales.

    Everything under the sun that is collected has a community and events associated with it, and this typically includes shows. Shows are places where people can buy, sell, trade-up, and learn about their hobby. Fishing, boating, cars, coins, beanie babies and every other hobby and collectable has shows.

    Gun shows are particularly popular because guns tend to hold their value well, and lots of people collect guns. Since many gun owners are of modest means, many of these guns eventually need to be sold, taken to a pawn shop, or otherwise converted into money after they are purchased. Gun shows allow ordinary people to sell guns to other collectors and enthusiasts, whether they are dealers or not.

    Background Checks Sound Good, But Accomplish Little

    While the 1993 Brady Bill mandated FFLs conduct background checks on all transfers, private sales are unregulated. This is sometimes described incorrectly as the “gun show” loophole. Contrary to the propaganda, most sales at gun shows are conducted by FFLs, and all FFL sales include a background check. But, whether conducted at a gun show or a barbeque, private sellers transferring their personal firearms do not have to conduct a background check. As I was told by a cop when I was new to the game, selling a personal gun is like selling a toaster.

    While this lack of regulation conjures images of shady back-alley transactions, these sales often involve family and friends, fellow collectors at a gun show, and sales to FFLs, who have already been thoroughly vetted when they were licensed. The only legal requirement is that a gun cannot be knowingly sold or transferred to a felon.

    We have heard a lot in recent years about universal background checks as a cure for most criminal misuse of guns. This doesn’t sound crazy on its face. Most people support background checks because they don’t want guns in the hands of criminals and lunatics. Also, background checks are not particularly scary because most gun owners have been through many background checks when buying guns from FFLs or obtaining concealed weapons permits.

    Even so, mandatory background checks would prevent the private sales that facilitate gun collecting as a hobby. Moreover, while background checks sound like they would stop illegal guns, they don’t seem to have much of an impact. There is an extensive black market for guns, and many criminals using guns are already prohibited possessors because of felony records.

    One more law is unlikely to stop criminals from getting guns, and the inevitable failure of such a law will be used to provide support for a national gun registry, which is a necessary precursor to mass confiscation.

    Letting Criminals Go Free While Turning the Law-Abiding Into Criminals

    Like most gun control laws, reducing crime appears to be a secondary goal of the latest ATF move. But this change will have the effect of harassing and dissuading gun enthusiasts. The new and ambiguous regulations will have a chilling effect, making gun owners think twice before liquidating a personal collection or conducting a private sale. This will make gun ownership more expensive and less inviting to newcomers.

    The law will also, through selective prosecution and strong pressure to turn people into confidential informants, destroy organic gun clubs and friend groups. Facing decades in prison, the pressure put on those caught in the net to become snitches will be tremendous. Government-sponsored sales, entrapment, and the creation of unintentional new criminals may become widespread in the same way it always is when federal law enforcement is involved.

    The Democratic Left’s continuing pursuit of gun control is a bit of a surprise. In the 1990s, they hypothesized that it would get suburban moms to vote their way, but it has barely moved the dial as a wedge issue. Many thought it backfired, motivating gun owners in certain swing states to vote Republican.

    That said, as with much of the left’s actions in education, popular culture, and sexual mores, any short-term political cost is outweighed by a longer-term and more sinister aspect. In this case, the accretion of rules and uncertainty surrounding gun collecting and trading undermines the networking, organic friendships, and cooperation that allow gun owners to organize and present a real threat to the leviathan state.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 20:50

  • China Is Winning Big On Smaller EVs
    China Is Winning Big On Smaller EVs

    Smaller is better…at least in the world of building EVs for the Asian market.

    And while less scrupulous publications might take this opportunity to make stereotypical jokes about height, we’ll do no such thing and instead will simply report that according to the IEA’s Global Electric Vehicle Outlook 2024, released Tuesday, China dominated the EV market in 2023.

    In fact, it made up 60% of global sales, according to a new report from Reuters. The report forecasts that by 2030, electric vehicles will represent one-third of all cars in China.

    The latest IEA report highlights China’s increasing dominance in the global electric vehicle market, particularly across Asia’s burgeoning economies. China is capitalizing on its extensive industrial capabilities to expand its EV influence, promoting more affordable electric vehicles in nations like Thailand, Vietnam, and Indonesia, the report says.

    The key to China’s success has been managing cost, the IEA report notes: “In China, we estimate that more than 60% of electric cars sold in 2023 were already cheaper than their average combustion engine equivalent.”

    It continued: “However, electric cars remain 10% to 50% more expensive than combustion engine equivalents in Europe and the United States, depending on the country and car segment.”

    “In 2023, 55% to 95% of the electric car sales across major emerging and developing economies were large models that are unaffordable for the average consumer, hindering mass-market uptake,” the IEA report continued, according to Reuters.

    “However, smaller and much more affordable models launched in 2022 and 2023 have quickly become bestsellers, especially those by Chinese car makers expanding overseas.”

    The report emphasizes China’s growing edge due to making affordable EVs, which is proving successful across Asia.

    European and U.S. automakers, by contrast, target wealthier customers with costlier, luxury EV models.

    In Asia, countries like Thailand, Vietnam, and Indonesia are rapidly adopting EVs, supported by favorable policies and incentives, enhancing the market share of Chinese manufacturers.

    In 2023, EV sales soared in these regions despite broader market contractions. Additionally, China faces its challenges, including potential EU tariffs and an oversupply in its EV market. The IEA report suggests that for widespread EV adoption, European and U.S. manufacturers need to focus on lowering costs and improving infrastructure.

    You can read the IEA’s full report here. 

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 20:30

  • US To Convert Pacific Oil Rigs Into Military Bases
    US To Convert Pacific Oil Rigs Into Military Bases

    Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

    The US Navy will convert surplus oil rigs in the western Pacific into mobile military bases as part of the US military buildup aimed at China, The Defense Post reported on Tuesday.

    The naval engineering firm Gibbs & Cox developed the concept, known as the Mobile Defense/Depot Platform (MODEP), and presented it earlier this month at the Sea Air Space Expo. The idea is to convert oil rigs into mobile missile defense and resupply bases.

    Illustrative image, via Marine Insight

    “Our target here is to find a solution to help the challenging problem of having capacity issues in the Western Pacific. For not enough cells, not enough missiles, not enough of being able to keep those ships in the forward station,” Dave Zook, an architect at Gibbs & Cox, told Naval News.

    Gibbs & Cox claims that the floating bases would be able to hold 512 vertical launch system cells or 100 large missile launchers, which is five times the capacity of a US Navy destroyer.

    The idea is to counter China’s ballistic missiles that could take out US warships and bases in the region in the event of an open war.

    US military officials have been explicit about the fact that they’re preparing for a direct war with China in the region despite the obvious risk of the conflict quickly turning nuclear. The US has been expanding its military footprint in the Philippines and in Pacific island nations to give China more targets that it will have to hit.

    Gen. Kenneth Wilsbach, the former head of US Pacific Air Forces who is now the commander of Air Combat Command, made this clear in comments to Nikkei Asia last year.

    The largest oil rig in the world – the Pacific Berkut, via Pinterest

    “Obviously, we would like to disperse in as many places as we can to make the targeting problem for the Chinese as difficult as possible,” Wilsbach said. “A lot of those runways where we would operate from are in the Pacific Island nations.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 20:10

  • Skincare Firm Vows To Rid 'Ozempic Face' In New Marketing Push 
    Skincare Firm Vows To Rid ‘Ozempic Face’ In New Marketing Push 

    One side effect of GLP-1 medications for weight loss is “Ozempic Face.” This happens when the rapid loss of body fat produces a hollowed-looking face, wrinkles, sunken eyes, and changes in the size of the lips, cheeks, and chin. To counter this, skincare companies are ramping up the marketing of products to ‘fix’ this side effect as these blockbuster drugs sweep the nation. 

    Swiss skincare company Galderma Group’s Chief Executive Officer Flemming Ornskov told Bloomberg in an interview after this week’s first-quarter earnings that its skin treatments and dermal fillers “should be able to restore this [Ozempic Face].” 

    “I think that will be another growth wave in that space, which I will make sure to capture,” Ornskov said. 

    Has Wall Street woken up to Galderma’s ability to indirectly capitalize on the weight loss craze?

    Goldman’s GLP-1 winners basket still shows a strong upward trend. 

    Novo Nordisk A/S’s blockbuster treatments, Ozempic for diabetes, and Wegovy for weight loss, are both two names for the same drug: semaglutide. The FDA approved Ozempic for diabetes in 2017 and Wegovy for obese people in 2021. 

    The issue with Wegovy is its effectiveness. Within four weeks of treatment, the average weight loss is around 5% of body weight, increasing to 8% after two months. Semaglutide, the active ingredient, significantly decreases appetite and hunger.

    “If weight is lost in a more gradual way, these changes may not be as noticeable. It’s the faster pace of weight loss that occurs with GLP-1 drugs that can make facial changes more obvious,” Harvard Health Publishing wrote in a note. 

    Here are real-world examples of Ozempic Face: 

    Google searches for “Ozempic Face” are soaring to record highs. 

    For those who can afford Ozempic Face, try also walking around in $1,000 ‘dirty’ Gucci sneakers to complete your look as a starved homeless person – or unvetted, starved illegal alien. 

    Instead of being the guinea pig for the pharma-industrial complex, why not just put down the processed foods from the food-industrial complex and just go outside for a jog? 

    At this rate, with a new study from Kaiser Family Foundation showing upwards of 3.6 million people will be subsidized for the miracle weight loss drugs, this could ultimately accelerate the bankrupting of Medicare.  

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 19:50

  • Gay Couples At Greater Risk From Climate-Change: UCLA Study
    Gay Couples At Greater Risk From Climate-Change: UCLA Study

    Via The College Fix,

    A new study out of UCLA says same-sex couples are at greater “risk of exposure to the adverse effects of climate change” than straight couples.

    These effects include “wildfires, floods, smoke-filled skies, and drought,” according to a report from KQED.

    Same-sex couples disproportionately live in coastal regions and cities, which are more vulnerable to such disasters. They’re also more likely “to live in areas with poor infrastructure, worse-built environments.”

    Washington DC, which rates high for “climate risks” such as heat waves, floods, and “dangerously strong winds,” has the greatest proportion of gay couples in the U.S.

    San Francisco ranks second, and also faces a high climate change risk. According to KQED report, the city’s Leather & LGBTQ Cultural District flooded 22 years ago, “swamping” the entire area.

    The closest supermarket, Rainbow Grocery, also got flooded.

    Ari Shaw, director of International Programs at UCLA’s School of Law’s Williams Institute who specializes in “international human rights, LGBTI politics, and U.S. foreign policy,” noted the study “cuts against the narrative” that LGBT individuals “have access to all the resources that they need.”

    From the story:

    Shaw said his team considered same-sex couples because the U.S. Census gathers information on cohabitating same-sex households but does not broadly collect sexual orientation or gender data.

    “This study helps to shine a light on what is likely a much larger and more complicated picture,” he said. “Our findings probably understate the true impact that climate change is having on LGBTQ people.”

    The new research moves the needle in helping the nation understand who is at risk of climate disasters, UC Irvine sociology professor Michael Méndez said. He previously studied how queer communities are often left out of disaster planning.

    “The needle is moving slowly,” Méndez said. “These disasters are not happening in isolation. If an individual is feeling discrimination, or a lack of safety in their home and a disaster happens, they can feel even more vulnerable.”

    But what Méndez said the study doesn’t reveal is who the same-sex couples are in terms of [race], income and their positions in society.

    Among several recommendations, Shaw and study co-author Lindsay Mahowald say climate disaster relief should be “administered without discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression,” and that future surveys like the U.S. Census ought to include “measures of sexual orientation and gender identity.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 19:30

  • Gen-Z Finds Anthem On TikTok. And They're Rockin' To This Anti-Work Song
    Gen-Z Finds Anthem On TikTok. And They’re Rockin’ To This Anti-Work Song

    An anti-work anthem has gone viral on the Chinese social media platform TikTok in recent days. This comes after youngsters have complained on social media about President Biden’s disastrous ‘Bidenomics’ policies that have sparked elevated inflation and crushed their financial mobility. 

    The viral video, posted by TikTok user “tedymakesmusic,” has been viewed 1.4 million times and liked nearly a quarter million times.  

    Here are the lyrics: 

    I don’t want to contribute nothing to society.

    I don’t struggle I don’t hustle.

    If you want it, you can have it.

    Sorry, I wasn’t born to Work. No, I wasn’t born to work. 

    I’m too pretty to get dirty. Yeah, I said it. You can sue me. 

    Don’t want to lift the finger. For the money. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “Can every corporate worker please turn this on super loud at their desk????” one TikTok user said in the video’s comment section.

    Another person said, “This Gen Z’s anthem.” 

    “Me thinking about quitting my job & living out a van,” someone else said. 

    Youngsters are starting to realize just how much the federal government, college, and the Federal Reserve are scams. These institutions are failing the youngsters and have provided them with worthless degrees and an economic environment that is some of the worst living conditions in a generation due to failed policies. Fed Chair Powell, you had one job – and one job only… 

    Plus, woke leftist universities are indoctrinating multiple generations with collectivism, i.e., socialism, which has left some of these folks believing the government will be handing them stimmy checks (universal basic income) and student debt relief checks. Thanks to Powell and lawmakers on Capitol Hill, these kids got a taste of Covid helicopter money via stimmy checks and want more – instead of working. 

    For those who don’t want to contribute to society and the economy, remember Goldman’s note from last year specifying that generative AI could displace hundreds of millions of jobs by the end of the decade. 

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 19:10

  • Conservation Funding Helps Keep Family Farms Viable
    Conservation Funding Helps Keep Family Farms Viable

    Authored by Tom Croner via RealClear Wire,

    I’m an 81-year-old, seventh-generation farmer working with my son T. Richard on a multigenerational grain and hay farm in Somerset County, Pennsylvania. We grow corn, soybeans, wheat, rye, and hay.

    I’m proud to see him out there by himself at night, and regret that I can’t always join him. As the Bible says in John 3:16: “That God so loved the world, he gave his only son.” I don’t know if I’d be able to do that, but I know I am fortunate to have a son who wants to continue the family farming tradition. He is raising his two teenage sons in the same tradition. God only knows what their choices will be.

    The latest USDA agriculture census numbers show that the number of farmers over the age of 65 is greater than that of younger farmers. Almost 1.3 million farmers are now at or beyond retirement age, while just 300,000 farmers are under the age of 35.

    Passing a new farm bill that addresses these challenges is the best way to help create an environment that attracts new farmers and enables families to pass their farms on to the next generation. In recent years, some federal programs have been put in place to help do that. 

    We have participated in USDA cost-sharing programs that encourage cover crops (plants grown to benefit the future growth of other crops) and no-tillage practices that improve soil health, with less erosion and fewer cost inputs. We have seen significant increases in yield, with the same dollars invested.

    In 2022, Congress made a generational $20 billion investment to help farmers adopt tried-and-tested conservation practices. Pennsylvania has already gotten $255 million to help farms in our commonwealth.

    But unfortunately, like everything else it seems, the funding has been politicized, and it’s at risk in the upcoming farm bill. There’s nothing partisan about taking care of our soil, planting cover crops, and keeping our land viable year after year. That’s what conservation funding encourages, and it’s just good commonsense.

    We need our lawmakers in Washington to maintain conservation funding and make sure that it’s included in the upcoming farm bill.

    I’m proud that my son is still out managing the farm where I have worked. I’m proud that he’s using good practices that we’ve learned and refined, which have kept our farm healthy for years.

    We need Washington to protect conservation funding so that the next generation of Pennsylvania farmers, and the generation after that, can continue to be stewards of the land.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 18:50

  • Popular Iranian Rapper Sentenced To Death For Supporting 'Anti-Hijab Protests'
    Popular Iranian Rapper Sentenced To Death For Supporting ‘Anti-Hijab Protests’

    A 33-year old Iranian activist and rapper who has recently been involved in anti-government demonstrations has been handed a shockingly draconian sentence by an Iranian court. Toomaj Salehi was first arrested in Oct. 2022 for publicly backing the so-called ‘anti-hijab’ protests which swept the ultra-conservative Islamic country. But this week…

    “Branch 1 of Isfahan Revolutionary Court… sentenced Salehi to death on the charge of corruption on Earth,” his lawyer quoted the court’s ruling as saying. The state laid out its case focused on a highly ambiguous charge of spreading “propaganda”.

    Image source: YouTube/RFERL

    Salehi’s lawyer further described that the court “in an unprecedented move, emphasised its independence and did not implement the Supreme Court’s ruling” – while noting that “we will certainly appeal against the sentence.”

    The charges further centered on the Revolutionary Court accusing him of “assistance in sedition, assembly and collusion, propaganda against the system and calling for riots.”

    In September of 2022, Iran’s Islamic ‘morality police’ arrested 22-year old Iranian Kurdish woman Mahsa Amini for “improper hijab” as she entered a subway station. Activists say she had been beaten and later died in custody, while Iranian authorities claim she suffered a natural health episode (state media and officials described it as a heart attack), fainted and hit her head on the ground.

    Her death sparked months of protests across major cities featuring anti-government slogans and clashes with police. Some international reports say that in total over 500 demonstrators died, while reports said dozens of police and security service personnel were killed and wounded.

    Iranian authorities at the time attempted to tie the raging domestic unrest to an externally supported destabilization campaign by Tehran’s enemies Israel and the United States.

    As for the rapper and his immense popularity and influence in Iran, Sky News has observed that “Salehi, who has 2.3 million followers on Instagram, had posted videos after Amini’s death talking about ‘revolution’ and resistance.” According more of his background:

    His songs also highlight the widening gap between ordinary Iranians and the country’s leadership, accusing authorities of “suffocating” the people without regard for their well-being.

    His angry lyrics resonate among Iranians who are increasingly discontent and alienated by Iran’s clerical establishment — and by the politicians who fail to keep their promises of change.

    Salehi has shared his songs on his Instagram and Twitter accounts. But those accounts became inaccessible while he was in custody.

    An sample of his music:

    Iran (alongside Saudi Arabia and Egypt) leads the Middle East in number of executions each year. In 2023 alone, Iran hanged at least 834 people, which was an 8-year high. This is partly because the Islamic Republic has recently launched a new ‘war on drugs’ crackdown, but also amid geopolitical tensions it has executed suspected spies in greater numbers.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 18:30

  • China Is Leading The Global Nuclear-Power Build-Out
    China Is Leading The Global Nuclear-Power Build-Out

    Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via OilPrice.com,

    China is currently constructing a total of 26 nuclear power units with a combined capacity of 30.3 gigawatts (GW), the highest in the world, according to a report by the China Nuclear Energy Association (CNEA) cited by local media.

    China’s nuclear power units Hualong One in Fuqing, Fujian Province, China. /CFP

    Last year, China approved the development of five new nuclear power projects and began construction of five units, the report found.

    Air pollution from coal-fired power plants is a major impetus for China to expand its nuclear generation fleet, according to the World Nuclear Association.

    China is not giving up coal, but it is betting on nuclear, too, to meet its rising power demand with cleaner energy sources. 

    Many countries in the West, with the notable exception of Germany, have also recognized that nuclear power generation would help them achieve net-zero emission goals.

    At the COP28 climate summit in Dubai at the end of last year, the United States and 21 other countries pledged to triple nuclear energy capacity by 2050, saying incorporating more nuclear power in their energy mix is critical for achieving their net zero goals in the coming decades.   

    The United States, alongside Britain, France, Canada, Sweden, South Korea, Ghana, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), among others, signed the declaration at the COP28 climate summit.

    China is not a signatory to that declaration, but it aims to develop more nuclear energy capacities to reduce emissions as its demand for electricity rises.

    As of September 2023, China had 55 nuclear power units in operation with a combined installed capacity of 57 GW, and 24 units under construction with a total installed capacity of 27.8 GW, Xinhua quoted CNEA official Wang Binghua as saying. By 2060, that capacity is expected to jump to 400 GW, the official said.

    China is also expected to approve six to eight nuclear power units each year “within the foreseeable future.”

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 18:10

  • Biden Takes Swipe At "MAGA Republicans" While Signing 'Vital' Ukraine, Israel Aid Bill
    Biden Takes Swipe At “MAGA Republicans” While Signing ‘Vital’ Ukraine, Israel Aid Bill

    During Wednesday’s signing ceremony authorizing the House and Senate-approved 95$ billion emergency foreign aid package, President Biden in his remarks took a swipe at “MAGA Republicans” for causing the holdup. 

    “It’s a good day for America, it’s a good day for Europe, and it’s a good day for world peace,” Biden said, confirming he signed the legislation. “It’s going to make America safer, it’s going to make the world safer, and it continues America’s leadership in the world and everyone knows it.”

    Via APF

    “To my desk, it was a difficult path. It should have been easier, and it should have gotten there sooner. But in the end, we did what America always does; we rose to the moment, came together and we got it done,” Biden said before going on the offensive with the words: “For months, while MAGA Republicans were blocking aid, Ukraine’s been running out of artillery shells and ammunition. Meanwhile, Putin’s friends are keeping him well supplied.” This latter phrase was an apparent reference Iran, North Korea and China.

    Biden in a prior phone call pledged to Zelensky that the aid would be coming “quickly” and in follow-up Wednesday the US president told the press that “vital” aid and military equipment would start being transferred to Ukraine “in the next few hours” from the U.S. stockpile.

    As many more billions of American taxpayers’ money is once again being shipped off to foreign countries, Biden in his remarks admitted there’s nothing allotted for the United States’ own border protection:

    The president on Wednesday also noted the foreign aid package doesn’t include border security, which was part of the initial $111 billion national security package requested by Biden last year.

    “It should have been included in this bill, and I’m determined to get it done for the American people,” Biden said.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Meanwhile some conservative pundits online have noted that Ukrainian leaders are ‘partying’ with American public funds, and that it this might only encourage the kind of rampant corruption which has long been well-known in Kiev, with no oversight or accountability. 

    Some authors have also pointed out that it was Trump’s nod which allowed House Republicans to cave in the first place, however.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    As we’ve detailed before, the now fully authorized package sets aside $61 billion for Ukraine, $15 billion in military aid for Israel, and $9 billion in humanitarian aid for Gaza. There’s also $8 billion in security assistance to deter “Chinese aggression” in the Indo-Pacific.

    As for Israel funding, Biden said, “We will always make sure that Israel has what it needs to defend itself against Iran and the terrorists it supports.” On this point Biden continues to have problems unifying Democrats and especially the Progressive wing of the party, also as campus protests have grown.

    Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has continued weighing in. She’s pushing back on Biden’s Israel/Gaza policy ironically at the very moment that her party pushed through the massive aid package. According to her fresh statements to an international press outlet:

    Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., former speaker of the House, called on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to resign, describing him as an “obstacle” to peace in the Israel-Palestine conflict. 

    “We recognize Israel’s right to protect itself. We reject the policy and the practice of Netanyahu — terrible. What could be worse than what he has done in response?” Pelosi said in an interview on Monday with a news outlet based in Ireland. “He should resign. He’s ultimately responsible.”

    Pelosi also said: “I don’t know whether he’s afraid of peace, incapable of peace, or just doesn’t want peace. But he has been an obstacle to the two-state solution.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    But again, her very party just spearheaded handing over $15 billion for Israel and the Netanyahu government as it continues the military onslaught in Gaza, and as a ground assault is reportedly being readied for the refugee-packed southern city of Rafah.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 17:50

  • Supreme Court Takes New Step In Jan. 6 Case, Orders DOJ To Explain Themselves
    Supreme Court Takes New Step In Jan. 6 Case, Orders DOJ To Explain Themselves

    Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    The U.S. Supreme Court on April 23 directed the U.S. Department of Justice to reply to a man convicted in the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol.

    The U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on April 8, 2024. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)

    Justices said the department’s response to Russell Alford is due May 23.

    Mr. Alford was convicted by a jury of four misdemeanor counts but is challenging two of the charges, arguing that they don’t apply to his conduct.

    The charges should not have been brought because the laws on which they’re based bar disorderly and disruptive conduct in a Capitol building and in a restricted building, but Mr. Alford merely entered the Capitol and stood silently against a wall before exiting, the Supreme Court was told in a filing from Mr. Alford’s lawyers.

    U.S. District Judge Tonya Chutkan, an appointee of President Barack Obama, originally rejected Mr. Alford’s request to dismiss the counts, finding that his “mere presence inside the Capitol disturbed the public peace or undermined public safety.”

    A federal appeals court, after reviewing the rejection, upheld it in January. While Mr. Alford was “neither violent nor destructive … a jury could rationally find that his unauthorized presence in the Capitol as part of an unruly mob contributed to the disruption of the Congress’s electoral certification and jeopardized public safety,” the ruling stated.

    “The court should grant review because this case presents an important question of federal statutory interpretation,” Mr. Alford’s lawyers wrote to the Supreme Court, describing the appeals court ruling as “establish[ing] a slippery and counter-textual standard for criminalizing conduct in settings for political activity.”

    One of the laws, 18 U.S.C. § 1752(a)(2), bars people from “knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of government business or official functions.”

    The other, 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(D), makes it a crime to “utter loud, threatening, or abusive language, or engage in disorderly or disruptive conduct, at any place in the grounds or in any of the Capitol Buildings with the intent to impede, disrupt, or disturb the orderly conduct of a session of Congress or either house of Congress, or the orderly conduct in that building of a hearing before, or any deliberations of, a committee of Congress or either house of Congress.”

    The lower court rulings were wrong in part because they focused on the effects of Mr. Alford’s conduct, not the nature of the conduct, according to the writ to justices.

    That focus “collapses the conduct element into the harm element by giving the adjectives no apparent force,” they said. They argued later that merely being present “is not disorderly conduct unless the presence is in defiance of an order to disperse.”

    If the court grants the petition, it would review the case and decide if the rulings were appropriate.

    The Department of Justice’s Solicitor General, Elizabeth Prelogar, told the court on April 12 that the government was waiving its right to file a response to the filing, “unless requested to do so by the court.” The petition was distributed to justices on April 18 for their scheduled May 9 conference. Then, on Tuesday, justices directed the Department of Justice to file a response to Mr. Alford.

    Lawyers for Mr. Alford and the government did not respond to requests for comment.

    If justices take up the petition and rule in favor of Mr. Alford, a number of other Jan. 6 defendants and convicts could see charges thrown out.

    Obstruction Charge

    The court already agreed to review another charge brought against many Jan. 6 defendants.

    Justices sat for oral arguments on April 16 concerning obstruction of an official proceeding, a charge brought against former police officer Joseph Fischer after he entered the Capitol on Jan. 6.

    One of Mr. Fischer’s attorneys said the charge should not have been brought because the law was only intended to be used in cases of evidence tampering.

    Ms. Prelogar told justices that the charge was proper because it was “not limited to evidence impairment.”

    Justice Neil Gorsuch, appointed by former President Donald Trump, wondered whether the government would bring the charge against people who heckled the court.

    “Would a sit-in that disrupts a trial or access to a federal courthouse qualify? Would a heckler in today’s audience qualify, or at the State of the Union address? Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify for 20 years in federal prison?” he asked.

    Another justice later questioned if protesters blocking access to a trial would face the charge, noting that protests have taken place in the past at the Supreme Court but the government did not charge the protesters under the law.

    Ms. Prelogar said the law might apply in such cases, if there was proof of “corrupt intent.”

    Justices are due to hand down a decision in the case at some point in the future.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 17:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Apr 24

Today’s News 24th April 2024

  • "Let's Debunk The Myth That Mass-Migration Brings An Economic Benefit", Says Former UK Immigration Minister
    “Let’s Debunk The Myth That Mass-Migration Brings An Economic Benefit”, Says Former UK Immigration Minister

    Authored by Thomas Brooke via ReMix News,

    The notion that mass immigration brings a net economic benefit to a developed nation is a myth that needs to be debunked, a former U.K. government minister who resigned over the spiraling numbers arriving in Britain has claimed.

    In an interview with the Conservative Home website, Robert Jenrick, the Conservative MP who stepped down from his role as immigration minister in the Home Office last year, called the government’s post-Brexit immigration policy a “complete disaster” and a “betrayal to voters” who for decades have elected parties promising to cut the number of new arrivals into Britain.

    “The numbers are just so large that it has a proportionally much greater impact on everyone’s lives. This cuts to the housing crisis, why we have such low productivity, and why we have concerns about community cohesion and integration,” he told the site.

    Net migration is at record levels in Britain since the U.K. left the European Union, peaking in the year to December 2022 at 745,000. It subsequently fell to 672,000 in the year to June 2023, but after leaving the European Union Single Market, this is a paradox that Jenrick finds difficult to accept.

    “For years, politicians made promises to cut legal migration they knew they couldn’t keep because ultimately the UK was beholden to the EU’s freedom of movement.

    “The great reform was the Conservative Party delivering Brexit, which finally took back control of the levers of migration. But the decisions made in the immediate aftermath of the Brexit vote were a betrayal to voters — they created a system that was even more liberal than the one before by lowering the salary threshold, creating a graduate route and an unregulated social care visa,” he said.

    “Frankly, these decisions were two fingers up to the public, and in public policy terms they’ve been a complete disaster.”

    Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has made “stopping the boats” a key pledge throughout his tenure in Downing Street — a nod to the illegal immigration crisis on England’s southern shores as thousands of undocumented migrants are transported across the English Channel from mainland Europe where they claim asylum and use human rights laws to avoid deportation.

    However, despite attempts to combat this issue through the flagship Rwanda policy — a plan to deport migrants to the African nation for offshore processing — Jenrick believes that this is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to tackling immigration.

    “To me, legal migration has always been the more important issue,” he explained.

    “I’m 42, and for my entire adult life, if not longer, political parties of all persuasions have stood at elections saying they’re going to bring down the level of legal migration.

    “All alighted on this challenge, said they were going to take action, and all ultimately failed.”

    The Conservative MP challenged the view that mass immigration has a net economic benefit on a developed country like Britain, highlighting that just 15 percent of non-EU migrants who came to the country last year arrived with work visas.

    “So, the overwhelming majority of people were students, dependants, or were those coming as refugees.”

    The figure is actually slightly higher than 15 percent. In the year to June 2023, 968,000 non-EU migrants arrived in Britain, of which just 169,000 were the main applicants on a work visa, amounting to 17.5 percent.

    “One can make arguments for and against each of those categories, but they’re not people who are demonstrably making an economic contribution to this country.”

    He warned the economic model that Britain has adopted when it comes to immigration isn’t working.

    “If importing hundreds of thousands of foreign workers to the UK was a route to prosperity, the U.K. would be one of the richest countries in the world,” he said, adding that Britain has been in a recession in terms of GDP per capita for almost the last two years.

    “I care about the prosperity of our own citizens, not the overall size of the economy.”

    The former immigration minister accused businesses in Britain of becoming “hooked on the drug of imported foreign labor” and said the government had done too little to “boost training for young people in our country” to take on jobs in key sectors like construction.

    He urged the government to adopt a “highly selective” immigration policy that enables it to choose the types of people that will make an economic contribution to Britain, noting that there is no longer the bogeyman of the European Union to fall back on as a reason why immigration figures should remain as high as they are now.

    “What we need is radically reduced, highly-selective, high-skilled, and high-productivity migration,” Jenrick added, suggesting that an annual cap could “serve as a democratic lock” on Britain’s immigration policy and ensure that promises to the electorate to bring down the numbers are met.

    Several studies support Jenrick’s observation that mass immigration is an economic drag on developed nations.

    In November 2021, a Danish Ministry of Finance report revealed that the net cost of immigration from non-Western countries, after tax contributions had been deducted, amounted to €4.2 billion in 2018.

    Similarly, a study from the University of Amsterdam published in December last year revealed the net cost to the Dutch public sector for decades of mass immigration between 1995 and 2019 was €400 billion, averaging €17 billion a year.

    The research categorized the types of migrants arriving in the Netherlands during that time by nationality, revealing that those arriving from other EU and European countries had a net positive contribution to the Dutch economy, while those coming from countries such as Turkey and Morocco had cost the Dutch taxpayer the most with a net negative contribution of €200,000 and €260,000, respectively.

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 02:00

  • A $250 Million War Game And Its Shocking Outcome
    A $250 Million War Game And Its Shocking Outcome

    Authored by Nick Giambruno via InternationalMan.com,

    At a cost of $250 million, Millennium Challenge 2002 was the largest and most expensive war game in Pentagon history.

    With over 13,500 participants, the US government took over two years to design it.

    The exercise pitted Iran against the US military. Washington intended to show how the US military could defeat Iran with ease.

    Paul Van Riper, a three-star general and 41-year veteran of the Marine Corps, led Iranian forces in the war game. His mission was to take on the full force of the US military, led by an aircraft carrier battle group and a large amphibious landing force in the Persian Gulf.

    The results shocked everyone…

    Van Riper waited for the US Navy to pass through the shallow and narrow Strait of Hormuz, which made them sitting ducks for Iran’s unconventional and asymmetric warfare techniques.

    The idea is to level the playing field against a superior enemy with swarms of explosive-laden suicide speedboats, low-flying planes carrying anti-ship missiles, naval mines, and land-based anti-ship ballistic missiles, among other low-cost but highly effective measures.

    In minutes, Van Riper emerged victorious over his superior opponent and sank all 19 ships. Had it been real life, 20,000 US sailors and marines would have died.

    Millennium Challenge 2002 was a complete disaster for the Pentagon, which had spent a quarter of a billion dollars to set up the extensive war game. It produced the exact opposite outcome they wanted.

    So what did the Pentagon do with these humbling results?

    Like a child playing a video game, they hit the reset button. They then rigged and scripted the game so that the US was guaranteed to win.

    After realizing the integrity of the war game had been compromised, a disgusted Van Riper walked out mid-game. He then said:

    “Nothing was learned from this. And a culture not willing to think hard and test itself does not augur well for the future.”

    The main lesson of Millennium Challenge 2002 is that aircraft carriers—the biggest and most expensive ships ever built—wouldn’t last a single day in combat against even a regional power like Iran. Russia and China would have an even easier time dispatching them. They are overpriced toys.

    That means the US has wasted untold trillions on military hardware that could prove to be worthless in a serious conflict.

    Nonetheless, the US government still parades aircraft carriers around the world from time to time to try to intimidate its enemies.

    However, it’s a flawed strategy prone to catastrophic results if someone calls their bluff.

    While Millennium Challenge 2002 occurred more than 20 years ago, it is of paramount importance today.

    Iran has substantially improved its asymmetric and unconventional warfare capabilities. It’s doubtful the US military would fare much better today than 20 years ago.

    In short, war with Iran today could be even more disastrous than the Millennium Challenge 2002 simulation.

    Unfortunately, war with Iran is an increasingly probable outcome as tensions in the Middle East are at their highest point in generations and are trending higher.

    Previously, I lived in Beirut, Lebanon, for several years while working for an investment bank. The experience was effectively an advanced training course in Middle East geopolitics. Today, it helps me see the big picture in the region… and unfortunately, it isn’t pretty.

    I think the next big war in the Middle East is coming soon and could be the biggest one ever. It will focus on Iran.

    The market doesn’t appreciate how close we are to a big war and the implications of it.

    But this distortion in the market is a blessing. It’s handing us a golden opportunity.

    First and foremost, I think there’s a huge opportunity to profit in the oil market right now.

    I’m certainly not cheering for war. I despise war, which is the health of the State.

    Regardless, a big war is highly likely, with significant investment implications that would be foolish to ignore.

    In short, we are only one escalation away from potentially the biggest oil shock in history as the Middle East is on the verge of the largest regional war in generations.

    Fortunately, it doesn’t have to blindside you, your family, or your portfolio.

    Quite the contrary.

    That’s precisely why I just released an urgent new report with all the details, including what you must do to prepare. It’s called The Most Dangerous Economic Crisis in 100 Years… the Top 3 Strategies You Need Right Now. Click here to download the PDF now.

    Tyler Durden
    Wed, 04/24/2024 – 00:05

  • Senates Passes $95 Billion Aid Bill For Ukraine, Israel And Taiwan, Forces Sale Of TikTok
    Senates Passes $95 Billion Aid Bill For Ukraine, Israel And Taiwan, Forces Sale Of TikTok

    The republicans do what they always do best: fold like cheap lawn chairs.

    Moments ago, in a 79-18 vote, the Democrat-controlled Senate passed a long-delayed $95.3 billion foreign-aid package sending $60.8 billion in ammunition and military equipment to Ukrainian soldiers, as well as billions of soon-to-be-embezzled dollars to the offshore real estate agents of Ukraine’s corrupt oligarchs while also fortifying Israel’s missile defense systems with $26.4 billion, and leaving $8 billion for Taiwan as if that will do anything to stop a Chinese invasion. Oh, and speaking of Chinese invasions, the Senate also just forced the sale of the China-owned TikTok in the U.S.

    There will be, of course, no change to the invasion at the southern US border because here too Republicans keep folding like cheap lawn chairs to the Democrat ploy to flood the US with illegal aliens who will get free shit for life if only they keep voting for the blue team.

    The bill had broad support in the Senate, with backing from almost all Democrats and a majority of Republicans. Several Republicans who had opposed an earlier iteration of the package, which came after a failed push to attach it to a border-policy overhaul, switched their vote to support Tuesday’s bill. The breakdown of the votes is as follows:

    GOP NO VOTES:

    • Barrasso
    • Blackburn
    • Braun
    • Budd
    • Cruz
    • Hagerty
    • Hawley
    • Johnson
    • Lee
    • Lummis
    • Marshall
    • Rubio
    • Scott (FL)
    • Schmitt
    • Vance  

    DEM NO VOTES:

    • Merkley
    • Sanders
    • Welch

    The vote brought to a close months of pointless sound and fury, and endless debate over Ukraine, that allegedly split the Republican Party,  with rank-and-file members openly rebelling against their leaders, who succeeded in outdemocrating the democrats.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The theatrical “fight” also called into question both how far the US would go to defend Ukraine, now in the third year of trying to repel Russia’s invasion, as well as America’s leadership role in the world, once the latest rescue funding is exhausted in a few months, which it will be, with the Ukraine having made zero progress in its war with Russia.

    The measure passed the House on Saturday and now goes to President Biden’s desk. Biden, who has been pushing for a big foreign-aid package since the fall, said he would quickly sign the measure into law Wednesday.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    As broken down below, the measure contains money for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, as well as humanitarian aid for Gaza—largely matching an earlier Senate bill—plus additions made by the House, such as sanctions on Russia and Iran and the TikTok provision. Leaders in the GOP-controlled House also changed roughly $9.5 billion in economic aid to Ukraine into forgivable loans rather than grants, to make it more politically palatable to Republicans, as if Ukraine will ever repay anything.

    Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) credited the White House as well as Republicans who backed Ukraine for advancing the measure, noting that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R., La.) put his political future on the line when he moved forward with the package.

    “In a resounding bipartisan vote, the relentless work of six long months has paid off,” Schumer said on the senate floor. In a statement, Biden thanked lawmakers of both parties, saying they answered “history’s call at this critical inflection point” by sending a message to allies and foes about American power.

    And just like that the deeply embedded deep state operative formerly known as the House speaker has become the media’s darling overnight:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Of course, while superficially the bill says “aid to Ukraine” where the majority of the money is really going is to the US military industrial complex. As the WSJ reports, the proposal has roughly $60 billion for Ukraine, most of which would flow to the U.S. defense industry for additional weapons such as ammunition and rocket launchers. The new aid comes on top of the more than $100 billion spent on the Defense Industry Kyiv since Russia invaded in February 2022.

    And while most muppets in the House and Senate are clearly in the pocket of the military-industrial complex and the deep state, a few holdouts remains.

    Sen. Eric Schmitt (R., Mo.), who voted against the measure, called the support for Ukraine to defend its borders “an insult to the American people” while the U.S. struggles with an influx of migrants at its own border with Mexico.

    Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) called his opposition to the proposal’s advancement “one of the toughest votes I’ve cast during my years in the Senate,” saying he couldn’t overcome his concern that humanitarian aid would end up in the hands of terrorists, among other worries.

    Others were more “malleable” in their ideological beliefs.

    Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R., Okla.), who switched from voting against the Senate’s aid package in February to supporting the revised version on Tuesday, said that the politics were complicated.   “Our approach this time was to make sure that the politics are set, meaning that President Trump was on board, it’s something that could be passable, it’s something that could be explained,” he said.

    Sen. James Lankford (R., Okla.), who also switched his vote, said he didn’t want to “punish Israel and Ukraine” over the lack of border provisions. Lankford had led a failed bipartisan effort to find a compromise on immigration, which was shot down by Republicans earlier this year as not tough enough.

    Asked why some Senate Republicans were slow to support aid for Kyiv, 3000-year-old Senate mummy Mitch McConnell cited the “demonization of Ukraine” by conservative political commentator Tucker Carlson. “He had an enormous audience, which convinced a lot of rank and file Republicans that maybe this was a mistake,” McConnell said in a press conference. Carlson declined to comment.

    Mummified Mitch also laid blame on former President Donald Trump, Democrats and the border crisis for the amount of time it took to get most Republican lawmakers to acquiesce in continuing to fund the Ukrainian war effort.

    “I think the former president had sort of mixed views on it,” he said of Trump’s position on Ukraine aid. “We all felt that the border was a complete disaster, myself included,” McConnell continued, noting that the attempt earlier this year to attach border security provisions to Ukraine funding required senators to “deal with Democrats … and then a number of our members thought it wasn’t good enough.”

    “And then our nominee for president didn’t seem to want us to do anything at all,” McConnell said. “That took months to work our way through it.”

    Last but not least, the bill also starts the clock on TikTok’s Chinese-controlled owner ByteDance to find a new owner for the video app in the U.S. within a year, or risk a shutdown. But the matter is expected to be decided by the federal courts which means that it will quietly die on some bench in the corrupt US legal system. A court dispute would likely require judges to weigh the national security objectives of the ban against the First Amendment rights of TikTok and its users.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 23:45

  • Chinese FX Outflows Soar, Priming The Next Bitcoin Surge
    Chinese FX Outflows Soar, Priming The Next Bitcoin Surge

    Last October, when we pointed out that China’s FX outflows had just hit a whopping $75BN – the single biggest monthly outflow since the 2015 currency devaluation – we concluded that the “unfavorable interest rate spread between China and the US will “likely imply persistent depreciation and outflow pressures in coming months”, or in other words, September’s biggest FX outflow in years is just the beginning, and very soon – in addition to geopolitics and central banks – the world will also be freaking out about the capital flight out of China… not to mention where all those billions in Chinese savings are going and which digital currency the Chinese are using to launder said outflows.”

    We wrote that on October 20 when Bitcoin was trading just under $30,000, a level it had been for much of 2023. And, just as we correctly predicted at the time…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    … following this surge in Chinese FX outflows, bitcoin – traditionally China’s preferred means to circumvent Beijing’s great capital firewall – promptly exploded more than 100% higher in the next 4 months.

    And while conventional wisdom is that this surge in the price of the digital currency was largely due to the January launch of Bitcoin ETFs, what many missed was a Reuters story in January which confirmed our thesis from back in 2015, according to which much more than ETFs, and much more than rapidly shifting sentiment or frankly any day-to-day newsflow, it is China’s massive wall of inert capital that has been the biggest driver of bitcoin moves, and never more so than during periods of FX and capital outflows which usually precede some form of capital controls.

    We bring all this up because six months after our first correct prediction that China’s spike in FX outflows would send bitcoin surging, it’s time to do it again.

    One wouldn’t know if, however, if one merely looked at the official Chinese FX reserve data published by the PBOC, here nothing sticks out. In fact, at $3.246 trillion, reported Chinese reserves are now near the highest level in past four years, and monthly flows are very much stable as shown in the chart below.

    The problem, of course, is that as we have explained previously China’s officially reported reserves are woefully (and perhaps purposefully) inaccurate of the bigger picture.

    Instead if one uses our preferred gauge of FX flows, one which looks at i) onshore outright spot transactions; ii) freshly entered and canceled forward transactions, and iii) the SAFE dataset on “cross-border RMB flows, we find that China’s net outflows were $39bn in March, up from $11bn in February and the fastest pace of outflows since the September spike in FX outflows which we duly noted half a year ago.

    How did we get this number? The portfolio investment channel showed net outflows in March. The Stock Connect channel showed net outflows of US$8bn vs. US$5bn inflows in February, and inflows to the bond market slowed in March (US$6bn, vs. US$11bn in February)…

    … primarily on record net selling of central government bonds.

    Finally, the current account channel showed also net outflows in March, mainly as services trade related outflows picked up.

    At the time when FX outflows were re-acclererating, the broad USD strengthened further in March, and USD/CNY spot drifted higher, as one would expect when there is capital flight... Oh, and Bitcoin hit a record high above $70K.

    And while Chinese policymakers are still keen on maintaining FX stability – the countercyclical factors in the daily CNY fixing remained deeply negative and front-end CNH liquidity tightened notably in recent weeks – the reality is that with China desperate to boost its exports at a time when its great mercantilist competitor, Japan, has hammered the yen to the lowest level in 3 decades, it is only a matter of time before the currency devaluation advocates win, as they did in 2015. 

    We hope that we don’t have to remind readers that the first big trigger for bitcoin’s unprecedented eruption higher starting in 2015 was – you guessed it – China’s August 2015 FX devaluation.

    So don’t be surprised if in the next 6 months Bitcoin doubles again, and the move has nothing to do with ETF inflows, the halving, or frankly anything else taking place in the US… and instead is entirely driven by China’s massive wall of money which at last check was almost 3x bigger than the US.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 23:25

  • Biden Admin To Pay $139 Million To Victims For FBI Failures In Sex Abuse Investigation
    Biden Admin To Pay $139 Million To Victims For FBI Failures In Sex Abuse Investigation

    By Tom Ozimek of The Epoch Times

    The Biden administration has agreed to pay over $138 million to victims of convicted sex abuser Larry Nassar while acknowledging the FBI’s failures to properly investigate warnings that the sports physician was exploiting his position to molest young girls under the guise of treatment.

    The Department of Justice (DOJ) said in an April 23 statement that it had settled 139 civil claims arising from allegations of sexual abuse committed by Mr. Nassar, who was earlier found guilty of having abused hundreds of victims under the pretext of performing medical treatments.

    The settlements—which total $138.7 million—resolve administrative claims made against the DOJ alleging that the FBI failed to carry out an adequate investigation into Mr. Nassar’s actions.

    Larry Nassar, a former team USA Gymnastics doctor who pleaded guilty in November 2017 to sexual assault charges, stands in court during his sentencing hearing in the Eaton County Court in Charlotte, Michigan, U.S., Feb. 5, 2018. (Rebecca Cook/Reuters)

    A DOJ watchdog found in July 2021 that parts of the FBI’s response to allegations against Mr. Nassar, as well as the agency’s investigation into his actions, were inadequate.

    The “FBI failed to conduct an adequate investigation of Nassar’s conduct,” Acting Associate Attorney General Benjamin Mizer said in a statement.

    “For decades, Lawrence Nassar abused his position, betraying the trust of those under his care and medical supervision while skirting accountability,” he continued.

    “These allegations should have been taken seriously from the outset. While these settlements won’t undo the harm Nassar inflicted, our hope is that they will help give the victims of his crimes some of the critical support they need to continue healing,” Mr. Mizer added.

    The $138.7 million will be distributed to the claimants.

    There have been other settlements involving Mr. Nassar, who was the U.S. women’s gymnastics team doctor.

    In total, settlements concerning the convicted sex abuser have totaled nearly $1 billion, including Michigan State University agreeing to pay $500 million to over 300 women and girls whom he assaulted.

    “Institutional Betrayal”

    After allegations of Mr. Nassar’s abuse were first reported to the FBI Indianapolis Field Office by the president of USA Gymnastics in 2015, local field agents failed to respond “with the utmost seriousness and urgency that the allegations deserved and required,” the 2021 report by the DOJ’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) found.

    Further, the report found that two FBI officials lied during their interviews to cover up or minimize their errors. One of the agents also made a false statement to the media in 2017 and 2018 about how his office handled the Nassar case.

    That agent also violated the FBI’s conflict of interest policy by discussing a possible job with the U.S. Olympic Committee while he was involved with the Nassar investigation.

    The watchdog noted the seriousness of the former agents lying during the investigation into their conduct in the years after the events but said there wasn’t enough to bring a federal criminal case.

    The Justice Department has acknowledged that it failed to step in. For more than a year, FBI agents in Indianapolis and Los Angeles had knowledge of allegations against him but apparently took no action, an internal investigation found.

    FBI Director Christopher Wray spoke to survivors of Mr. Nassar’s abuse at a Senate hearing in 2021, expressing contrition for the agency’s failures. The assault survivors include decorated Olympians Simone Biles, Aly Raisman, and McKayla Maroney.

    “I’m sorry that so many different people let you down, over and over again,” Mr. Wray said. “And I’m especially sorry that there were people at the FBI who had their own chance to stop this monster back in 2015 and failed.”

    After a search, investigators said in 2016 that they had found images of child sex abuse and followed up with federal charges against Mr. Nassar.

    Continue reading at the Epoch Times

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 23:05

  • "That's Concerning": US Indo-Pacific Commander Warns China Becoming More Aggressive As Economic Recovery "Failing" 
    “That’s Concerning”: US Indo-Pacific Commander Warns China Becoming More Aggressive As Economic Recovery “Failing” 

    One of the biggest questions of our time is whether China and the United States can escape Thucydides’s Trap. It seems that, in the short term, the US will likely avoid direct conflict with China, but in the long term, there will be a slow march toward conflict in the Indo-Pacific region. 

    On Tuesday, Admiral John Aquilino, the head of the US Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), told reporters in Tokyo that China has become increasingly aggressive across Asia. 

    “We all need to understand that it’s moving very fast,” Aquilino said, as quoted by Bloomberg. 

    He said, “The buildup of military power despite a bad economy, the increased narrative of all things inside the 10-dash line are Chinese sovereign territory, then the actions that are going toward enforcement.”

    After serving three years as the head of INDOPACOM, Aquilino will step down. He oversees 380,000 soldiers, sailors, Marines, airmen, guardians, Coast Guardsmen, and Department of Defense civilians. 

    He warned about rising tensions near the Second Thomas Shoal, where the Philippines has held the line since World War II. A recent incident of Chinese vessels using water cannons to block Philippine military vessels has been an ominous sign for some military observers. 

    Aquilino also spoke about China’s economy, indicating the world’s second-largest economy “has drastically been reduced” because of a “real-estate market crash.”

    “You go ask any economist if the Chinese are going to deliver 5.3% growth, and they will tell you, ‘No way,'” Aquilino said.

    Aquilino also called North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s regime “disgusting” for spending large sums of money on the military while a food shortage ripples through the country. 

    Aquilino’s comment comes days before US Secretary of State Antony Blinken travels to China. He is expected to convey Washington’s “deep concerns” about Beijing’s support for Russia’s defense industrial base.

    “We’re prepared to take steps when we believe necessary against firms that … severely undermine security in both Ukraine and Europe,” Blinken told reporters ahead of Wednesday’s trip. 

    David Asher, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, commented on Aquilino’s remarks by stating:

    “Admiral Aquilino has been a forward-thinking, leaning, and acting US Combatant Commander in the Indo-Pacific. But the facts on the ground and sea have been allowed to strategically favor Communist China which has fortified coral reefs and atolls across the South China Sea and fan its naval forces across the region from the seas surrounding Japan to Taiwan to the Philippines and Vietnam. 

    “China’s relentless expansionism has been largely unopposed. Beijing cannot be allowed to continue its expansionist wave. It’s time for the US, Japan, and Australia to link up and provide active protection to the Philippines and start to begin freedom of navigation missions to Taiwan. Incoming Commander Admiral Sam Paparo will have a lot on his plate.” 

    Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and soaring turmoil in the Middle East, including Israel and Iran, with risks of conflicts flaring up in the Indo-Pacific region, are all confirmations that a multipolar world has emerged. 

    That said, we have noted that defense spending worldwide has surged, pushing the defense industry into a bull market:

    There’s a bull market in global defense stocks. 

    The multipolar world will only bring more chaos and destruction. 

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 22:45

  • Are The Mass Pro-Palestine Protests On College Campuses Just One Big Virtue Signal?
    Are The Mass Pro-Palestine Protests On College Campuses Just One Big Virtue Signal?

    Submitted by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

    As a general rule, rebels without a cause will eventually latch onto the nearest cause of opportunity.  It really doesn’t matter what it is, for activists with ample time on their hands and plenty of trust fund money these protests fill the void and make them feel like they have meaning.

    Such is the case with the political left and their infatuation with Gaza (or any movement rooted in Islam).  It’s been noted by many commentators that the relationship between Islamic fundamentalists and the far-left is a bizarre one.  After all, almost every element of Sharia Law is completely antithetical to the proclaimed values of progressives including equal rights for women, equal rights for gays and the leftist penchant for atheism.  All of these beliefs might get a person executed in a host of Muslim governed countries, but for some reason the leftist mob wants in on the Islamic bandwagon.  

    Whatever your opinion is on the war or the governments involved it’s clear that it has nothing to do with woke activists in the western world.  The war is simply a vehicle which they hope they can hijack and attach their own agendas to.  Primarily, progressives view Israel as a symbol of western “colonialism” and in their minds anything colonial must be destroyed.  Their concerns for Palestinians are peripheral, if their concerns exist at all.  This is about visibility and a chance to create chaos.

    If you believe in “karma” then you might suggest that the Israelis have been setting themselves up for this reaction for a long time.  Israeli tied propaganda organizations like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) have been fomenting leftist insanity for decades and defending every aspect of the social justice religion.  They helped create a golem that they can’t control and now it’s turning on them.

    Of course, it’s not the Israeli government that’s suffering any real consequences; rather, it’s conservatives abroad as well as Jewish students attending western universities.  After many years of the ADL crying wolf (racism and antisemitism) over secret Nazis that didn’t really exist, now they finally have something legitimate to complain about.

    Woke protesters marched out in tandem within multiple universities across the US in a relatively well coordinated disruption action.  New York University, Columbia, Yale and Berkeley were all involved but much of the media focus was on NYU and Columbia.  Activists linked arms and allegedly blocked Jewish students from entering campus facilities.  The atmosphere has become so volatile that Jewish religious leaders are calling on students to leave such institutions for their own safety.   

    The NYPD has responded with a blitz on the protests.  Encampments have been torn down and mass arrests have ensued.  Police could not immediately share how many people had been arrested or issued with summonses because the situation was ongoing.  Faculty members were among those arrested, an NYPD spokesperson told CNN.  

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    These developments have some interesting implications for the US going forward.  In particular, polls show that Joe Biden is gradually losing favor among young voters because of his continued military and monetary support of Israel.  His most rabid base is turning on him, which means the November election is looking better and better for Donald Trump.  

    That said, there is the continuing problem of fabricated rationales.  Just as the death of George Floyd was shamelessly exploited by the left and Democrats as a radicalization moment, Gaza is also being used erroneously as a foil for increasingly aggressive mobilizations of people that, frankly, just want a reason to burn stuff. It’s likely that as the conflict continues to escalate western countries will see larger and more violent protests in major cities.

    Does anyone in the Middle East care what a bunch of college kids in the US have to say about Gaza?  No, why would they?  Can the US government influence the developing war for the better?  Maybe, but they aren’t going to.  But stopping the war is not necessarily the goal of US based activists.    

    Donald Trump has loudly voiced his own political support for Israel on a number of occasions so a change in White House leadership probably won’t lead to the economic or strategic isolation of Israel.  Unless the war ends soon, which is improbable now that Iran is involved, we may be seeing nationwide protests and riots yet again.  Different excuse, same results. 

    *  *  *

    The views expressed above do not necessarily represent those of ZeroHedge.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 22:25

  • These Are The Worst States To Be A Gun Owner In 2024
    These Are The Worst States To Be A Gun Owner In 2024

    Does your state support your 2nd Amendment rights or make it exceedingly difficult to keep and bear arms?

    Ammo.com has ranked the worst states to be a gun owner below…

    How?

    By analyzing each state’s current laws, upcoming laws, concealed carry guidelines, self-defense statutes, and 2A-centric taxes in order to identify the worst states for gun owners in 2024.

    Report Highlights

    • Hawaii is the #1 worst state for gun owners due to strict purchasing and carry laws, as well as defying the Supreme Court on the individual’s right to carry.

    • California is the #2 worst state for gun owners due to its permit-to-purchase and reciprocity laws.

    • New York, Illinois, and New Jersey take the #3, #4, and #5 spot in our list of worst states for gun ownership due to strict purchasing and carrying requirements.

    • North Carolina, Maine, and Ohio fall into spots #25, #24, and #23 due to new restrictive legislation with some relaxed carry laws.

    • Some states rank lower than others due to excessive infringements, additional taxes, and the current Governor’s 2A statements.

    • State and local laws defining Stand Your Ground vs. Duty to Retreat vary and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

    Jump to a state: AL | AK | AZ | AR | CA | CO | CT | DE | FL | GA | HI | ID | IL | IN | IA | KS | KY | LA | ME | MD | MA | MI | MN | MS | MO | MT | NE | NV | NH | NJ | NM | NY | NC | ND | OH | OK | OR | PA | RI | SC | SD | TN | TX | UT | VT | VA | WA | WV | WI | WY

    Read the full report on the worst states to be a gun owner in 2024 at Ammo.com.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 22:05

  • Scientific American Claims It Is "Misinformation" That There Are Just Two Sexes
    Scientific American Claims It Is “Misinformation” That There Are Just Two Sexes

    Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

    Scientific American has published a piece claiming that “misinformation,” such as the notion that there are only two sexes, is “being used against transgender people” and in order to target “gender-affirming medical care.”

    The article states that there are three types of “misinformation,” and they are “oversimplifying scientific knowledge, fabricating and misinterpreting research, and promoting false equivalences.”

    The piece asserts that “Many of the arguments against trans rights center on the idea that transness itself is not legitimate – that there are just two sexes, period.”

    There are only two sexes though.

    It then turns to ‘scientist’ Simón(e) Sun, a self described trans(sexual) ándrógýne \ (neuro)biologist, pronouns in bio person and notes “You describe this idea as ‘sex essentialism.’ Can you explain that term, and talk about how it shapes the debate.”

    They/she then states “Essentialism is the idea that you can take any phenomenon that is complex and distill it down to a particular set of traits. In the case of sex essentialism, the idea is that you can sufficiently describe sex by a few particular characteristics. In this debate, it used to be chromosomes, now it’s gametes (egg and sperm cells).”

    Yeah, that is biology 101 and no matter how many times they/she says it’s changed and that anyone who doesn’t agree is a ‘transphobe’, it hasn’t.

    They/she continues, “The target is always moving, because if you want to make something binary, then you need to find the most binary characteristic. Today, sex essentialism boils all of sex down to the gametes that a person produces.”

    Again, biology 101.

    “But biology is just not that simple,” Sun continues, adding “The sex essentialist perspective is completely wrong about the biology of how sex characteristics arise.”

    It is that simple though.

    The piece goes on in this vein, throws in ‘hate’ and ‘prejudice’ and climate change and Donald Trump, all to push the ideological agenda that life-altering drugs and surgeries shouldn’t be challenged.

    All of this comes in the wake of a major long term study in the UK that concluded that treatment gender-confused children have been offered was built entirely on “shaky foundations” and that there is “no good evidence to support the global clinical practice of prescribing hormones to under-18s to pause puberty or transition to the opposite sex.”

    The author of the review, retired consultant paediatrician Dr Cass, formerly the president of the Royal College of Paediatrics, called the evidence for life altering drugs “remarkably weak” and warned that transgender activists are the ones “deliberately spread(ing) misinformation.”

    Since the review was published, Cass has been subject to abuse and cannot use public transport over fears for her safety.

    Meanwhile, trans activist groups continue to push their propaganda on children, encouraging teachers and school officials to keep it hidden from the parents:

    *  *  *

    Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 21:45

  • "Let Me Go Home, Okay?": Mistrial Declared For Arizona Rancher Accused Of Killing Illegal Immigrant On His Property
    “Let Me Go Home, Okay?”: Mistrial Declared For Arizona Rancher Accused Of Killing Illegal Immigrant On His Property

    A mistrial was declared in the case of an Arizona rancher accused of fatally shooting an illegal immigrant on his property near the US-Mexico border, after the jury failed to reach a unanimous decision following two full days of deliberation.

    George Alan Kelly, 75, was charged with second-degree murder in the Jan. 30, 2023 shooting of 48-year-old Gabriel Cuen-Buitimea, who was in the United States illegally.

    “Based upon the jury’s inability to reach a verdict on any count,” said Arizona Superior Court Judge Thomas Fink, adding “This case is in mistrial.“

    According to one of Kelly’s defense attorneys, Kathy Lowthorp, just one juror was voting ‘guilty,’ which is why their legal team pushed for deliberations to continue.

    “There was one hold out for guilt, the rest were not guilty. So seven not guilty, one guilty,” said Lowthorp. “We believe in our gut that there was no way the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt.”

    The Santa Cruz County Attorney’s office can still retry Kelly for any charge, or drop the case. 

    Prosecutors accused Kelly of recklessly firing nine shots from an AK-47 rifle toward a group of men who were trespassing on his cattle ranch after running from Border Patrol agents, roughly 115 yeards away. He was also accused of providing inconsistent statements throughout the investigation – initially failing to tell officials that he had fired his weapon, and then allegedly claiming that the illegal immigrants were part of a group of 10-15 people armed with AR-style rifles – and that he’d heard gunshots.

    Kelly’s attorney said that he had fired “warning shots.”

    “He does not believe that any of his warning shots could have possibly hit the person or caused the death,” she said at the time. “All the shooting that Mr. Kelly did on the date of the incident was in self-defense and justified.

    After Monday’s ruling, Consul General Marcos Moreno Baez of the Mexican consulate in Nogales, Arizona, said he would wait with Cuen-Buitimea’s two adult daughters on Monday evening to meet with prosecutors from Santa Cruz County Attorney’s Office to learn about the implications of a mistrial.

    “Mexico will continue to follow the case and continue to accompany the family, which wants justice.” said Moreno. “We hope for a very fair outcome.“

    Kelly’s defense attorney Brenna Larkin did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment after the ruling was issued. Larkin had asked Fink to have jurors keep deliberating another day. –CBS News

    Following the mistrial, Kelly said: “Let me go home, okay? That alright with y’all? It is what it is and it will be what it will be. I will keep fighting forever. I won’t stop.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

     

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 21:30

  • Kim Jong Un Oversees "Nuclear Counterattack" Drill
    Kim Jong Un Oversees “Nuclear Counterattack” Drill

    North Korean leader Kim Jong Un oversaw salvo launches of the country’s “super-large” multiple rocket launchers in what state media presented as simulation drills of a nuclear counterattack against enemy targets, state media revealed Tuesday.

    The day prior, the South Korean and Japanese militaries reported suspected launches of artillery and ballistic missiles from the north. Pyongyang subsequently confirmed it tested new systems including 600mm multiple rocket launchers, said to be capable of delivering tactical nuclear warheads.

    State media referred to the United States and South Korea, which have been conducting a series of joint military exercises over many months, as “warmongers” while describing the necessity of exercises focused on nuclear counterattack.

    Kim has described that the north’s new rocket launchers are as accurate as a “sniper’s rifle”. Kim observed the exercises from an observation post, a new set of photos released by KCNA shows.

    According to a state media description, as cited in AP:

    It said the rockets flew 352 kilometers (218 miles) before accurately hitting an island target and that the drill verified the reliability of the “system of command, management, control and operation of the whole nuclear force.”

    Part of the drill included a salvo of missiles sent toward “the potential enemy” which included targets on and outlying island with a range of just over 350km.

    US officials have previously indicated the recent spate of more aggressive statements from Kim should be taken seriously.

    “While the officials added that they did not see an imminent risk of a full-scale war on the Korean Peninsula, Mr. Kim could carry out strikes in a way that he thinks would avoid rapid escalation,” a NY Times report issued early this year said.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    All of this is said to be part of Kim’s new policy of “open hostility” in response to US provocations on the peninsula, including starting last summer the docking of a US nuclear submarine at a South Korean port.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 21:25

  • 'Merit' Makes A Comeback: More Universities Reinstate Testing Requirement For Admissions
    ‘Merit’ Makes A Comeback: More Universities Reinstate Testing Requirement For Admissions

    Authored by Wenyuan Wu via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Harvard, following in the footsteps of its Ivy League peers (Dartmouth and Yale) has reinstated standardized testing in its undergraduate admissions. America’s oldest private university, after popularizing the “holistic admissions” model (originally used in the early 20th century to keep Jews out) and dissing meritocracy, is perhaps taking a long and hard look at the ideological mess the education establishment itself helped create.

    People walk through the gate on Harvard Yard at the Harvard University campus in Cambridge, Mass., on June 29, 2023. (Scott Eisen/Getty Images)

    Like a self-fulfilling prophecy, the war on tests has perpetuated the soft bigotry of low expectations and racialized education at the expense of our global competitiveness. And it filters down to younger kids. Based on ratings by the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), the U.S. ranked No. 25 on 15-year-old students’ academic performance in math, science, and reading among nearly 80 countries and No. 37 on its average math score in 2018.

    The march back through the institutions has begun, with torchbearers of “progressive” education like Harvard retracting from the equity-obsessed assault on standards. But the overdue redress is not happening quickly enough. As of April 18, 2024, more than 1,900 accredited institutions of higher education in the U.S. are test-optional, while over 80 campuses are test-free.

    Most importantly, the ideological rot and moral bankruptcy at the core of the war on standards remain stubbornly embedded in many of our major institutions and in our contemporary culture. The concept of “merit,” for instance, is thoroughly misconstrued. Some “anti-racism” groups have listed “hard work, objectivity, rational thinking” as signs of “whiteness.” The MIT Press Reader ran an article last year about “The Myth of Meritocracy,” discrediting the thesis that a hard-working, right-living person can become a prosperous self-made man. The Princeton University Press published a Trump-bashing piece shortly before the 2020 election, arguing that “believing in meritocracy makes people more selfish, less self-critical and even more prone to acting in discriminatory ways. Meritocracy is not only wrong; it’s bad.”

    The harsh indictment on merit, a quintessential American spirit and an integral part of our national DNA, is based on faulty conceptualization. To critics of meritocracy, innate ability and personal circumstances are the only components of merit and they are beyond our control. Such an oversimplified conception of merit leaves no room for factors such as hard work, grit, perseverance, personal initiative, and agency.

    Adrian Wooldridge, author of “The Aristocracy of Talent” (2021), offers a synthesis on four tenets of a meritocratic society:

    1. People can get ahead in life on the basis of natural talent.

    2. Meritocracy secures equality of opportunity by providing education for all.

    3. It forbids discrimination on the basis of sex, race, and other irrelevant characteristics.

    4. It awards jobs through open competition, rather than patronage or nepotism.

    Admittedly, merit is not just about standardized test scores for college admissions. But those pursuing technical career paths also need to cultivate their skills and develop some sort of minimum qualifications. Emergency Medical Technicians, general contractors, and food truck operators must obtain state licenses or certifications to carry on their respective lines of work. A society that shuns any measurable standards expected of its contributing members is not one that can maximize the utilization of different talents, potentials, and skill sets.

    Merit is actually a combination of natural talent and effort. While not flawless, it is infinitely better than a return to ancient aristocracies “founded on wealth and birth.” It is also fairer than the fashionable paradigm of equity, which treats Americans as representatives of their identity groups and deprives us of agency. Assuming victimhood and privilege based on color, race and other group labels metabolizes into the prevailing culture of DEI, as if the profound fairness and unfairness of life that everyone must contend with can be simply reduced to cartoonish dichotomies.

    If there is something in life worth fighting for, I believe it must be imbued with a sense of personal agency, with the idea that we are the architects of our own life. The American Dream, a happy consequence of our meritocracy, is the notion that we can get to a place that is not predetermined by our birth or circumstances.

    Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 21:05

  • What The Rising Gold Price Signals (Spoiler Alert: Nothing Good)
    What The Rising Gold Price Signals (Spoiler Alert: Nothing Good)

    Authored by Antonius Aquinas,

    The recent run-up in the gold price has not garnered the attention among the mainstream financial media outlets as it should. 

    Gold has, in part, been overshadowed by the rise in the price of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. 

    Naturally, the financial press, which is really an arm of the government and its central bank, wants to ignore, as much as possible, references to gold as protection against the continuing increase in the price level which itself has been deliberately understated by monetary officials.  The media and government understand that precious metals are the ultimate security against runaway inflation and economic collapse.

    While the increase in the gold price has reached nominal highs, it and the price of silver have not passed their all-time 1980 highs in real terms. 

    Adjusted for inflation, gold would have to rise to about $3590 an ounce while silver would have to surpass $50 an ounce.

    Both are poised to exceed these watermarks in the not-too-distant future.

    Precious metals will continue to escalate unless the Federal Reserve radically changes its interest rate policy to combat inflation as former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker once did.  Volcker raised interest rates to double-digit levels which caused gold prices to fall.  While Volcker could get away with such actions (because, at the time, the U.S. was still a creditor nation), current Chair Jerome Powell cannot because of the enormity of public and private debt.  Double-digit interest rates would collapse the economy and plunge millions of Americans into bankruptcy.

    The rising price of gold is anticipating some of the promised policy actions of the Fed.  Since the end of last year, the central bank has indicated that it would be cutting interest rates.  In addition, Powell is considering ending the Fed’s “Quantitative Tightening” (QT) program.  Both are highly inflationary. 

    While commentators have focused on gold’s spectacular price rise, there is an underlying issue that is also taking place.  The record setting gold price is signaling that the present fiat monetary order, which is based on the dollar as the world’s reserve currency, is coming to a financially unpleasant end. 

    Ever since 1971, when the Nixon Administration closed the “gold window,” refusing to redeem gold for dollars held by foreign central banks, the world has been on a “dollar standard” where bank reserves are held in Greenbacks. 

    If the Fed continues to print dollars to sustain government spending at this rate, the dollar will continue to lose purchasing power and foreigners will no longer want to hold them.  Foreign central banks will then turn to gold.  In fact, central banks are already increasing their positions in gold which has been a catalyst that has fueled the latest rally.

    Not surprisingly, the Fed has not purchased much gold (or is not admitting publicly that it has) since it would be a bad look for the issuer of the world’s reserve currency to be abandoning its own currency for gold.

    Besides the severe financial implications if the dollar is dethroned, there will be dramatic geopolitical repercussions from the loss of its hegemony.  Just like the British pound was replaced as the dominant world currency after England insanely exhausted itself in fighting WWII and ending its empire, America will face a similar future when the dollar becomes just another money.  Many will see it as a “blessing” if and when the U.S. Empire comes to an end.

    While it would appear logical and morally sound to replace the present crumbling monetary order with one based on gold and silver, a far worse paradigm than even the present one is, no doubt, being planned. 

    The new system will be one of central bank digital currency (CBDC) which would give governments and bankers the power to monitor and control all aspects of economic and social life. 

    Some states have passed legislation to counter CBDC, such as Florida in 2023 under Governor Ron DeSantis who said:

    “The Biden administration’s efforts to inject a Centralized Bank Digital Currency is about surveillance and control.  Today’s announcement will protect Florida consumers and businesses from the reckless adoption of a ‘centralized digital dollar’ which will stifle and promote government-sanctioned surveillance. . . .”

    While the press and policy makers have ignored the surge in precious metal prices, it should be a warning to everyone that difficult economic times are still yet to come with the potential of a new draconian monetary order to be installed on the horizon. 

    Observant individuals should heed gold’s signals and take appropriate measures to safeguard their futures.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 20:25

  • Backstage, Private Dinner At ZeroHedge Crypto Debate With Schiff, Roubini, Scaramucci, & Voorhees
    Backstage, Private Dinner At ZeroHedge Crypto Debate With Schiff, Roubini, Scaramucci, & Voorhees

    On May 3, ZeroHedge is partnering with Crypto Banter to bring together top macroeconomic minds to debate Cryptocurrency: is it the financial engine of the future or a worthless bubble?

    In the anti-crypto corner is the man whose name is synonymous with “gold”, infamous crypto bear Peter Schiff. Alongside Schiff will be “Dr. Doom”: renowned economist Nouriel Roubini.

    Arguing in favor of crypto will be Anthony Scaramucci – infamous wealth manager with over $10 billion in AUM – as well as day-one crypto veteran Erik Voorhees, founder of ShapeShift and torch-bearer for the asset class’ libertarian roots.

    ZeroHedge is making an extremely limited number of spaces available for our readers who would like to meet the participants backstage before the debate, and enjoy dinner afterwards with the team and ZeroHedge staff in Palm Beach, Florida.

    Only five tickets available at $10,000 each (existing pro subs get a discount – email debates@zerohedge.com to redeem).

    Tickets are all-inclusive (business class travel and a luxury hotel stay in Palm Beach are included) and first-come-first-serve, so purchase yours now.

    If you cannot attend in person, be sure to catch the debate on ZeroHedge.com on May 3, 7pm ET.

    Secure your ticket

    *Anthony Scaramucci cannot attend the dinner but will be in-studio for the debate.

    For businesses interested in purchasing all five tickets for a work retreat, contact debates@zerohedge.com to inquire about discount pricing.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 20:15

  • Amash Battling Trump-Endorsed Deep-State Doozie For Michigan Senate Nomination
    Amash Battling Trump-Endorsed Deep-State Doozie For Michigan Senate Nomination

    Former Rep. Justin Amash on Monday announced that his Senate campaign had submitted the requisite signatures to appear on Michigan’s Aug. 6 primary ballot. The GOP field for a shot at a Democrat-vacated seat includes an archetypal Deep Stater in former Rep. Mike Rogers, who chaired the House Intelligence Committee and scored Trump’s endorsement in March despite having repeatedly bashed the former president. 

    In his final House term, Amash left the GOP, first becoming an independent and then a “capital L” Libertarian, giving the party its first-ever member of Congress, and positioning himself for a potential 2020 presidential run as a Libertarian; after forming an exploratory committee, he ultimately opted not to run.  

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Libertarian Republicans Thomas Massie, Justin Amash and Rand Paul amid an intense 2015 battle against extension of the Patriot Act (Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call/Newscom)

    In rotating back to the Republican Party after leaving it to carry the Libertarian banner, Amash is in some good company: After holding a House seat as a Republican, Ron Paul was the 1988 Libertarian presidential nominee, but returned to the GOP as a congressman and two-time Republican presidential candidate. 

    Of course, for many Republicans, Amash committed a far bigger sin: voting to impeach Donald Trump in 2019 for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. In a lengthy tweet thread at the time, Amash said Special Counselor Robert Mueller’s report “identifies multiple examples of conduct satisfying all the elements of obstruction of justice, and undoubtedly any person who is not the president of the United States would be indicted based on such evidence.”

    Last August, however, Amash railed against the federal criminal indictment of Trump for alleged election interference, tweeting:

    “I may not like Trump, but I love our Constitution, so I feel compelled to speak out. The latest indictment, which I encourage everyone to read, attempts to criminalize Trump’s routine misstatements of fact and law in connection with the 2020 election. But this is precisely the sort of wrong that must be addressed politically under our Constitution, not criminally.”

    One of those exasperated observers is Sen. Rand Paul, who lashed out at Trump’s endorsement of “the worst Deep State candidate this cycle”:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    A choice between Amash and Rogers is a choice between two people who’ve hammered Trump. The Michigan MAGA crowd can pick the one who’s a relentless opponent of mass surveillance, or the one who advocated expanded surveillance power under FISA and trafficked slanderous propaganda against NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.

    In a 2014, Rogers smeared Snowden with baseless suggestions that he was aided by the Russians, telling Meet the Press, “Let me just say this. I believe there’s a reason he ended up in the hands, the loving arms, of an FSB agent in Moscow. I don’t think that’s a coincidence.” Of course, the facts were as clear then as they are now: Snowden didn’t flee to Russia — Obama trapped him there.   

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    In a bright spot for Amash, his campaign last week announced that its per-week Q1 receipts since entering the race far outpaced its rivals’. Amash brought in $109,000 per week, compared to $79,000 for Rogers, $18,000 for Meijar and (not a typo) $93 for Pensler. Amash had $740,000 in cash on hand on March 31, compared to $1.4 million for Rogers, who spent nearly $600,000 in the first three months of 2024. 

    For conservatives, Meijar isn’t much of an alternative. Backed by interventionist neocons Sen. Tom Cotton and Rep. Dan Crenshaw, he succeeded Amash in Michigan’s 3rd congressional district, and proceeded to vote for Trump’s second impeachment — for “incitement of insurrection” — and for creating the Jan. 6 inquiry committee. He was primaried out of office after voting with Biden 39% of the time. His record also includes votes for Ukraine aid, and for a gun control package that included funding for “red flag” gun seizures. 

    Born to Palestinian and Syrian Christian parents, Amash was the first Palestinian-American to serve in Congress. In October, the Israeli Defense Forces killed several of his relatives when it bombed Saint Porphyrius Orthodox Church in Gaza. In another point of differentiation, we’re guessing Rogers will be keener on shoveling more money to the IDF than Amash. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 20:05

  • Wave Goodbye To Another Set Of Freedoms With The New Digital ID
    Wave Goodbye To Another Set Of Freedoms With The New Digital ID

    Authored by Graham Young via The Epoch Times,

    “Papers please” used to be the ostinato of totalitarian systems, at least in the movies.

    With the passing of the government’s Digital ID bills, Australians will have to become used to the digital equivalent – so what does that say about present-day Australia?

    A few things have surprised me over the last few years, not the least the way the famous Aussie spirit of insubordination has been subsumed into a goody-two-shoes compliance with whatever capricious orders the authorities made.

    I can’t imagine our forebears accepting lockdowns and forced vaccinations, and I certainly couldn’t see them accepting an identity card linking not just government accounts but private sector ones as well.

    While the first proposition is an assertion based on a gut feeling, the second is very much based on fact.

    Remember the Australia Card?

    In 1984, the Hawke Labor government introduced the Australia Card, and for the next three years, the government and opposition parties tussled over it to the extent that it triggered a double-dissolution election in 1987.

    Objections didn’t just come from the federal Opposition either.

    Queensland Labor Senator George Georges resigned from the governing party in 1986 over the issue, and in the lower house, Labor backbencher Lewis Kent said:

    “Nothing can be more un-Australian than the need to provide one’s identity on the call of an official, be it a policeman or a bureaucrat. It would be more appropriate for the proposed card to be called a Hitlercard or Stalin-card.”

    As a result, while the government won the 1987 election, and had the numbers to push the card through, instead, it withdrew the card when a technicality was found that could have affected its operation. One senses this was a relief.

    Individual Freedom Chipped Away, One Law at a Time

    Yet, apart from a few senators this time there has been little outcry in response to the Albanese government’s Digital ID, although the Liberal-National Opposition did vote against it.

    A form of this ID was recommended by the Murray Inquiry into the Financial System in 2014, but the committee was careful to avoid recommending a full-blown government-issued identity card because of the Australia Card debacle.

    The then-Liberal-National government acted on these recommendations, but its version of the bill was to facilitate private organisations to issue their own digital identity cards, rather than the government.

    Why has the government now decided to make the card a government-issued one, when the recommendation and the draft legislation was for a competitive system?

    At one level one might say it is symptomatic of this Labor government that it wants to control everything and is suspicious of both private enterprise and competition.

    At another level, it has been gnawing away at the independence of the citizenry, particularly the independence of thought, so maybe there is a long-term agenda of control here.

    Two pieces of draft legislation, and one draft regulation, exemplify this tendency—the proposed draft Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2023, the Online Safety (Relevant Electronic Services—Class 1A and Class 1B Material) Industry Standard 2024, as well as the Religious Discrimination Bill.

    The combination of these is to restrict what citizens can say, teach, and whom they associate with, depending on what is approved by the government, or worse, regulators.

    Recent Tragedies Reveal How Eager Authorities Are to ‘Protect’ Us

    Almost as though to prove the dangers of these proposed laws, the Commonwealth “censor” eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant just days ago ordered Meta and X to remove videos showing footage from the stabbing incidents at Westfield Bondi Junction shopping centre, and the Christ the Good Shepherd church at Wakely.

    I’ve seen this footage, as have many other Australians, and suffice it to say, were I the eSafety commissioner, they would still be up.

    When it comes to horror, the footage I have seen from Gaza and Ukraine, and reproduced in the pages and on the websites of the major news sites, is more horrific than any of this footage.

    And where is the justification for censoring the information that individuals can now access for themselves?

    For a moment there, we all became citizen journalists, able to view events and make our own decisions, and now the government is trying to take our accreditation away from us.

    Indeed, some of these clips are uplifting as they show acts of heroism as men throw themselves between attackers and victims, or tend to the wounded.

    Ms. Grant only has powers over commercial entities, so I can still, for the moment, show the videos on my blog.

    But should we all have a unique identifier, known to the government and cross-referenced to every other activity that we are involved in, who knows what petty bureaucrat will hold my free will in their hands? And what else might the government interfere with?

    Voluntary? Not Really

    In Canada, a country that shares our democratic norms, we saw the Trudeau government bar protestors, and any supporters who donated money to their cause, from using their bank accounts.

    Imagine what an interlinking record could allow them to have done.

    Is it too far-fetched to think that could happen in Australia?

    The government says these concerns are absurd.

    The digital ID card is “voluntary” and will only link records to the person, not link them together, and records will be encrypted. It also claims that it will protect against cyber-attacks.

    The voluntary aspect is laughable.

    You may be able to access your Centrelink welfare benefits without it, but you will need to physically go down to the Centrelink office, even if you live in Oodnadatta—a remote outback town in South Australia—and if the office is in Perth, Western Australia.

    And if you are a company director, you will need one, full-stop, because of the now-mandatory “director IDs” introduced by the Morrison government in 2021.

    If “voluntary” doesn’t mean voluntary for all people and all activities, then it doesn’t mean voluntary at all.

    Believe It or Not, the Slippery Slope Is Real

    So why are we acquiescing to this scheme?

    Perhaps it is because we’ve become too compliant—that the irreverent generation were the original immigrants and their sons and daughters, and now we are onto third, fourth, fifth generations and more, the spirit of adventure that brought people here has dissipated.

    Or maybe it’s the case that the frog has been swimming in digital waters that have gradually risen in temperature.

    First, we allowed social media companies to monetise us in return for the free use of their platforms, and then we allowed them to cross-reference our online activities to create profiles to then be used for other unrelated sites.

    And how is that working out? They abuse their power.

    We know that, come election time, they will be putting their thumbs on our scales and showing us material that they deem suitable, rather than allowing us to make our own decisions.

    We also know that they work hand-in-glove with unscrupulous administrations to sell us lies like “safe and effective” and to suppress embarrassing facts, such as the high probability that viruses escape from laboratories more regularly than from pangolins in a market (particularly when the market didn’t have any pangolins for sale).

    I don’t believe that governments are any more trustworthy than social media, especially if they are staffed with Bruce Lehrmanns and Brittany Higgins’s.

    Democracy is meant to be government by the people, for the people. And Google’s motto was “Don’t be evil.”

    But one seems to be converging on government by anyone but the people, and the other seems to have dropped the motto, maybe ashamed of their hypocrisy.

    Either way, human institutions seem inexorably to head towards dissolution, so the less they know about you and can link together, the better.

    So I’ll probably pass on my Digital ID.

    Whoops, I’m a company director. Looks like they are closing in on me already.

    Looks like I’ve already learned the true, government-approved, meaning of “voluntary.”

    *  *  *

    Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 19:45

  • Next Ukraine Package 'Larger Than Normal' As Biden Tells Zelensky Aid Coming "Quickly"
    Next Ukraine Package ‘Larger Than Normal’ As Biden Tells Zelensky Aid Coming “Quickly”

    US officials have been quoted in Politico as saying the Biden White House is preparing a “larger than normal” weapons package for Ukraine to be sent quickly once Biden signs the bill into law authorizing $61 billion in spending, following the historic weekend House vote, which was far and away the biggest hurdle.

    The officials described the new “significantly larger” tranche as including Bradley Fighting Vehicles, Humvees, M113 armored personnel carriers, and missiles – which will be ready to roll out the door. Also expected included in the package will be older Humvees and M113 armored personnel carriers. Two admin officials have told Reuters that the first single new package is expected to be valued at $1 billion.

    ATACMS missile, via US Army

    The White House said in a readout of Biden’s Monday call with Zelensky wherein the latter thanked the US for the new assistance: “President Biden shared that his administration will quickly provide significant new security assistance packages to meet Ukraine’s urgent battlefield and air defense needs as soon as the Senate passes the national security supplemental and he signs it into law.”

    Interestingly (and alarmingly, given the cross-border escalation with Russia soon to follow), Zelensky touted that the new bill also included provisions for Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) with a range of about 190 miles. “In the agreement on ATACMS for Ukraine, all the details are in place,” Zelensky said. “Thank you, Mr. President, thank you Congress, thank you America.”

    The $61 billion marked for Ukraine, among a broader final package totaling $95 billion (the rest for Israel and Taiwan), is now set for a vote in the Senate on Tuesday. “The task before us is urgent. It is once again the Senate’s turn to make history,” Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell stated while previewing the vote.

    Biden told Zelensky that he could expect the military assistance to arrive “quickly” – at a moment Ukrainian cities and especially energy and communications infrastructure are getting pounded. One question that remains is how much of the $61 billion is going straight to major US defense contractors, as they work speedily to prepare more military hardware to be shipped out the door.

    Meanwhile, the southern port city of Odesa was pummeled overnight, and there are reports of Russian drones having been fired on the capital of Kiev as well:

    At least nine people have been injured after an overnight Russian air strike on the city of Odesa, Ukrainian officials said. “As a result of Russian terror, residential buildings were damaged, and there was a fire,” Ukraine’s state emergency services said on Telegram.

    The day prior, stunning video emerged from Kharkiv showing a large TV tower being taken out during a Russian attack…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    AFP reported that an “AFP journalist in Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city, saw the red-and-white spire of the 240-meter structure toppled after local officials reported a barrage by Russian forces.”

    The New York Times has recently observed that “War in eastern Ukraine has killed tens of thousands of people, reduced cities to ruins and displaced millions of people. It has also all but destroyed the factories and plants that were for years an important driver of Ukraine’s economy.”

    As for what’s expected to be rushed US aid the moment Biden signs the new package into law, there are reports saying the staging has already taken place in central and eastern Europe…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 19:25

  • Cannabis Use Greatest Among Lower-Income And Less Educated
    Cannabis Use Greatest Among Lower-Income And Less Educated

    By Dan Witters of Gallup

    Nine percent of U.S. adults report that they use cannabis regularly, defined as at least 10 days of consumption per month.

    Regular usage differs by education and income, with the highest rates seen among those with a high school education or less (13%) and those living in households earning less than $24,000 per year (16%). These consumption levels are about three times the rates found among those with postgraduate work or degrees (5%) and those living in households earning $180,000 or more annually (5%).

    This analysis is part of the Gallup National Health and Well-Being Index. The results are based on a web survey of 6,386 U.S. adults, conducted Nov. 30-Dec. 8, 2023, as part of the Gallup Panel, a probability-based, non-opt-in panel encompassing all 50 states and the District of Columbia. To measure cannabis use, Gallup asked: “Keeping in mind that this is confidential, how many days in the last month have you used cannabis products (such as smoking marijuana, vaping liquid THC, or consuming baked goods or gummies) to alter your mood and help you relax?”

    About one in five adults (19%) report using cannabis products at least once in the prior month, including 23% of those with a high school degree or less and 28% of those in households earning under $24,000 per year.

    Regular Cannabis Use Diminishes With Age, Slightly Higher Among Men

    In addition to education and income, other factors are associated with greater use of cannabis. Adults younger than 50, for example, are twice as likely as those aged 65 and older to be regular cannabis users (12% vs. 6%, respectively). Men (11%) are marginally more likely than women (8%) to be regular consumers, while little difference is found among White, Black and Hispanic adults.

    Cannabis Use Highest in East North Central and New England Areas

    Reports of regular cannabis use vary across the U.S. Census divisions. The highest rates of use (11%) are found in the Middle Atlantic (New York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey) and East North Central divisions (Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio). The lowest usage rates (7%) are reported in the East South Central (Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi and Alabama) and the West North Central (North Dakota, Minnesota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas and Missouri) divisions. These differences are statistically meaningful.

    These results generally align with political identity, with residents of politically red states having somewhat lower regular usage rates than politically blue states. While regular use is reported by 10% of Democrats and independents, it drops to 6% among Republicans.

    When sorted into states that have legalized marijuana versus those that have kept it illegal, however, little differences in usage exist:

    • In states that have legalized marijuana: average of 2.9 days of cannabis consumption per month per person, with 9.7% regular users
    • In states that have not legalized marijuana: average of 2.5 days of cannabis consumption per month per person, with 8.6% regular users

    Implications

    In the U.S., cannabis is fully legal in 18 states and legal for medicinal purposes in 12 states. Another eight states have decriminalized marijuana, while it is fully illegal in 12 others. Legalization for recreational use was passed initially by voters in Colorado and Washington in 2012, with the commercial sale of marijuana to the general public available in both states in 2014. Nationally, 70% of adults now favor the legalization of marijuana for recreational use, an all-time high across over 50 years of measurement and up from 25% as recently as 1995. The narrow gap in cannabis consumption among residents of states where it remains illegal compared with those in states where it is legal suggests that its criminalization does little to curtail its use among American adults.

    Dovetailing with broadening legalization, the percentage of U.S. adults who report that they smoke marijuana has more than doubled in the past decade, climbing from 7% in 2013 to 17% in 2023. During that same period, the percentage reporting that they have tried it at least once has climbed from 38% to 50%. (It is worth noting that respondents may have also become more comfortable admitting to its use as its legality has widened.)

    How users consume cannabis has also evolved in recent years. For example, CDC BRFSS data show that among those who had consumed cannabis by any means in the prior 30 days, the proportion who primarily chose vaping to do so increased from 9.9% to 14.9% between 2017 and 2019 alone — and has likely increased since that time, particularly among young adults.

    Marijuana use can be addictive, with one study1 estimating that about three in 10 users form marijuana use disorder and a different study2 estimating that about 10% of cannabis users will become addicted. The use of marijuana during adolescence or young adulthood can affect how the brain builds connections for functions like attention and memory. Its use has also been linked to depression, anxiety and suicide. That cannabis use skews toward younger, less educated and lower-income individuals is consistent with previously existing research across an array of different substances and supports the need for early detection and intervention for at-risk individuals.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 19:05

  • Hezbollah Launches Deepest Attack Into Israel Since War's Start, On Passover
    Hezbollah Launches Deepest Attack Into Israel Since War’s Start, On Passover

    Hezbollah on Tuesday conducted its deepest strikes into Israeli territory since the start of the war, launching drones at Israeli military bases on the outskirts of the Israeli city of Acre.

    Israel’s military said none of its facilities were hit, and videos circulating online appear to show Israeli anti-air systems intercepting at least one drone which was flying low over the Mediterranean, just off the coast where Acre is located.

    The IDF subsequently confirmed it intercepted two “areal targets” off Israel’s northern coast. Thus far in the conflict, Hezbollah’s daily rocket and drone attacks have tended to stay within within a few kilometers inside Israel. 

    However, Tuesday’s attack seems to be sending a message that escalation could be imminent: 

    A security source told Arab News that the attack was “a sensitive targeting.” The area struck is more than 15 km from the border with Lebanon.

    “This targeting took place in broad daylight while the Israelis were celebrating the Jewish Passover,” the source said.

    Hezbollah said it launched the drones “in response to Israeli aggression against the Lebanese town of Aadloun and the assassination of a (Hezbollah) cadre there.”

    While the IDF denied that there were any direct hits on military bases, Lebanese source Al-Mayadeen reported that the headquarters of the army’s Golani Brigade was struck with drones.

    The below video shows an IDF intercept of a Hezbollah drone…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    This was based on a Hezbollah statement claiming that the air attack “targeted the headquarters of the Golani Brigade and the headquarters of Egoz Unit 621 in the Sharaga barracks, north of the occupied city of Akka (Acre), and the drones hit their targets accurately.”

    Last week a major war between Iran and Israel was narrowly avoided after each side launched ‘limited’ strikes against the other. But tensions remain high and it could be that Iran’s proxies, such as Hezbollah and Yemen’s Houthis, could be set to escalate, especially as the IDF has Rafah set in its sites.

    Interestingly, a fresh report in The New York Times says that Israeli leaders had actually planned a much bigger attack on Iran, but ditched the larger strike option at the last minute due to White House diplomatic intervention:

    Israel reportedly abandoned plans for a much more extensive counterstrike on the Islamic Republic after concerted diplomatic pressure from the United States and other foreign allies and because the brunt of an Iranian assault on Israel soil had been thwarted, according to three senior Israeli officials:

    Israeli leaders originally discussed bombarding several military targets across Iran last week, including near Tehran, the Iranian capital, in retaliation for the Iranian strike on April 13, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the sensitive discussions.

    Such a broad and damaging attack would have been far harder for Iran to overlook, increasing the chances of a forceful Iranian counterattack that could have brought the Middle East to the brink of a major regional conflict.

    In the end — after President Biden, along with the British and German foreign ministers, urged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to prevent a wider war — Israel opted for a more limited strike on Friday that avoided significant damage, diminishing the likelihood of an escalation, at least for now.

    Another angle showing a drone intercepted near Acre:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    According to a note via Rabobank, Mohamed El-Erian underlines a markets/NatSec disconnect over Mid-East events. Markets say “de-escalation”, because the oil price has gone down. National security figures worry; and those saying recent attacks were telegraphed might note reports of White House panic when Iran launched missiles, and Israel planning a larger military strike at first. We have calm now, but neither side will pass on the opportunity to weaken the other; the enmity is not over.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 18:45

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Apr 23

Today’s News 23rd April 2024

  • NATO's Never-Ending War: The 75-Year-Old Bully Is Faltering
    NATO’s Never-Ending War: The 75-Year-Old Bully Is Faltering

    Authored by Ramzy Baroud via Counterpunch.org,

    The western discourse on the circumstances behind the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), 75 years ago, is hardly convincing.

    Yet, that over-simplified discourse must be examined in order for the current decline of the organization to be appreciated beyond the self-serving politics of NATO’s members.

    The history records page of the US State Department speaks of the invention of NATO in a language suitable for a US high school history book.

    “After the destruction of the Second World War, the nations of Europe struggled to rebuild their economies and ensure their security,” it reads, which compelled the US to take action: “(integrating) Europe as vital to the prevention of communist expansion across the continent.”

    This is the typical logic of NATO’s early doctrine. It can be gleaned from most of the statements made by Western countries that established and continue to dominate the organization.

    The language oscillates between a friendly discourse – for example, Harry Truman’s reference to NATO as a ‘neighborly act’ – and a threatening one, also Truman’s tough language against “those who might foster the criminal idea of having recourse to war.”

    The reality, however, remains vastly different.

    Indeed, the US did emerge much stronger, militarily and economically after WWII. That was reflected in the Marshall Plan, an ‘Economic Recovery Plan’, which was a strategic, not a charitable act. It engineered the economic recovery of selected countries who would become the US’ global allies for decades to come.

    Upon its establishment, then Canadian Secretary of State Lester Pearson referred to the NATO ‘community’ as part of the ‘world community’, linking the strength of the former to “preserving the peace” for the latter.

    As innocuous as such language may seem, it introduced a paternal relationship between the US-dominated NATO and the rest of the world. Thus, it allowed the powerful members of the organization to define, on behalf of the rest of the world – and often outside the umbrella of the United Nations – such notions as ‘peace’, ‘security’, ‘threat’, and, ultimately, ‘terrorism’.

    A case in point is that the first major conflict instigated by NATO did not target external threats to Europe or US territories, but took place thousands of miles away, on the Korean Peninsula.

    The west’s political discourse wanted to view the civil war in the Peninsula, prior to NATO’s intervention as an example of “communist aggression”. This ‘aggression’ supposedly forced NATO’s hands to react. Needless to say, the Korean War (1950-53) was a destructive one.

    The 75 years since then proved the flimsiness of that argument. The Soviet Union has long been dismantled, and North Korea has been desperately fighting to break out of its isolation. Yet, a fractious state of no war-no peace remains in place. It could turn into an outright war at any time.

    However, what the war has achieved is something entirely different. The constant state of non-peace provides a justification for the permanent US military presence in the region.

    Similar outcomes followed most of NATO’s other interventions: Iraq (1991 and 2003), Yugoslavia (1999), Afghanistan (2001), Libya (2011) and so on.

    Yet, the ability to start or exacerbate conflicts, and the inability, or perhaps unwillingness to permanently end wars, is not the real crisis at NATO, 75 years after its establishment.

    In an article marking the anniversary, UK Secretary of Defense, Grant Shapps wrote in the Daily Telegraph that NATO must accept that it is now in a “pre-war world”.

    He lashed out at those NATO members who were “still failing” to meet the minimally required spending on defense, which equals to two percent of total national GDPs. “We cannot afford to play Russian roulette with our future,” he wrote.

    Shapps’ anxieties are often expressed by other top NATO leaders and officials, who are either warning of an imminent war with Russia or criticizing each other for the dwindling influence of the once-powerful organization.

    Much of that blame was placed on former US President Donald Trump, who outright threatened to leave NATO during his only term in office.

    Trump’s disparaging comments and threats, however, were hardly the instigator of the crisis.

    They were symptoms of growing problems, which have continued for years after Trump’s dramatic exit from the White House.

    NATO’s crisis can be summarized as this:

    • First, the geopolitical formations that existed following the collapse of the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact no longer exist.

    • Second, the main aspect of the new global competition cannot be reduced to military terms. Rather, it is economic.

    • Third, Europe is now largely dependent on energy sources, trade and even technological integration with countries that the US perceives as enemies: China, Russia and others. Therefore, if Europe allows itself to subscribe to the US polarized language on what constitutes enemies and allies it will pay a heavy price, especially as EU economies are already struggling under the weight of continued wars and constant disruption of energy supplies.

    • Fourth, fixing all of these challenges and more through the dropping of bombs is no longer an option. The ‘enemy’ is far too strong, and the changing nature of warfare makes traditional war largely ineffectual.

    Though the world has greatly changed, NATO remains committed to a political doctrine from a bygone era. And even if the two percent threshold is met, the problem will not go away.

    It is time for NATO to re-examine its 75-year-old legacy, and be courageous enough to change directions altogether – instead of opting for a state of non-peace, actually seeking real peace.

    Tyler Durden
    Tue, 04/23/2024 – 02:00

  • "What Kind Of American Are You?"
    “What Kind Of American Are You?”

    Authored by Jim Quinn via The Burning Platform blog,

    War, What’s It Good For?

    We have only seen a handful of movies in a theater over the last decade. Ever since the kids grew up, there hasn’t been a reason to spend too much for too little. Regal Cinemas in Oaks was the place to go in the old days. It had 24 theaters and was always packed. You could never get a parking spot close to the venue. The restaurant near the theater always had a line and you usually had to wait 30 minutes to get a seat.

    We decided to go and see Civil War on Friday night, and boy times have changed. Regal Cinemas went bankrupt a few years ago after Covid, and the theater was taken over by some local businessmen. They now play four or five movies, but $10 per ticket is pretty reasonable compared to the chains. Instead of hundreds of cars in the parking lot, there were about 30 cars. We expected a long wait time at the PJ Whelihans, but there were dozens of seats at the bar and booths.

    When we ventured over to the cinema, there was no one checking that we had tickets, and it was like a ghost town. A Friday night at the movies a decade ago was a big deal. The place would have been bustling. I can’t see this place making it over the long haul.

    There were eight people there to see Civil War. The previews were so loud, we thought we were going to need ear plugs. The sound became more reasonable once the movie started.

    I had read a few reviews of Civil War and they leaned negative, for a myriad of reasons. Some people seemed disappointed and angry that the director did not pick a side, or even make a single political statement.

    My interest in this movie stemmed from the snippet shown in previews, where a guy holding some journalists at gunpoint asks them who they are, they respond “Americans”, and he asks them:

    I think that is a profound question, as this country has already split into at least two enemy camps, with the leftists already fighting the war using any means necessary.

    Laws and morality no longer matter during this time of coming conflict. Knowing we are in the back end of this Fourth Turning, there is a high likelihood of civil and/or global war in the next few years. Whenever I point this out, many scorn the possibility of civil war. Some think keyboard warriors will never actually have the guts to get into a shooting war with the government and/ or leftist fanatics.

    I was hoping the movie would provide some thought provoking fodder giving me an inkling of what might be on the near term horizon. The movie is more about the journalist characters traveling from NYC to Washington DC in order to get an interview with the embattled president. There was no background regarding what started the civil war, who were the good guys, and whether the entire country was involved. The entire movie took place in the eastern U.S.

    My observations are as follows:

    • The conflict was between the Western Forces versus the existing U.S. government forces. The Western Forces constituted Texas and California, with Florida leaning in their direction. It was not clear whether all the states chose a side. Since both sides had high tech military weapons, the assumption is the U.S. military split its allegiance. That means rogue generals did what southern generals did in 1860.

    • For most of the movie, you can’t tell who is fighting who. That seems realistic in a civil war scenario. The scene where the journalists are asked “What kind of American are you?” captures how confusing and chaotic it would be. I don’t think the guy dressed in military garb is on either side. They were dumping bodies into a hole. Without anyone to enforce laws, warlords will rise up and execute retribution on locals they consider enemies. Every local community will become a battleground. Neighbors versus neighbors, families versus families. With 300 million guns, there will be blood.

    • Two characters let it be known that their parents have stayed on their farms in Missouri and Colorado, pretending their is no civil war. They seemed dismayed that they wouldn’t choose sides. That made me wonder whether those who choose to not participate in the coming civil war will be able to work their farms in peace. Since modern society will come to a grinding halt, with shortages of fuel and food, I’m afraid small farmers will come under attack by the hungry masses. It will be essential for small communities of like minded folk to form militias to protect their farms and communities.

    • We all know our existing uni-party government is corrupt, evil and hates us. Whether we call it the Deep State, corrupt oligarchy, or corporate fascist totalitarians, it is clear they are our enemy. They are continuing to implement their Great Reset/Great Taking scheme, and will only be stopped through violent means. This movie did not take sides, but did imply the existing government will be defeated. The question is who or what takes their place. Sadly, it is unlikely that a republic will be reborn from the ashes of this empire of debt, delusion and decay.

    Civil War was a sobering and depressing movie. I think it is a foreshadowing of what lies ahead.

    Innocent people will die. Senseless slaughter will be the norm. The boundaries between good and evil will blur. Right and wrong will become meaningless. It will be unclear who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. Conflict is upon us. Will the cessation of our Constitution before the upcoming election be the spark that starts this civil war? Where and when will our Fort Sumter moment happen? I don’t know, but I fear it is close upon us.

    “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.” – Thomas Jefferson in a letter to John Adams

    *  *  *

    To donate to Jim’s blog via Stripe, click here.
     

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 23:40

  • US & Philippines Kick Off Largest Ever Joint Drills On 'China's Doorstep'
    US & Philippines Kick Off Largest Ever Joint Drills On ‘China’s Doorstep’

    Tensions are soaring in waters off China as the US and its close regional ally the Philippines launched expansive joint war drills Monday, not far from hotly disputed maritime areas.

    At over 16,000 troops, the exercises called the “Balikatan” drills (or “shoulder to shoulder”) mark the largest ever conducted between the two allies. “The 2024 iteration is not only the largest but the most complex,” Newsweek confirmed of the annual exercise.

    US Marine Corps image

    The joint exercises will focus on “seizing maritime terrain, HIMARS infiltrations, and coastal defense and maritime strike operations among others” — and are taking place around the the Philippine provinces of Palawan and Batanes, geographically near disputed China Sea areas as well as Taiwan.

    A US Marine Corps statement described Balikatan as a “cornerstone event between the US and the Philippines, directly supporting the refinement and understanding of our shared Mutual Defense Treaty obligations.”

    To be expected, Beijing has blasted the war games as a provocation, with Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian warning against the placement and deployment of US weapons systems “at China’s doorstep.” He further put the Philippines on notice, saying there will be “serious consequences of pandering to the United States.”

    He further said Manilla “should understand that drawing in countries outside the South China Sea to flex their muscles and stoke confrontation in the region will only intensify tensions and undermine regional stability.” 

    Russia’s Sputnik has the following details on the scope of the new drills:

    • Some of the drills will also involve other countries, such as Australia and France, in secondary roles.
    • 14 nations will reportedly act as observers, including India, Japan, as well as some ASEAN and European Union countries.
    • In a first, six Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) vessels will participate in the drills in an active role.
    • The drills will simulate seizing islands in the vicinity of Taiwan and South China Sea.
    • For the first time, the exercises will be held at multiple Philippine locations, 12 nautical miles offshore, outside of the country’s territorial waters, near the disputed South China Sea – waters that are claimed by both China and the Philippines.
    • The maiden deployment by the US military of the Mid-Range Capability missile system in the Philippines has been denounced as contributing to a regional arms race.

    Recently, rival Chinese and Philippine coast guard patrols have directly clashed over maritime territory and fishing rights. Often these involve the firing of water canons well as dangerous ramming situations.

    Washington and Manillas are defense treaty partners – meaning that if Philippine forces ever come under direct military attack, the United States is ‘obligated’ to intervene on their behalf.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 23:20

  • Supreme Court Denies Bid To Expand No-Excuse Mail-In Ballots In Texas
    Supreme Court Denies Bid To Expand No-Excuse Mail-In Ballots In Texas

    Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear a legal challenge to a Texas law that requires voters under the age of 65 to provide justification to vote by mail, meaning that the Democrat-aligned attempt to sharply expand “no-excuse” mail-in ballots in the Lone Star state has failed, with implications for other states.

    Empty envelopes of opened vote-by-mail ballots for the presidential primary are stacked on a table at King County Elections in Renton, Washington, on March 10, 2020. (Jason Redmond/AFP)

    According to an April 22 order list, the high court denied petition for a writ of cetriorari in a case that stems from a federal lawsuit filed in 2020 on behalf of the Texas Democratic Party and several voters who requested that Texas lift its age-based limitations on no-excuse mail-in voting.

    Texas law only allows individuals to vote by mail without a qualifying excuse, like sickness, if they are 65 years or older. In their original complaint, which made its way through a number of lower courts before ending up before the Supreme Court, the petitioners alleged that the Texas voting law violates the 26th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits denying the right to vote due to age.

    The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the appeal means that the Texas law stays in place, delivering a win to election integrity advocates who argue that no-excuse mail-in voting is prone to fraud and makes elections less secure.

    At the same time, the high court’s decision to deny certiorari is a setback for groups who see laws like Texas’s age-based limits on no-excuse mail-in ballots as “voter suppression” or an unfair attempt to impose barriers to voting for certain groups, in this case younger voters.

    The high court’s decision not to hear the appeal has broader implications, however, since six other states–Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee–have similar laws on the books that let older voters to request absentee ballot without having to provide any justification.

    Public opinion in Texas over the issue of no-excuse mail-in voting is split, according to some polls.

    More Details

    In their initial petition filed in 2020 on behalf of the Texas Democratic Party and a group of voters amids the COVID-19 pandemic, the plaintiffs requested that Texas lift its age-based restrictions to no-excuse mail-in voting, citing public health risks related to the outbreak.

    A district court judge sided with the plaintiffs in May 2020, temporarily blocking the Texas law.

    Led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, Texas officials then filed an appeal with the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which paused the district court’s ruling while the appeal played out.

    The plaintiffs then asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reimpose the district court’s decision to freeze enforcement of the age-based limits to no-excuse mail-in voting, or to take the case up for review, but the high court rejected both requests.

    Ultimately, the 5th Circuit voided the lower court’s May 2020 order in full. This led the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint in the district court, this time asserting other claims, including ones of racial discrimination under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and arguing that the age limitations on mail-in ballots violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th and 26th Amendments.

    In a July 2022 order, the district court judge dismissed all of the plaintiffs’ claims, leading to another appeal before the 5th Circuit, which ultimately affirmed the district court’s decision to dismiss.

    The plaintiffs filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court in December 2023, asking the high court to declare Texas’s age-based voting law unconstitutional.

    The court declined to review the plaintiffs’ appeal, leaving Texas’s age restrictions in place and denying a bid to expand no-excuse mail-in voting in the Lone Star state.

    The Epoch Times has reached out to counsel for both petitioners and respondents with a request for comment on the high court’s decision.

    Election Integrity or Voter Suppression?

    The Supreme Court ruling comes amid a broader fight between those who see election integrity efforts as “voter suppression” and those who believe that the security of U.S. elections is too lax and should be tightened.

    According to a running tally by the left-leaning Brennan Center for Justice, expansive voting laws far outpaced restrictive ones in 2023.

    At least 53 expansive voting laws were introduced last year in at least 23 states, compared to 17 restrictive laws being passed in 14 states, suggesting that the election integrity movement is falling behind.

    Amid concerns over voter fraud, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich recently suggested that to win the presidential election in November, Republicans need to outvote Democrats by a significant margin.

    “Everybody who wants an honest election should know that in the long run, we need the French model: Everybody votes on the same day, everybody has a photo ID, everybody’s accounted as a person,” Mr. Gingrich said in a February interview on Fox News.

    “But until we get to that, if Republicans want to win this year, under the rules that exist this year, they need to outvote the Democrats by about 5 percent, which is a margin big enough that it can’t be stolen,” he said.

    Elsewhere, an election integrity monitor laid out over a dozen “critical” reforms that it believes are necessary in order to secure voter integrity in the 2024 election, including outlawing ranked choice voting and non-citizen voting, consolidating election dates, requiring voter ID, and safeguarding vulnerable mail ballots.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 23:00

  • On Earth Day, Biden Administration Backs Rooftop Solar With $7 Billion Grant
    On Earth Day, Biden Administration Backs Rooftop Solar With $7 Billion Grant

    By Tsvetana Paraskova of OilPrice.com

    U.S. President Joe Biden is announcing on Monday $7 billion in grants to help more than 900,000 low-income households install residential solar power, the White House said.

    President Biden will mark today’s Earth Day by traveling to Prince William Forest Park in Triangle, Virginia, and is expected to highlight the Administration’s progress “in tackling the climate crisis, cutting costs for everyday Americans, and creating good-paying jobs,” the White House said.

    The $7 billion in grants will come from the Environmental Protection Agency’s Solar for All grant competition, a key component of the Inflation Reduction Act’s $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.  

    The selectees under the competition are expected to deliver residential power to more than 900,000 households in low-income and disadvantaged communities, saving households more than $350 million in electricity costs annually, or about $400 per household, according to the White House.

    The rooftop solar program will also help avoid more than 30 million metric tons of carbon pollution over the next 25 years.

    EPA has received 150 applications, and 60 applicants were selected through a robust multistage review, Environmental Protection Agency Deputy Administrator Janet McCabe said in a call with reporters.

    U.S. solar installations surged in 2023, as solar accounted for over 50% of new electricity capacity added to the grid, for the first time in history, the annual solar market review of the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) and Wood Mackenzie showed earlier this year.

    However…

    …the biggest residential solar market in the U.S., California, has seen major policy changes in the way the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) will compensate rooftop solar customers for the excess energy they generate.

    This decision moved the state from retail rate “net metering” to a new “net billing” structure that cuts the value of rooftop solar credits by about 75%.  

    This, according to SEIA and WoodMac, is expected to crash California’s residential solar market in 2024, contributing to a projected 36% decline across all segments in the state.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 22:20

  • BlackRock Triples Larry Fink's Home Security As Anti-Woke Backlash Accelerates
    BlackRock Triples Larry Fink’s Home Security As Anti-Woke Backlash Accelerates

    BlackRock chief executive Larry Fink’s efforts to push ‘wokesim’ or environmental, social, and governance policies across corporate America have been in reverse in recent years amid the backlash from Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill and 19 state attorneys general in conservative states, including Arizona and Texas, who have been fed up with ESG-related policies hurting the economy. 

    Supposedly, the backlash by anti-woke activists has forced BlackRock to triple Fink’s home security spending. Financial Times says the CEO has become “a target for anti-woke activists and conspiracy theorists.” 

    According to FT’s numbers, the $10.5 trillion money manager spent $563,513 to “upgrade the home security systems” at Fink’s residences during 2023, on top of $216,837 for bodyguards. 

    The ESG movement has been highly politicized. Vivek Ramaswamy, one of the Republican party’s presidential candidates before Donald Trump was nominated, called Fink “the king of the woke industrial complex [and] the ESG movement.”

    In December, Fink said his firm was unfairly targeted by candidates in the fourth Republican presidential debate, calling it a “sad commentary on the state of American politics.”

    Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has called BlackRock the “economic power” to instill a “left-wing agenda.” 

    Besides conservative lawmakers revolting against the world’s largest woke money manager at the state level and on Capitol Hill, UBS bankers on Wall Street are becoming increasingly frustrated with unrealistic climate goals. Here’s the note, “ESG Frustration And Backlash In The Banking Sector Continues.”

    It should be no surprise to our readers: we have been pointing out the demise of ESG for more than a year now. Earlier in March, we wrote how Exxon’s CEO had all but declared victory over the “woke” ESG lobby. 

     We noted that CEOs were ditching ESG lingo on conference calls in February. For some context, peak ESG and related synonyms, such as “climate change” and “clean energy” and green energy” and net zero,” among other terms, peaked at 28,000 mentions in the first quarter of 2022. Ever since, the number of mentions has plunged. 

    Fink’s beefing up security is a sign that the political ideology pushed by the asset manager does not align with actual investors and most Americans. 

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 22:00

  • "Not About Freedom Of Expression": Aussie Politicians Unite Against Elon Musk's X
    “Not About Freedom Of Expression”: Aussie Politicians Unite Against Elon Musk’s X

    Authored by Monica O’Shea via The Epoch Times,

    Elon Musk’s X is facing strong criticism from both the centre-left Labor Party and the centre-right Liberal-National Coalition in Australia amid a legal challenge against the country’s online content tsar.

    Mr. Musk labelled Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant (a former Twitter employee), the “Australian censorship commissar,” after she issued an order to X to take down videos related to the alleged stabbing of a Christian bishop.

    X says it had removed all posts domestically, but the commissioner’s order calls for the removal of content around the world.

    X is planning to challenge this in court, and said the posts did not violate its rules on “violent speech” – content that incites or glorifies violence.

    Shadow Minister Says Musk Being ‘Irresponsible’

    However, the Liberal Party’s Shadow Foreign Minister Simon Birmingham called X’s contention a “completely ridiculous and preposterous argument.”

    “The type of standards that we expect in everyday life that we expect in other forms of media should be able to be applied to the online world as well,” Mr. Birmingham said on ABC News Breakfast on April 22.

    “The idea that it is censorship to say that imagery of a terrorist attack, of a stabbing incident should not be able to be broadcast in an unfiltered way for all to see—children to access and otherwise—is an insulting and offensive argument.”

    The senator also argued Mr. Musk’s argument was “irresponsible” given the impact of the social media posts on potential terrorists.

    “It is also an irresponsible one when you consider the implications that can have for inspiring potentially future terrorists, for creating discord and disharmony in communities, and driving people further apart when such images are manipulated or used with propaganda or other information,” he said.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Labor Government Paints Musk As ‘Bully’

    This comes after Labor’s Health Minister Mark Butler said the government would not be “bullied” by Mr. Musk.

    “And can I say this: Australia is not going to be bullied by Elon Musk, or any other tech billionaire, in our commitment to making sure that social media is a safe space,” Mr. Butler said during a press conference.

    Mr. Butler said if Mr. Musk wanted to fight the fine in court, the government was up for it because they were determined to keep “social media safe.”

    Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said he found it “extraordinary X chose not to comply.”

    “We know, I think overwhelmingly, Australians want misinformation and disinformation to stop. This isn’t about freedom of expression,” he told reporters.

    “This is about the dangerous implications that can occur when things that are simply not true, that everyone knows is not true, are replicated and weaponised in order to cause division, and in this case, to promote negative statements.”

    Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek called Mr. Musk an “egotistical billionaire.”

    “It’s more important for him to have his way than to respect the victims of the crimes that are being shown on social media and to protect our Australian community from the harmful impact of showing this terrible stuff on social media,” she said on Sunrise.

    “We need to keep Australians safe from this terrible stuff on social media. And Elon Musk doesn’t dictate to the Australian government what we are doing here domestically with our laws.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Opposition Switches Gears, Will Back ‘Misinformation’ Laws

    Meanwhile, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton agreed there was a case for “tougher action” against social media companies during an interview with ABC Insiders on April 22.

    “No question at all, and I think there’s a bipartisan position in relation to this. We know that the companies—and we’ve seen some of the comments from Elon Musk overnight—they see themselves above the law,” Mr. Dutton claimed.

    “The Australian law here should apply equally in the real world as it does online.”

    Mr. Dutton pointed out social media companies turnover billions of dollars of revenue in the Australian economy and indicated the laws should apply to them within the country.

    “I think there’s a red herring in a sense here. When Elon Musk says that there’s not extraterritorial reach—that is the Australian law can’t apply to other parts of the world—I’m sure that’s the case. But in terms of the content, which is displayed here, or broadcast here, well the Australian law does apply,” Mr. Dutton said.

    Mr. Dutton also indicated the Opposition would support Labor’s misinformation and disinformation laws, despite the Shadow Communications Minister David Coleman being very critical of the law in September.

    “Yeah, we are, and happy to have a look at anything the government puts forward, as we’ve said over the last week, with the horrendous scenes that we’ve seen.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    What Did X Do?

    X received a global takedown order from Australia’s eSafety commissioner to remove posts following the knife attack on a Christian bishop during a livestream service.

    However, X says the posts did not violate the platform’s rules on “violent speech,” and revealed it had received a demand from the eSafety commissioner to remove all posts globally—or face a daily fine of $785,000 (US$506,000).

    “X believes that eSafety’s order was not within the scope of Australian law and we complied with the directive pending a legal challenge,” the platform posted.

    “While X respects the right of a country to enforce its laws within its jurisdiction, the eSafety commissioner does not have the authority to dictate what content X’s users can see globally. We will robustly challenge this unlawful and dangerous approach in court.”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    On April 16, the eSafety commissioner confirmed it had issued legal notices to X and Meta to remove material within 24 hours.

    The commissioner said notices related to material that depicted “gratuitous or offence violence with a high degree of impact or detail.”

    “While the majority of mainstream social media platforms have engaged with us, I am not satisfied enough is being done to protect Australians from this most extreme and gratuitous violent material circulating online,” Ms. Inman Grant said.

    “That is why I am exercising my powers under the Online Safety Act to formally compel them to remove it.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 21:40

  • AI Crusades: San Fran Lunatic Goes 'Donkey Kong' On Waymo Robotaxi
    AI Crusades: San Fran Lunatic Goes ‘Donkey Kong’ On Waymo Robotaxi

    A viral video on X shows a person going full ‘Donkey Kong’ on an autonomous Waymo vehicle in the crime-ridden downtown area of San Francisco over the weekend. This plays into a much larger trend of people lashing out against self-driving cars. 

    Local media outlet KRON4 said the fully autonomous Jaguar I-Pace was near Market and Dolores streets when a person jumped on the hood and started “stomping the front windshield in an attempt to break it open.” 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    This isn’t the first time driverless vehicles have been targeted. A video from earlier this year shows a crowd in Chinatown torching a Waymo Jaguar on Jackson Street, between Stockton and Grant. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    A video late last year shows another robotaxi being attacked by a person with a hammer. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Last summer, we pointed out that members of Safe Street Rebels, a group that says these cars are “polluting, dangerous & murderous,” were coning driverless cars across the city. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    We have cited some X users who believe “The AI crusades have begun.” 

     Why would people rise up against machines? As Goldman explained a little over a year ago, “AI Will Lead To 300 Million Layoffs In The US And Europe.“

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 21:20

  • Syria's President Assad Confirms Rare Direct Talks With Washington
    Syria’s President Assad Confirms Rare Direct Talks With Washington

    Via The Cradle

    Syrian President Bashar al-Assad told the Foreign Minister of the south Caucasus republic Abkhazia during an interview published on 21 April that Damascus holds dialogue with Washington “from time to time.” In response to a question from Abkhazian Foreign Minister Inal Ardzinba on whether there has been an opportunity for Syria to “restore dialogue with the collective west,” Assad said: “America is currently illegally occupying part of our land, financing terrorism, and supporting Israel, which also occupies our land.”

    “But we meet with them from time to time, although these meetings do not lead us to anything,” the Syrian president said, adding, however, that “everything will change.”

    Syrian Presidency Telegram/AP

    As part of regime change efforts against Damascus in 2011, Washington, along with Turkey, Gulf states, and several other countries, sponsored extremist groups with the aim of overthrowing the Syrian government. 

    With the help of Russia, Iran, and Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Damascus has regained control over large swathes of Syria, which were under the control of ISIS and other US-backed groups. 

    Under the pretext of fighting ISIS, the US army occupied Syrian oilfields in the north of the country in 2015 in coordination with its Kurdish proxy, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) – one year after the launching of an international military coalition in Iraq and Syria. 

    In May 2023, a senior diplomatic official in the Arab League revealed exclusively to The Cradle that Washington and Damascus were holding secret, direct negotiations in the Omani capital of Muscat. 

    During the talks, Syrian officials mainly pressed for the complete withdrawal of US occupation troops from the country.

    The diplomat added that “secret talks took place in previous years between Damascus and Washington, but most of them were through mediators, such as the former director general of the Lebanese General Security, Abbas Ibrahim. Direct meetings also took place between the two countries, one of which was in the Syrian capital, Damascus.” However, the number of direct meetings remained limited.

    The secret talks in Muscat also touched on Austin Tice, a US citizen who entered Syria illegally via the Turkish border in 2012. Not long after, Tice disappeared in the territory of armed opposition groups that were fighting the Syrian government.

    “There is always hope: even when we know there will be no results we must try,” he said when asked about the possibility of mending ties with the West. — Times of Israel

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    During the Muscat talks, the source stressed that “the American envoy repeatedly confirmed that he has information that Austin Tice is alive and in a Syrian army detention center. However, the Syrian delegation insisted that it had no information about Tice, with Damascus expressing its readiness to make all possible efforts to reveal his fate.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 21:00

  • Kolanovic Says "Correction Has Further To Go" While JPM's Trading Desk Remains "Bullish"
    Kolanovic Says “Correction Has Further To Go” While JPM’s Trading Desk Remains “Bullish”

    On one hand, the technical storm appears to have subsided: as we predicted last night, just days after the biggest CTA shake-out in over a year (thanks to the fake Iran-Israel war, which on Thursday shook out all the sell stops thanks to the latest brutal bear trap, and thus paradoxically removed any residual selling pressure), other systematic funds finally stepped in to buy the dip, with vol control and Risk-Parity strategies both starting to add leverage back after a sharper unwind last week.

    Add to that our reminder that the stock buyback blackout ends on Friday, which the algos immediately rushed to frontrun…

    … and in retrospect it’s almost surprising stocks soared more than 1% at their highs.

    But after the biggest slide in stocks since the bank crisis last March, has the threat to markets faded away and is it safe to BTFD? At least according to one reformer permabear, the answer is a resounding no.

    Having incorrectly called the market in both 2022 and 2023, when he was first bullish during an epic rout, only to turn bearish at the lows and stay bearish during the biggest market rally in recent history, JPMorgan’s Marko Kolanovic – who has remained bearish in 2024 in hopes that a crash magically emerges out of nowhere even as the government is injecting $1 trillion in fiscal stimmies every 100 days in an election year, and finally validates his stubborn pessimism even though most of his clients have long ago seen their short positions stopped out – wrote a piece this afternoon titled “The correction likely has further to go” (available to pro subscribers in the usual place), in which he writes that, as one may expect, “we think the sell-off has further to go” and warns that he remains “concerned about continued complacency in equity valuations, inflation staying too hot, further Fed repricing, and a profit outlook where the implied acceleration this year might end up too optimistic.” 

    According to the Croat, who since October 2022 hasn’t seen a dip that wasn’t a guaranteed harbinger to a great depressionary collapse (and then when it proved to be just another dip-buying opportunity, would promptly provide a polysyllabic, extensive, if petulant analysis of why the market surged even as he never explained why he failed to predict it in the first place… again… and again… and again), “the current market narrative and patterns are increasingly resembling those of last summer, when upside inflation surprises and hawkish Fed revisions drove a correction in risk assets, but investor positioning now appears more elevated.”

    Fully elevated, eh? Funny he should say that, because just a few pages later in his own analysis, Kolanovic publishes this recurring chart showing how JPM clients see their positioning, and according to which just 35% plan to increase their equity exposure, which is tied for the lowest since last summer.

    And if that wasn’t enough, a chart showing how clients view their own equity positioning/sentiment in historical terms, reveals a perfectly balanced, if somewhat bearish distribution.

    Needless to say, both charts clearly refute Marko’s baseless contention that “investor positioning now appears more elevated” than it was a year ago, but then again, we would be the last to accuse the Croat of objectively analyzing data and interpreting facts without bias or a tendency to goalseek a predetermined bearish outcome (at least until the JPM trading desk has had its fill of purchasing all the stocks that JPM’s clients have to sell, after listening to Marko of course).

    Anyway, for those who are curious, here is what else Kolanovic had to say about the market’s “problematic backdrop.”

    USD, bond yields, oil and concentration all showing elevated risks remains a problematic backdrop. The multiple expansion seen in past months, extremely low volatility metrics up to recently, tightest credit spreads since 2007, and the general inability by market participants earlier in the year to identify any potential negative catalysts for stocks are starting to shift. We remain concerned about continued complacency in equity valuations, inflation staying too hot, further Fed repricing, rates moving higher for the “wrong reasons”, and a profit outlook where the implied acceleration this year might end up too optimistic.

    Market concentration has been very high, and positioning extended, which are typically red flags, at risk of a reversal. The combination of these macro factors increases the downside risks, and suggests that more Defensive trading should be appropriate

    Alas, none of that is accurate, relevant or actionable: in fact, concentration in the largest stocks has been far higher late in 2023 and earlier this year, and the result has already been felt following the recent Nasdaq drubbing, which hammered not only the Mag 7s but everything else too.

    In fact, one could argue that the recent selloff provided just the breather these extremely popular stocks needed to resume their vapid meltup, which will continue until one of two things happen: i) Trump wins the election and the government stops injecting trillions in fiscal stimmies or ii) the thing that we have said since February 2023 as the only necessary and sufficient  condition for stocks to crash, happens and Marko turns bullish.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Considering the S&P was at 4000 when we said that, one can argue that the simplest condition to trigger a market rally has also been the most accurate one, and since Kolanovic has refused to turn bullish in over a year, the S&P has soared more than 30% since the JPM strategist turned bearish.

    Bottom line: fade this latest in a long series  of bearish calls – if for no other reason than this one: those who really matter at JPM – the bank’s trading desk – remains thoroughly bullish.

    JPMorgan US Market Intelligence note, April 15, 2024, available to pro subscribers

    In fact, one can argue that JPM’s giant trading platform continues to perform admirably… if not for the bank’s clients, then for JPM itself, whose equity sales and trading desk had another phenomenal quarter.

    Why? Because all those stocks that JPM clients sold to the bank’s flow desk – in hopes that Marko Kolanovic would be right at least once in the past two years – have served to propel the bank’s own P&L gains into the stratosphere.

    Then again, while Marko’s relentless bearishness remains a source of comfort for all bulls, there is one looming risk: while we previously noted that both vol-control and risk parity funds are again buying, the same can not be said for CTAs, and as Goldman trader Cullen Morgan writes in his weekly Equity Positioning and Key Levels note (available to pro subs in the usual place), CTAs are sellers under almost all market conditions, and should the selling resume, CTAs have as much as $237BN in total global selling (and $58BN in S&P futs) over the next month. The only loophole: should the tape push higher over the next month, only then would CTAs buy some $46BN in global stocks, and $12BN in the US.

    CTA Flows:

    Over the next 1 week…

    • Flat tape: -$36bn to sell (-$9.5bn SPX to sell)
    • Up tape: -$23bn to sell (-$10bn SPX to sell)
    • Down tape: -$70bn to sell (-$24bn SPX to sell)

    Over the next 1 month…

    • Flat tape: -$43bn to sell (-$9bn SPX to sell)
    • Up tape: +$46bn to buy (+$12m SPX to buy)
    • Down tape: -$237bn to sell (-$58bn SPX to sell)

    On the other hand, after today’s powerful bounce, we are now closer to tripping the short-term pivot level to the upside, rather than the all-important medium-term pivot level to the downside, to wit:

    Key pivot levels for SPX:

    • Short term: 5116
    • Med term: 4888
    • Long term: 4625

    Anyway, while stock may swoon over the next few days and weeks, practically and pragmatically speaking the odds of a full-blown selloff (let alone crash), in an election year when the Fed is injecting $1 trillion in new debt every 100 days, are nil… unless of course Marko gets the tap on the shoulder that it is time for JPM’s desk to liquidate all its holdings. At which point he will of course turn bullish, and all bets are off.

    More in the full JPM and Goldman notes, both available to pro subscribers.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 20:30

  • 'The Most Secure Election In American History': John Eastman
    ‘The Most Secure Election In American History’: John Eastman

    Authored by John Eastman via The Gatestone Institute,

    I would like to discuss some of the illegalities that occurred in the 2020 election and the proposed constitutional remedies that we thought we could advance.

    I would also like to discuss the lawfare that is sweeping across the country and destroying not just the people that were involved in those efforts, but the very notion of our adversarial system of justice.

    This fight and the dangers from it are much bigger than what I am dealing with personally, or what the hundred or so Trump lawyers who have been targeted in this new lawfare effort are dealing with. It seems that there is something similar going on here, albeit to a much less lethal degree, than what we are seeing with the October 7th attack on Israel, as that, too, was an attack on the rule of law.

    The international community that will condemn Israel’s just response to these unjust attacks demonstrates a bias in the application of the rule of law that is very similar to what we are dealing with here.

    These are not isolated instances. They go to the root of the rejection of the rule of law. One of our greatest presidents, Abraham Lincoln, gave a speech, the Lyceum Address, in 1838 talking about the importance of the rule of law.

    When there are unjust laws, you have to be careful about refusing to comply with them because what you may lose in the process – the rule of law itself — is of greater consequence. He was not categorical about that, however, because the example he gave was of our nation’s founders and their commitment to the rule of law.

    But think about that for a minute. What did our founders do? They committed an act of treason by signing the Declaration of Independence. They recognized at some point you have to take on the established regime when it is not only unjust, but when there is no lawful way to get it back on track. These matters frame our own nation in our own time.

    Let us start with the 2020 election. What do we see and how did I get involved in this?

    When President Trump, then candidate Trump, walked down that famous escalator at Trump Tower, one of the planks in his campaign platform was that we need to fix this problem of birthright citizenship. People who are just visiting here or are here illegally ought not to be able to provide automatic citizenship to their children. People laughed at him for not understanding the Constitution.

    In his next press conference, he waved a law review article, and said there is a very serious argument that our Constitution does not mandate birthright citizenship for people who are only here temporarily or who are here illegally. That happened to be my law review article on birthright citizenship.

    Then, during the Mueller investigation, I appeared for an hour on Mark Levin’s television show and said the whole Russia collusion story (which Trump rightly called the Russia “hoax”) was illegitimate – completely made up. President Trump thought that my analysis was pretty good, and invited me to the White House for a visit.

    When the major law firms were backing out of taking on any of the election challenges, President Trump called me and asked if I would be interested. Texas had just filed its original action in the Supreme Court against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Michigan — four swing states whose election officers had clearly violated election law in those states and with an impact that put Biden over the top in all four.

    Two days later, I filed the motion to intervene in the Supreme Court in that action. The Supreme Court rules require the lawyer on the brief to have their name, address, email address and phone number.

    Nobody in the country at that point really knew who Trump’s legal team was, but all of a sudden people had a lawyer and an email address. I became the recipient of every claim, every allegation, crazy or not, that existed anywhere in the world about what had happened in the election. It was like drinking from a fire hose.

    I received communications from some of the best statisticians in the world who were working with election data and who told me there was something very wrong with the reported election results, according to multiple statistical analyses.

    One group decided to do a counter-statistical analysis. They said the statisticians had misapplied Stan Young’s path-breaking work. Unbeknownst to them, one of the statisticians I was relying on was Stan Young himself.

    Did you ever see the movie Rodney Dangerfield’s “Back to School”? He has to write an essay for English class, the essay has to be on Kurt Vonnegut’s thinking, so he hires Kurt Vonnegut to write the essay for him.

    The professor fails him. Not because it was not his own work – the professor hadn’t figured that out — but because, in the professor’s view, the work that Dangerfield turned in was not what Kurt Vonnegut would ever say. That is what I felt like with this supposed critique of the statistical work my experts were conducting.

    Those were the kinds of things we were dealing with. I became something of a focal point for all this information. The allegations of illegality were particularly significant. I’ll just go through a couple of states and a couple of examples:

    In Georgia, the Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, signed a settlement agreement in March of 2020 in a suit that was filed by the Democratic Committee that essentially obliterated the signature verification process in Georgia. It made it virtually impossible to disqualify any ballots no matter how unlike the signature on the ballot was to the signature in the registration file.

    The most troubling aspect of it, to me, was that the law required that the signature match the registration signature. Secretary Raffensperger’s settlement agreement required three people to unanimously agree that the signature did not match, and it had to be a Democrat, a Republican and somebody else, so you were never going to get the unanimous agreement. That means no signature was ever going to get disqualified – and in Fulton County, election officials did not even bother conducting signature verification

    Even more important than the difficulty of disqualifying obviously falsified signatures was that, under the settlement agreement, the signature would be deemed valid if it matched either the registration signature or the signature on the ballot application itself. That means that if someone fraudulently signed and submitted an application for an absentee ballot and then voted that ballot after fraudulently directing it to a different address than the real voter’s address, the signature on the ballot would match the signature on the absentee ballot application and, voila, the fraudulent ballot would be deemed legal..

    How do we know that went on? Well, we had anecdotal stories. A co-ed at Georgia Tech University, if I recall correctly, testified before Senator Ligon’s Committee in the Georgia Senate. She said she went to vote in person with her 18-year-old sister. They were going to make a big deal about going to vote in person because the 18-year-old sister was voting for the first time. They did not want to vote by mail. They wanted to make an event out of it, get a sticker, “I voted,” and all that stuff. They get down to the precinct and the 22-year-old is told that she has already voted. They said she had applied for an absentee ballot.

    “No, I didn’t,” she said. “Oh, Deary,” they said, “you must have forgotten.” Very patronizing. “No, I didn’t forget.,” she said. “We have been looking forward to this for months. I know I did not apply for an absentee ballot.”

    They subsequently found out that somebody had applied for an absentee ballot in her name, had it mailed to a third-party address, not an address she knew. She never recognized it, didn’t understand it, and then she testified that she later learned that the fraudulent ballot was voted.

    We had that kind of anecdotal evidence to prove that this change in the signature rules that Secretary Brad Raffensperger signed on to had actually resulted in fraud. The disqualification rates statewide, because of this change in the law, went down by about 46%.

    Why is the change in the rules through a settlement agreement a problem? Article II of our Constitution, the Federal Constitution, quite clearly gives the sole power to direct the manner for choosing presidential electors to the legislature of the State.

    When Brad Raffensperger, who is not part of the legislature, unilaterally changed the rule from what the legislature had adopted by statute, that change was unconstitutional, not just illegal.

    Another alteration of the rules set out by the legislature occurred in Fulton County. Election officials there ran portable voting machines in heavily Democrat areas of Atlanta, which was contrary to state law.

    Pennsylvania. One of my favorite cases comes out of Pennsylvania. The League of Women Voters, which claims to be non-partisan but is clearly anything but, filed what I believe was a collusive lawsuit against the Democrat Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Kathy Boockvar, in August of 2020.

    The premise of the suit was that the signature verification requirement that election officials had been applying in Pennsylvania for a century violated the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment because voters whose ballots were disqualified were not given notice of the disqualification and an opportunity to cure the problem.

    The premise of the lawsuit was that there was a signature verification process but that it violated federal Due Process rights. The remedy the League of Women Voters sought was to have the court mandate a notice and opportunity to cure requirement.

    The Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania decided to resolve the lawsuit by providing something the League had not even requested. She decided, on her own, that Pennsylvania did not really have a signature verification requirement at all, so the request relief – notice and opportunity to cure – would not be necessary.

    Unilaterally, she got rid of a statute that election officials in Pennsylvania had been applying for 100 years to require signature verification. She then asked the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to approve what she had done.

    She filed what was called a Petition for a King’s Bench Warrant to ratify what she had done. If I ever bump into her, I’m going to say, “You know, you have not had a king in Pennsylvania since 1776, maybe you ought to change the name of that.”

    The partisan elected Pennsylvania Supreme Court obliged. Not only is there no signature verification requirement in Pennsylvania, the Court held, but all those statutes that describe how election officials are supposed to do signature verification are just relics; they really do not have any meaning. So the Democrat majority on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, at the urging of the Democrat Secretary of the Commonwealth, just got rid of the whole signature verification process.

    Then the court went on to say: And since there is no signature verification requirement, there is no basis on which anybody would be able to challenge ballots, so we are going to get rid of the challenge parts of the election statutes as well, and since there is no basis to challenge, the statute that requires people to be in the room while things are being counted, that really does not matter. It does not have to be meaningful observation. Being at the front door of the football field-sized Philadelphia Convention Center was sufficient even though it was impossible to actually observe the counting of ballots.

    The statute actually requires that observers be “in the room,” but it was written at a time when canvassing of ballots would occur in small settings, like the common room of the local library, where being “in the room” meant meaningful observation of the ballot counting process. Obliterating the very purpose of the statute, the court held that being “in the room” at the entrance of the Philadelphia Convention Center was sufficient.

    In other words, all of the statutory provisions that were designed to protect against fraud were obliterated in Pennsylvania. We ought not to be surprised if fraud walked through the door left open by the unconstitutional elimination of these statutes.

    To this day, there are 120,000 more votes that were cast in Pennsylvania than their records show voters who have cast votes. Think about that: 120,000 more votes than voters who cast votes. The margin in Pennsylvania was 80,000.

    Wisconsin. One of the people who has testified for me in my California bar proceedings was Justice Mike Gableman, former Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. He was hired by the Wisconsin legislature to conduct an investigation.

    His investigation efforts were thwarted at every turn, with the Secretary of State and others refusing to comply with subpoenas, etc. Nevertheless, he uncovered an amazing amount of illegality and fraud in the election. For example, the county clerks in Milwaukee and Madison had directed people that they could claim “indefinitely confined” status if they were merely afraid of COVID.

    That is clearly not permitted under the statute, but voters who followed the county clerks’ directive and falsely claimed they were “indefinitely confined” did not have to submit an ID with their absentee ballot as the law required — again, opening the door for fraud.

    Although the Wisconsin courts held that the advice was illegal and ordered it to be withdrawn, the number of people claiming they were indefinitely confined went from about 50,000 in 2016 to more than a quarter of million in 2020. The illegal advice provided by those two county clerks in heavily Democrat counties clearly had impact.

    Election officials in heavily Democrat counties also set up drop boxes. They even set up what they called “human drop boxes” in Madison, which is the home of the University of Wisconsin. For two or three consecutive Saturdays before the election, they basically ran a ballot harvesting scheme at taxpayer expense with volunteers – whom I suspect were actually supporters of the Biden campaign — working as “deputized” county clerks to go collect all these ballots, in violation of state law.

    How do I know it is a violation of the state law? The Wisconsin Supreme Court after the fact agreed with us that it was a violation of state law.

    One last piece. Wisconsin law is very clear. If you’re going to vote absentee, you have to have a witness sign a separate under-oath certification that the person who is voting that ballot is who they say they are.

    The witness has to fill out their name and address and sign it, under penalty of perjury. A lot of these came in with the witness signatures, but the address not filled in. The county clerks were directed by the Secretary of State to fill the information in on their own. In other words, they were doctoring the evidence.

    They were doing Google searches to get the name, to fill in an address to validate ballots that were clearly illegal under Wisconsin law. All told, those couple of things combined, more than 200,000 ballots were affected in a state where the margin victory was just over 20,000.

    Then in Michigan, we had similar things going on. We probably all saw the video of election officials boarding up the canvassing center at TCF Center in Detroit so that people could not observe what was going on. There were hundreds of sworn affidavits about illegality in the conduct of that process in Detroit.

    Then there was one affidavit on the other side submitted by an election official who was responsible for legally managing the election. He said, basically, that everything was fine, it was all perfect.

    The judge, without holding a hearing on a motion to dismiss, at which the allegations of the complaint are supposed to be taken as true, rejected all the sworn affidavits from all the witnesses who actually observed the illegality, and instead credited the government affidavit – without the government witness evening being subject to questioning on cross-examination.

    This is a manifestation of what I have described as the increasingly Orwellian tendency of our government. “We’re the government and when we’ve spoken, you’re just supposed to bend the knee and listen.”

    That was just some of the evidence we had. In those four states, and in Arizona and Nevada as well, there is no question that the illegality that occurred affected way more ballots than the certified margin of Joe Biden’s victory in all of those states.

    It only took three of those six states — any combination of three — for Trump to have won the election.

    When I was coming out of the Georgia jailhouse after surrendering myself for the indictment down in Georgia, one of the reporters threw a question at me. He said, “Do you still believe the election was stolen?”

    I said, “Absolutely. I have no doubt in my mind,” because of things like this and because of the Gableman report, because of Dinesh D’Souza’s book on 2000 Mules — that stuff is true.

    People say, “Well, it’s not true. It’s been debunked.” No, it has not been debunked. In fact, there have been criminal convictions down in Pima County, Arizona, from the 2018 election, where people finally got caught doing the same thing that Dinesh D’Souza said they were doing.

    Dinesh’s documentary was based on the investigative work conducted by Catherine Engelbrecht of True the Vote. Her team obtained, at great expense, commercially-available cell phone location data and identified hundreds of people who visited multiple ballot drop boxes, oftentimes in the wee hours of the morning, 10 or more different drop boxes. Then they got the video surveillance from those drop boxes (those that were actually working, that is), confirming that the people were dropping in 8, 10, 12 ballots at a time.

    In Georgia, you are allowed to drop off ballots for immediate family members, but I think it is fairly clear that these folks – “mules” is what the documentary called them – were not family members. They were taking selfies of themselves in front of the ballot boxes because, as the whistleblower noted to Engelbrecht, they were getting paid for each ballot they delivered. In other words, this certainly looks like an illegal ballot harvesting scheme.

    What has happened since then? Well, there is a group in DC, largely hard-liner partisan Democrats, Hillary and Bill Clinton crowd, but joined by a couple of hard-line never-Trump Republicans, or one, so they can claim they are bipartisan. The group is called The 65 Project, and it is named after the 65 cases brought by Trump’s team that supposedly all ruled against Trump.

    Well, first of all, that mantra, how many have heard it?: “All the cases, all the courts ruled against Trump.” First of all, that is not true. Most of the cases were rejected on very technical jurisdictional grounds, like a case brought by a voter, rather than the candidate himself.

    Individual voters do not have standing because they lack a particularized injury. Those were dismissed. There is no basis for claiming that there was anything wrong with the claims on the merits. It is just that the cases were not brought by the right people.

    There was one case where one of these illegal guidances from the Secretary of State was challenged before the election. The judge ruled that it was just a guidance, and that until we get to election day to find out if the law was actually violated, the case was not ripe — and it got dismissed.

    Then the day after the election, when election officials actually violated the law, the case gets filed again, and the court says, “You can’t wait until your guy loses and then bring the election challenge. It’s barred by a doctrine called laches. This is the kind of stuff that the Trump legal team was dealing with in those 65 cases.

    Of the cases that actually reached the merits –there were fewer than a dozen of them, if I recall correctly — Trump won three-fourths of them. You have never heard that in the “New York Times.” And the Courts simply refused to hear some clearly meritorious cases, such as one filed in the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The majority in that case simply noted that it did not see any need to hear the case, over a vigorous dissent that basically said, “Are you nuts? This was illegal, and we have a duty to hear the challenge.”

    Two years later, that same Court took up the issues that had been presented to it in December 2020, and it held that what happened was illegal. But by then it was too late to do anything about it.

    The 65 Project was formed — I think I’ve seen reported that they received a grant from a couple of George Soros-related organizations of $100 million — to bring disbarment actions against all of the lawyers who were involved in any of those cases.

    The head of the organization gave an interview to Axios, kind of a left-leaning Internet news outlet, and he said in his interview to Axios that the group’s goal with respect to the Trump election lawyers is to “not only bring the grievances in the bar complaints, but shame them and make them toxic in their communities and in their firms” “in order to deter right-wing legal talent from signing on to any future GOP efforts” to challenge elections.

    Think about that. Our system works, in part, because we have an adversarial system of justice that supports it. If groups like the 65 Project succeed in scaring off one side of these intense policy disputes or legal disputes, then we will not have an adversarial system of justice.

    We will not have elections that we can have any faith in, because if you do not have that kind of judicial check on illegality in the election, then bad actors will just do the illegality whenever they want, and we won’t be able to do anything about it.

    They are not the group that brought the bar charges against me in California, but they did file a complaint against me in the Supreme Court of the United States. A parallel group called the States United Democracy Center is the one that filed the bar complaint against me in California. Nearly every single paragraph of the complaint had false statements in it.

    The bar lawyers publicly announced back in March of 2022 that they were taking on the investigation. Under California law, investigations before charges are filed publicly are supposed to be confidential. But there is an exception if the bar deems that the lawyer being investigated is a threat to the public.

    So the head of the California Bar had a press conference announcing that I was a threat to the public, and therefore they could disclose that they were conducting an investigation. Now, what is the threat to the public that I pose? What is the old line? Telling truth in an era of universal deceit is a revolutionary act? I guess that is the threat to the public they’re asserting.

    That is the threat to the public. Telling the truth about what went on in the 2020 election. They gave me the most extraordinary demand. They basically said we want to know every bit of information you had at your disposal for every statement you made on the radio, for every article you published, for every line in every brief you filed. It took us four months.

    I said, “We’re going to respond to this very comprehensively.” They say I have no evidence of election illegality and fraud. We gave them roughly 100,000 pages of evidence. 100,000 pages we disclosed to them. They went ahead and filed the bar charges anyway against us in January of 2023.

    My wife and I, since 2021, have been on quite a roller coaster.

    We came to the realization that my whole career, my education in Claremont, my PhD, my teaching constitutional law for 20 years, my being a dean, my being a law clerk for Justice Clarence Thomas, probably equipped me better than almost anybody else in the country to be able to confront, stand up against this lawfare that we’re dealing with.

    This is our mission now. This is what we do. This is what I do around the clock, is deal with this.

    I was teaching our summer seminar at the Claremont Institute. We do a series of summer seminars, one for recent college grads called the Publius Fellowship Program.

    You may recognize some of the names of people that have gone through Publius. I was a Publius Fellow in 1984. Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, Tom Cotton, Kate Mizelle (the judge who blocked the vaccine mandates down in Florida). We’ve had some pretty good folks.

    We also conduct a program for recent law school grads called the John Marshall Fellowship. We were conducting a seminar on the Constitution’s religion clauses when the news of the Georgia indictment naming me as an indicted co-conspirator came down. We kept going on with the seminar. At the end of the program, the fellows always roast each other and make fun of each other, missteps they’d made during the week and things like that.

    Well, this year, they roasted me a bit. One of the students noted that as FBI agents were rappelling down from the rooftop, Eastman kept talking about the Constitution’s religion clauses.

    He recounted that, prior to the program, the students didn’t know what to expect when they accepted the fellowship offer to study with me (among others), given all that was going on. Then he said that what they witnessed on that night, when the indictment came down, was a demonstration of courage they had not seen before, and that it was contagious. He then recited a line from our national anthem – the one asking whether the flag was still flying. And he noted, with great insight, that if you listen carefully to the words, the question is not so much whether the flag still flies, but what kind of land it flies over? Is it still the land of the free and the home of the brave, or the land of the coward and the home of the slave?

    I find more and more, as more Americans are waking up to what is going on, that courage is indeed contagious. People are looking for ways to help fight back. When they see somebody standing up with that kind of courage, it gives them courage to join.

    There are people in every county in the country, with eyes on the local clerk’s office and verifying that, “When it says 28 people are living and voting in an efficiency apartment, we know that is not true and we’re going to get that cleaned up.”

    I remain optimistic as people are awakening to the threat to our way of life. This is one of the cornerstones of our Declaration of Independence. We are all created equal. There are certain corollaries that flow from that.

    This means that nobody has the right to govern others without their consent. The consent of the governed is one of the cornerstones of our system of government. Our forefathers exercised it in 1776 by choosing to declare independence, and 10 years later by choosing to ratify a constitution, and we exercise that consent of the governed principle in an ongoing way by how we conduct our elections.

    Ultimately, we are the sovereign authority that tells the government which direction we want it to go, not the other way around.

    Regularly, we are instead being given the following message: “We’re the government. We have spoken. How dare you stand up and offer a different view.” That has turned us from being sovereign citizens in charge of the government to subjects being owned by or run by the government.

    That is not the kind of country I intend to live in. It is not the kind of country I want my kids and now my grandchildren to grow up in. This is a fight worth everything you’ve got. That’s why we’re going to do as much as we can to win this fight. Thank you for your support and prayers.

    * * *

    Question: What happened after the 2020 election with Justices Thomas and Alito. They wanted the Supreme Court at least to hear the evidence, but were turned down. Why?

    Dr. Eastman: One of the cases that was up there was one of the other illegalities that occurred in Pennsylvania. The Secretary of State unilaterally altered the statutory deadline for the return of ballots.

    Pennsylvania, like most states, says, “If you’re going to mail in your ballot, it’s got to be received by the close of the poll so we’re not having this gamesmanship of being able to get ballots in after the fact.” She said, “Oh, we’re going to give an extra week.” The court said, “No, we’ll give an extra four days.”

    That case was brought to the Supreme Court to block that clearly illegal action by the Secretary of the Commonwealth, agreed to by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. They asked for an emergency stay of that decision so the rule that had been in place would still be followed.

    Ruth Ginsburg had died, there were eight people, and the court split four to four, which means the stay was denied. You had to have a majority. It was Thomas, it was Alito, it was Gorsuch, and it was Kavanaugh. John Roberts voted with the three liberals. Then when Amy Coney Barrett joined the court, I thought, “OK, we’ll get to five.”

    When a motion to expedite in my case was filed in mid-December, we filed a cert petition from three of the erroneous Pennsylvania Supreme Court cases, we filed a motion to expedite, and that was denied. They didn’t even act on it.

    Then February 12th of 2021, they denied the cert petition and the motion to expedite. The vote there was six to three on the ground that it had become moot. That meant Barrett and Roberts and Kavanaugh all voted to deny the cert petition. But it had not become moot.

    The issue of whether non-legislative actors in the state can alter election law consistent with the Constitution remains an open issue. It should not be an open issue. The Constitution is quite clear, but there was a news account at one point reporting that John Roberts had yelled at Alito and Thomas, who had insisted they needed to take these cases. They were just like Bush versus Gore.

    Roberts was reported to have said, “They’re not like Bush versus Gore. If we do anything, they will burn down our cities.” Which means the impact of what had gone on in the summer of 2020 in Portland and Kenosha and all these other places, had an impact on the Supreme Court declining to take these cases.

    By the way, a little aside on that story to show you how distorted the January 6th committee, and particularly Liz Cheney was on the evidence.

    At some point during the course of all this, the legislator in Pennsylvania who was conducting hearings on the election illegality in Pennsylvania wanted my advice on what the legislative authority was if they found that there was outcome determinative illegality or fraud in the election.

    He sent an email to me at my email address at the University of Colorado, where my wife and I were teaching at the time.

    I responded, “If there is clear evidence of illegality, that’s unconstitutional, and so you have the legal right, the legal constitutional authority to do something about it. If you think it altered the effect of the election, you should name your own electors.”

    University of Colorado, contrary to their policy, disclosed that email publicly. Liz Cheney announced the email, said Eastman was pressuring the Pennsylvanian legislature to overturn the election, even though it was quite clear that my statement about legislative authority was specifically conditioned on a finding of illegality and fraud sufficient to have affected the outcome of the election.

    The other gross distortion that came out of the J6 Committee involved an email exchange I had about whether to appeal the Wisconsin case to the Supreme Court. The campaign staff, money guys in the campaign said, “We’re trying to be good stewards of the funds we have. What are the chances that they’re going to take these cases? Is it worth filing these cert petitions?”

    I wrote in the email, “The legal issues are rock solid. It therefore doesn’t turn on the merits of the case. It turns on whether the justices have the spine to take this on. Then I said, “And I understand that there is a heated fight underway and whether they should take these cases. We ought to give the good guys the ammunition they need to wage that fight.”

    Liz Cheney or someone on the J6 Committee puts out a portion of this email. They ignore that I say the legal issues are rock solid. They say instead that Eastman, knowing his case had no merit, was pressuring the Supreme Court to take the case and obviously had inside information from Ginni Thomas, because three weeks earlier, Ginni had sent me a note saying, “I heard you on Larry O’Connor’s show giving an update on the election litigation. Can you give that same update to my Zoom call group? By the way, what’s your home address? I need it for the Christmas card.”

    That was the email. All of a sudden, Liz Cheney and the J6 Committee puts those two things together as if there was something nefarious about it.

    My understanding that there is an intense fight underway at the Court was based exclusively on the news accounts in The New York Times about Roberts yelling at Alito for insisting that the Court needed to take these cases. The dishonesty, the combination of the dishonesty, the whole thing, this narrative is out there and it is the government narrative.

    No matter how false the narrative is, we are supposed to just accept it or bend the knees. “It’s like, the government says, ‘We’ve increased your funds this year from four to three,'” and we’re just all supposed to accept it. This is lawfare, but it is support of totalitarianism, of authoritarianism.

    The government has spoken, and we are all supposed to accept it as true, no matter how obviously false it is. I’m sorry, free people should not and never have and never will if they continue to be a free people tolerate that kind of thing.

    Q: I have two questions. One, when Raffensperger did that in Georgia, was it expressly to defeat Donald Trump? Do you think he knew what the ramification of that ruling was going to be? The second thing is, in this upcoming trial, is there an opportunity to lay out publicly for a jury?

    Is this a jury situation, the talk you just gave us? Because there has to be a moment where people pay attention to this, and so far it has not happened.

    Dr. Eastman: So far it has not come, I agree. I mean, it has come, but in ways that are immediately shut down. We are laying out the case now in my California bar trial, which next week enters its eighth week. My defense of my California bar license will have cost us a half million dollars before all is said and done.

    Being a full trial team for eight weeks, it’s gone on. It is insane, but we are laying out the case to the extent the judge permits. She has already blocked about a dozen of my witnesses, but I’ll tell you some of the stories. We have a guy named Joseph Freed, retired CPA, professional auditor, auditing Fortune 500 companies his whole career.

    He said something doesn’t smell right here, and so he applied his tools of the trade to look at the elections and wrote a book called “Debunked.” It’s a brilliant book. I told my wife, “This is the book I would have written if I hadn’t been on my heels playing defense the last year.”

    The book was written and published in January of 2023, so the judge ruled it was not relevant because even though it discusses all the evidence I had before me, the analysis he did was after the fact and I could not have relied on it, therefore it was not relevant.

    Two days later, the government offers a witness to introduce into evidence government reports that were done in September 2022. My lawyer objected, “It’s not relevant on your prior ruling.” The lawyer for the bar actually said, “Well, these are government reports. They are different.” So the judge let them in.

    Part of the problem is, trying to prevent the story from getting out, even in a trial where the rules of evidence are supposed to come to play. I don’t think they’ll be able to get away with that in the Georgia criminal litigation.

    This full story probably will come out more clearly there and it will have a bigger viewership there than my California bar trial has had because Trump is one of the defendants. The California bar trial is exposing a lot of this.

    A reporter for the “Arizona Sun,” Rachel Alexander, is doing a terrific job covering the case in daily articles in Arizona Sun, but she also she has a Twitter account.

    What I’ve seen this far from the state trial judge down in Georgia is that he is going to hold the line on what the law is and what the law requires. That is a very good thing and we’ll be able to see it. Fingers crossed.

    About Raffensperger, look, I don’t know what his motives are, all I can see is the consequences of them. There are the consequences of that, which should have been obvious on its face. More importantly, there is the continued falsity claims in his public statements, and I’ll give you one example.

    One of the expert reports on the election challenge that was filed — which never got a judge appointed, by the way, for nearly a month, and by then it was too late.

    One of the allegations based on an expert analysis was that 66,247 people had voted who were underage when they registered to vote.

    Now, he goes out and does a press conference and says, “We checked, nobody voted when they were underage,” but that was not the allegation made by the expert. The allegation was that they registered to vote when they were 16. You have to be 17 and a half before you can register.

    If they had not re-registered, that meant they were not legally registered and not legally allowed to vote. He routinely mischaracterizes the actual allegation in the case, deliberately lying. Whatever his motives were with whether he’s anti-Trump or not, he is clearly lying, and we ought not to give him any credence whatsoever.

    Q: You had said before that President Trump had won three quarters of the real cases. I’m wondering what that means to win, what are the implications of that and what is correct, if anything. What, then, then is the way forward?

    Dr. Eastman: The way forward is a legal system. Now, the Trump cases that were won only involved small components like the statutory right in Pennsylvania to be there to observe the counting. They were blocking even minimum observation. The court ordered, “Yeah, you’ve got to let them into the room and observe.”

    That was not one that was the grand enchilada on the outcome determinative issues, but he won the case. We won ultimately on the indefinitely confined ruling up in Wisconsin. They said that, “Just being fearful of COVID does not mean you’re indefinitely confined under the statute.”

    It’s not as if the Wisconsin legislature didn’t have an opportunity to alter that. If they wanted, they determined, they considered alterations in the law as a result of COVID, made some, but this was not one of them.

    What I have seen, and it pains me to say this, is that the level of corruption in our institutions, including our judicial institutions, is so pervasive now that it is troubling. Because many of these cases end up in the DC courts, I cannot imagine a stronger case for change of venue than those January 6th criminal defendants.

    Yet their motions for change of venue were uniformly denied because they wanted this in the DC jury pool, which is like 95% hostile to Trump. This is not a jury of peers. This is not a jury that is likely to lead to a just and true result. This is a partisan political act, a loaded dice system in DC.

    The same thing I think they were gambling on being true in Georgia, in Fulton County. But I don’t think the dice is as loaded there as it is in DC.

    It will cost a million, a million and a half to defend against those charges. The poor guy who entered a plea agreement and pleaded guilty last week, one of the 19 defendants in Georgia, he is a bail bondsman for a living.

    If he gets a felony, he is not only in jail for a while, but he cannot do his trade, so they offer him a misdemeanor conviction and no jail time. He took it in a heartbeat. Otherwise, he is looking at a million to two million dollars in legal fees tied up in this internationally televised drama for nothing, and he was not in the position to undertake that.

    We have raised over a half million on my legal defense fund site. It’s probably going to end up being three million total that we need, but he did not have the ability to do a hundredth of that.

    In international news: “Oh, one of Trump’s co-defendants is turning the tables on Trump. This is bad news for Trump.” No, it’s not. The guy made the most sensible decision he could.

    My lawyer got a call from ABC, they said, “Have they reached out to you to offer a plea agreement?” I told him to say “No, I suspect they’re not going to, but I’ll tell you what. I’ll make a suggestion to them. I will agree to a plea agreement that says they drop all the charges, and I will agree to testify truthfully on their behalf. In exchange, I agree not to file a lawsuit for malicious prosecution against them.”

    I thought that was a pretty good offer.

    Q: You’re paying with your money. They’re paying with the…

    Dr. Eastman: Yeah, they’re paying with my money too, taxpayer money.

    Q: What about the ability to manipulate electronic voting machines? It was on every single broadcast for weeks.

    Dr. Eastman: I quickly became a triage nurse. Once I filed that brief on behalf of Trump and everything started coming in. I had to try and make the best judgment I could about what kind of allegations were credible and what allegations were not credible. What things that would appear credible that we could prove versus the one that seem credible, but we cannot prove them. I’ll give you one example.

    Early in January, Mike Lindell from MyPillow said he had a list of the Chinese intrusions. He has got 50 pages of spreadsheets purporting to show IP addresses in Beijing connecting with IP addresses in county election offices all over the country, and then altering Trump down 45 votes in this precinct or altering the totals as they are getting transmitted to the secretaries of state that then become part of the reported vote totals.

    I had the first 10 lines of that spreadsheet on January 2nd, and I had some of the best security experts in the world that I was working with, and I said, “Can we verify this?” — because they commonly describe how many Trump votes were lost, but obviously just typed in. I said, “I need to see the data, I need to see the packet that you say is sending instructions to make these alterations.”

    They wanted me to go to the president with this stuff and I said, “If in fact this is true this is an act of war by the number one other superpower in the world against the United States.” Taking that information into the president without confirming it would be an imprudent thing to do.

    I wanted to confirm it and my experts, who had access to IP address registries, said none of the IP addresses were valid. This is made-up stuff. So, I was not able to confirm it. Now, maybe this occurred, but the data I was looking at was not the silver bullet of evidence that we needed to be able to take it.

    Other stuff, do you know…how many saw the vote spike charts? Some entrepreneur started making T-shirts out of them. Those big vote spikes, you saw that chart over the Internet.

    Well, think about that for a moment. Atlanta, which is about 90% Democrat, if they are not reporting partial returns all night long the way the rest of the state is, and then they report all of their returns all at once, you are going to see a vote spike for the Democrat.

    If they are reporting partial returns all night long, the way the rest of the state is, and then you see that kind of vote spike, that is pretty good evidence of fraud. I asked, “The data we are looking at that gives us that vote spike chart, that famous Internet graph that everybody saw is based on state-wide aggregate time-series data. I need to know whether Atlanta is reporting what we would expect or whether it’s fraud.” How do I get that information? I need the county level time series. Let’s see what was going on in Fulton County alone.”

    I’m told that Georgia officials locked access to the county level time-series data that would have helped me determine whether it was evidence of fraud or evidence of something that we should have expected. To this day, I do not know, but those are the things I was trying to do to get to the bottom of this information.

    About electronic voting machines? There have been three audits. Antrim County, Michigan, and one of the leading critics of voting machines and their software is a guy named J. Alex Halderman, a professor of computer science and engineering at the University of Michigan.

    He testified as the expert in litigation down in Georgia in 2018 saying these machines are not secure. They sealed his testimony and it was only released in June. It just says, “These things are susceptible to fraud by all sorts of bad actors.”

    He was the government witness in Antrim County, and he demonstrated that, in his opinion, what really happened in Antrim County was that some of the local clerks had done an update. One of the cities in the county had omitted one of the school board races, and so they had to redo the ballot.

    Unbeknownst to the county clerks, every line in the machine code was consecutively ordered throughout the whole county. If you add one line in Bailey Township, it doesn’t affect the cities in the county that began with A, but it affected everything else.

    All the votes for Jorgensen were cast for Trump, all the votes for Trump were cast for Biden. All the votes for Biden were cast for the line marked “President” and didn’t count. When they unraveled that error and counted the actual ballots, it looked like this was an update in the software error and it was explainable.

    Halderman goes out of his way, however, not to distance himself from his prior concerns about the vulnerability of election.

    One of the things we discover in that Antrim audits is that in fact, the vote logs that are supposed to be there had been deleted for 2020, not 2016, not 2012, they’re still there, but 2020 had been deleted.

    We also found that the password for access to the machine, that give you, the administrator, rights that would allow you to delete logs, was the same password that everybody had access to anywhere — from county clerk to anybody — they had the same password. 123456 or something simple like that was the password. It had been that way since 2008.

    The audit uncovered huge vulnerabilities, but because the logs had been deleted, no proof. A second audit was done in Mesa County, Colorado. A woman by the name of Tina Peters was the county clerk in Mesa County, Colorado.

    The Secretary of State in Colorado, a radical advocate named Jena Griswold, had ordered an update to all the machines in the county shortly after the election. The update destroys all the election evidence, and that is a violation of federal law.

    All election information is supposed to be kept for 22 months, and the people that are on the hook for the violation of that federal law –and it is a felony — are the county clerks. Tina Peters said, “I’m not going to allow them to put me in way of a felony indictment of letting this information be destroyed.”

    She made a mirror-image copy of all the data so that when they did the upgrade, she could say, “I haven’t violated federal law. I’ve got it.” She had the mirror image, and she hired forensic analysts to look at.

    They are now charging her with nine felonies for illegally accessing the information, but what they discovered in that audit, they actually identified computer code that was changing votes. Now, Jeff O’Donnell was the guy that did it. He published three reports, the three Mesa County reports. I called Jeff O’Donnell as one of the witnesses of my California bar trial. The judge has barred him from testimony. We had not identified him up-front because this was going to be rebuttal to their claims that everything was fine. The third audit has occurred down in Georgia. There’s one case still pending from all of these things from three years ago. The case is called Favorito vs. Raffensperger.

    Garland Favorito runs an organization called Voter GA, which has been doing election integrity oversight stuff in Georgia for 20 years. He is neither Democrat nor Republican. He is a Constitution Party guy, sorry.

    There was a judge down there. Apparently this judge did not get the memo that we are not supposed to look at any of this stuff, and he authorized Garland and his team of forensic experts to access one of the machines in Fulton County, and he gave them forensic audit access.

    They had it for about a week before somebody came down on the judge and said, “Oh, we’re not supposed to do that,” and the judge revoked the order. In that week, they discovered something very stunning. Think about how this works:

    At first in our history, it used to be that you would go to both of your local precincts, and maybe the local library, and absentee ballots would get mailed in and delivered to that precinct, so that the absentee people who had voted from the same neighborhood were counted with the in-person votes.

    This year in all the big cities, they had big central balloting and counting facilities: State Farm Arena in Atlanta, the Philadelphia Convention Center, or the TCS Center in Detroit.

    This meant that absentee ballots are in from all 490 precincts in Atlanta, in Fulton County. They are randomly put through, they do not come all “in batches,” such as, these are all the ballots from precinct number one, or whatever. They are random.

    They get put in, they get opened, and they get stacked into piles of a hundred, and then they get scanned. Now think about that. That means you have 490 different ballots being scanned. Every ballot, every precinct, has different races on it, different school board races, different things.

    The ballot has a code to tell the machine which key to look to in order to know how to count those dots on the ballot box. Every 100 with that randomized listing of precincts creates a unique digital signature for that hundred. For mathematicians, that is 100 to the 490th power, because there are 490 precincts.

    The odds that you have a duplicate batch of a hundred are zero. 0.0000001. Infinitely small chance that they would have anything. In their one week on one machine, they discovered 5,000 ballots with identical digital signatures in batches of a hundred.

    The margin in Georgia was 11,779. They did this on just one machine, looking at it only a partial bit of time for one week. These are the three audits we had. We know the machines either have been hacked or are open to bad actors with access to the machines, either put in a thumb chip. Halderman’s the guy.

    They had a convention in Las Vegas, hired a bunch of geeks, computer geeks from around the country, to come to this convention and see who could hack into the machines and alter the vote codes quickest. It took people about 15 minutes.

    Halderman is also the guy. What is one of the big rivalries in the country, Michigan versus Ohio State? He had his Michigan students vote on who had the better football program, Michigan or Ohio State.

    Now, anybody that knows anything about football knows there’s no way anybody in Michigan is ever going to vote for Ohio State, but he programmed it so that Ohio State won by 80 percent. It took him five minutes.

    Michigan students voting on one of his Dominion machines, when this was the issue, the ballot initiative, voted for Ohio State. The notion that these things cannot be hacked is laughable. They have to be able to be opened if they need to be repaired. [I heard that from an MIT graduate at the time.]

    The question is, how to prove that they were hacked in this particular instance when they are destroying the evidence, and that is where we are.

    Q: Do the Republicans do this too?

    Dr. Eastman: I don’t know. There was a story that was floated that the former Secretary of State in Arizona and former governor, who was running a distant fifth in the primary election for governor before he signed the $100 million contract with an electronic voting machine company, and all of a sudden he won the election, or the same thing that happened with Kemp in Georgia.

    Those speculations have been floating out there that their bribery was not cash into their bank account but votes in their upcoming primary elections. I do not know whether that is true or not. Those allegations have been floated. It would not surprise me .

    Stacey Abrams certainly thought Kemp stole the election. There was a whole litigation on it. That is why Halderman was doing his expert reports in that case.

    More troubling, though, are the people that knew that there was something amiss and refused to do anything about it because they did not like Trump, or they do not like the Trump populist uprising movement that Trump is leading.

    Remember, Trump did not create this movement. We need to date it back to the Tea Party movement in 2010 after Obamacare comes down. The Republicans in charge in Congress thought that was a bigger threat to them than the Democrats were.

    They wanted to do everything they could to shut down that movement. The movement just took on a new guise when a new leader stepped up to get ahead of it, and it is the MAGA movement now.

    Either they do not like those people in flyover country — that may be part of it from our release in DC — or they do not like anybody questioning the utter corruption that is making them all multimillionaires with having government jobs or some combination of both.

    What was most discouraging was finding people saying, “Oh, I wish we could do something about this election illegality,” and then, on the back side, doing everything they could to stop it.

    Former Attorney General William Barr is the primary example of this. Barr goes out on December 1st, and said, “We’ve been investigating, and we found no evidence of significant enough fraud to affect the outcome of the election.”

    One of the charges against me in California is, “You continue to insist there was illegality even after Bill Barr made that statement. Why didn’t you bow to him?” Well, we subsequently learned that despite Barr’s public statement that US attorneys could investigate election illegality, anytime somebody did, he called him on the phone and order them not to.

    In Pennsylvania, the US attorney in Pennsylvania, McSwain, was looking at the truck driver incident. Barr told him, “You hand all that over to the attorney general of the state” — a Democrat who was part of the problem.

    One of the FBI investigators who was actually getting to the bottom of this got a call that said, “Stand down.”

    The investigation of the ballots coming out from under the table and being counted after everybody was sent home down in Atlanta, the FBI did investigate that. Guess what the purpose of their investigation was. To determine that the statement that there were suitcases of ballots rather than bins of ballots was false. They did not do any other investigation about whether in fact people had been sent home.

    You have people out there saying, “Oh, we’re investigating. Everything’s fine,” while behind the scenes ordering people not to do the investigation that would actually get to the bottom of it.

    I call it the uniparty. You can call it the deep state. You can call it the administrative state. You can call it the corrupt state, but it sees the MAGA movement as the biggest threat to its syndicators. It is going to do everything it can to destroy the people who are going to try and publicize what is going on.

    That is what we are dealing with, and we are $2 million in. One of the lawsuits that was filed against me by this guy down in North Carolina, I don’t know why he picked me as the lead defendant, but other defendants are all billionaire oligarchs who are using their own wealth. That is the kind of nonsense I’m dealing with.

    This article is based on a briefing from John Eastman to Gatestone Institute.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 20:20

  • SCOTUS Will Hear Lawsuit Challenging Biden's ATF "Ghost Gun" Rule Before Elections 
    SCOTUS Will Hear Lawsuit Challenging Biden’s ATF “Ghost Gun” Rule Before Elections 

    On Monday, the Supreme Court said it would review a lawsuit filed by the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and FPC Action Foundation (FPCAF) challenging President Biden’s “frame or receiver” rule, which was enforced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. The nation’s highest court plans to decide if certain gun parts that complete ‘ghost guns’ fall under the definition of a “firearm” under the federal Gun Control Act.

    Ghost gun rules require kit manufacturers and sellers to obtain licenses to sell the parts kit, apply serial numbers to frames and receivers, and conduct FBI background checks.

    Last year, the Fifth Circuit struck down the ghost gun rule, but the Justice Department appealed to the Supreme Court. Biden’s DoJ desperately claimed that 80% lower kits were considered “firearms” under the Gun Control Act of 1968 because it included “any weapon…which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive,” as well as “the frame or receiver of any such weapon.”

    FPC founder and President Brandon Combs called Biden’s ATF war on the Second Amendment through the ghost gun rule “unconstitutional and abusive.” 

    “We are delighted that the Supreme Court will hear our case and decide this important issue once and for all,” Combs said, adding, “The Fifth Circuit’s decision in our case was correct and now that victory can be applied to the entire country.”

    FPC Action Foundation President Cody J. Wisniewski, counsel for Plaintiffs, said, “This is an important day for the entire liberty movement. By agreeing to hear our case, the Supreme Court will have the opportunity to put ATF firmly in its place and stop the agency from unconstitutionally expanding its gun control agenda. We look forward to addressing this unlawful rule in the Court’s next term.” 

    One of the leading plaintiffs, Cody Wilson of Defense Distributed, the maker of Ghost Gunner, told us, “We’re pleased the Court decided to take up this important question concerning the proper definition of a firearm.” 

    Wilson added, “The Biden ATF had tried to illegally rewrite the legal definition of the word to discourage homemade firearms.” 

    Meanwhile, ABC News is calling ghost guns “a firearm” despite the Supreme Court having yet ruled on the case. This misinformation and disinformation 

    ABC News is saying the quiet part out loud: The government wants to label all gun parts firearms to restrict the Second Amendment. 

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 20:00

  • 'Threat Facing Our Country Is From The Far Left' And Socialistic Thugs, Not Trump: Bill Barr
    ‘Threat Facing Our Country Is From The Far Left’ And Socialistic Thugs, Not Trump: Bill Barr

    Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Former Attorney General Bill Barr dismissed the idea that former President Donald Trump is a power-hungry “right-wing dictator,” noting that the real threat facing the United States is the intolerant “far left” ideologues.

    President Donald Trump (L) and Attorney General William Barr arrive together in the East Room of the White House on May 22, 2019. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

    President Trump will “probably put a premium on people who he feels would be more subservient to him. And that’s an area of concern. But at the end of the day, you have to remember, serving in his administration, I was fine with his policies. I think his policies were good policies,” Mr. Barr said in an April 20 interview with Fox. “My problems came with his behavior, which I found very troubling after the election. And I think the idea that he’s going to be an autocrat and take over power like some right-wing dictator is not the threat facing our country.”

    “The threat facing our country is from the far left. And the drift that’s been occurring toward really a socialistic system and one that brooks no opposition, one that cancels people, that has only one viewpoint taught in colleges, that tries to push parents out of the picture when it comes to the education of their children. It’s a heavy-handed bunch of thugs, in my opinion. And that’s where the threat is.”

    Mr. Barr pointed out that while there is a lot of “babble” about the Trump administration being lawless, it was the Biden administration that’s been breaking the law consistently.

    President Biden is “not enforcing the law on the border. He’s forgiving tens of billions of dollars of money owed to the United States that puts this onus on the back of hardworking taxpayers, people who are not getting these breaks. And the court’s already said that they didn’t have the power to do this. And he’s trying to do it before the election to buy votes. This is, to me, lawless and crass behavior,” he said.

    Mr. Barr thinks neither President Biden nor President Trump should be “near the Oval Office.” However, if he has to pick one, “there’s no doubt in my mind that it’s better for the country for the Republicans to win the election.”

    “At the end of the day, we have to select between two different individuals. And I’ve said all along, and I think it’s my duty to pick the person I think will do the least harm to the country. And I think that to me, that’s clearly Trump and the Republican administration, which I think is important,” he said.

    Key priorities for the United States’s leaders must be to take control over the border, stop lawlessness in cities, build up the country’s strength, and prevent excessive regulation that suffocates the business and tech sector. Mr. Barr believes these goals will be fulfilled “under a Trump administration.”

    “At the same time, I think the Biden administration is, in fact, the greater threat to democracy. I think they have a totalitarian temper. They have bought into the progressive movement, and they’re trying to squelch opposition and freedom of speech,” he warned.

    Trump-Biden Re-Match

    Mr. Barr’s comments on the two presidents come as the presidential election is only a few months ahead. Multiple polls show President Trump having a lead or being tied to President Biden.

    An April 18 update by Morning Consult showed both presidents tied in the race, with each garnering 42 percent support of U.S. voters. Even among Independents, both were tied, with 34 percent support each.

    However, more Republicans were seen to back President Trump than Democrats supporting President Biden. While 88 percent of Republicans said they’ll vote for President Trump, only 85 percent of Democrats said they intend to vote for President Biden.

    “Trump has a slight popularity edge,” Morning Consult said. “Trump maintains a net favorability advantage over Biden, though the bulk of the electorate is still more likely to hold negative views about both major party contenders.”

    According to an April 18 Emerson College poll, 46 percent of voters support President Trump, a three-point lead over President Biden with 43 percent support.

    “Since Emerson’s last national poll in early April, support for Biden lowered by two points, while Trump maintained 46 percent. When undecided voters are asked which candidate they lean toward, Trump’s overall support increases to 51 percent, and Biden to 48 percent,” the pollster said.

    Spencer Kimball, executive director of Emerson College Polling, pointed out that “voters who think the cost of living is rising support Trump over Biden, 56 percent to 32 percent.” Meanwhile, “those who feel the cost of living is easing or staying the same support Biden over Trump.”

    Meanwhile, President Trump is battling multiple legal battles as he campaigns for a second term in the White House. He is currently involved in four criminal cases.

    The opening arguments for President Trump’s “hush-money” trial are set to begin this Monday. He is facing 34 charges in the case, with each count carrying a maximum jail time of four years.

    President Trump has slammed the legal challenges facing him as political targeting. “We are under Political Attack from Biden’s D.C. Thugs, working closely with the D.A.’s Office, in order to help Re-Elect Crooked Joe Biden, the Worst President in History. MAGA2024!” he wrote in an April 19 Truth Social post.

    According to federal disclosures made by three groups associated with the Trump campaign, they have collectively spent over $16.1 million so far this year to meet the former president’s legal bills.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 19:40

  • "Our Cities Turn Into War Zones Every Night"
    “Our Cities Turn Into War Zones Every Night”

    From coast to coast, radical prosecutors and progressive politicians have been pushing illogical criminal justice policies that not only have backfired but transformed many once-safe Democrat-controlled cities into crime-ridden hellholes.

    Go down the list of cities. Whether it’s New York City, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington, DC, Chicago, or San Francisco, and the list goes on and on – these metros are plagued with violent crime, out-of-control youth, carjackings, murders, drug crises, the homelessness crisis, theft waves, and unvetted migrants.

    The latest sign some of the bluest American cities continue their transformation into ‘war zone’-like conditions while progressive lawmakers ignore law and order is an illegal “teen takeover” event in Democratic-controlled Memphis, Tennessee. 

    On Saturday evening, Memphis police initially reported 16 people were shot during a block party in the 2400 block of Carnes Avenue in the Orange Mound neighborhood. It was later reported that five victims had gunshot wounds – two males were pronounced dead at the scene, and three others were taken to the hospital in critical condition. 

    X video shows the moment when a Chevrolet Corvette was burning out in the middle of the street. Gunfire erupted, and everyone ducked for cover. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    “Our cities turn into war zones every night and weekend, but the media refuses to even talk about it,” X user End Wokeness said. 

    X user SaltyGoat said, “I’m willing to bet if there was a red MAGA hat anywhere in the crowd, it’d be all over the news.” 

    The explosion of illegal teen takeover events nationwide is happening at a time when the youth is not respecting the law – thank Democrats for this phenomenon. 

    According to Bloomberg data, there has been a surge in “teen takeover” news stories in corporate media since the start of 2023. 

    Last night, Elon Musk said on X, “My politics are (I think) fairly moderate anyway.” 

    He told X users he just wants safer cities and secured borders, among other common-sense points that Democrats are failing to deliver. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Most Americans agree that safer cities and secured borders are critical to the nation. However, Democrats are oddly failing on this – and one has to wonder if there’s a secret agenda at play. 

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 19:20

  • Planned Parenthood Abortions Among 'Top Four Leading Causes Of Death' In America
    Planned Parenthood Abortions Among ‘Top Four Leading Causes Of Death’ In America

    Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Abortions conducted by Planned Parenthood are a leading cause of death in the United States, with the organization recommending the procedure to pregnant clients 97 percent of the time, according to Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America group.

    A Planned Parenthood facility in Anaheim, Calif., on September 10, 2020. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

    Planned Parenthood, the country’s largest abortion provider, released its 2022–2023 annual report revealing the organization conducted 392,715 abortions during the period. “This puts abortions performed by Planned Parenthood in the top four leading causes of death in the United States, after heart disease, cancer, and COVID-19,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America group.

    According to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), over 695,000 Americans died from heart disease in 2021, with 605,000 dying from cancer, 416,000 from COVID-19, and nearly 225,000 from accidents.

    “Once again, pregnant women who walk into Planned Parenthood are sold an abortion 97 percent of the time, rather than helped to keep their child or make an adoption plan. Meanwhile, they saw 80,000 fewer patients, provided 60,000 fewer pap tests and breast exams, and even gave out less contraception, she said.

    Ms. Dannenfelser blamed Democrats in Washington and several other states for backing Planned Parenthood abortions by sending them almost $700 million in taxpayer funds. This amount made up a third of the organization’s revenue, with Planned Parenthood ending the fiscal year with $2.5 billion in net assets, she noted.

    Around 60 percent of women who have had an abortion “would rather have kept their babies if they just had more emotional or financial support,” Ms. Dannenfelser stated. “Democrats’ response? They demonize and strip funding from pregnancy resource centers that serve women and their children.”

    Michael New, a social scientist and senior associate scholar at Charlotte Lozier Institute, pointed out that Planned Parenthood’s abortion number was a record for the organization, representing around 40 percent of total abortions performed in the United States.

    While boosting its abortion numbers, Planned Parenthood also “continues to cut back on several health services,” he said. “Between 2022 and 2023, preventive-care visits fell by 31.0 percent, pap tests fell by 13.5 percent, cancer screenings fell by 1.4 percent, and adoption referrals fell by 4.5 percent.”

    “In the past ten years, the number of abortions performed by Planned Parenthood has increased by 20 percent. Meanwhile, cancer screenings fell by more than 58 percent, and prenatal services declined by more than 67 percent.”

    Despite cutting back on several healthcare services in 2022, Planned Parenthood continues to see an increase in government funding, Mr. New noted.

    Funding, Election Issue

    Republican lawmakers have been trying to cut back government funding for Planned Parenthood. In January last year, Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) proposed a draft bill to defund the organization by instituting a one-year moratorium on federal funding for the organization.

    “The nation’s largest abortion provider has no business receiving taxpayer dollars,” she said at the time. “Planned Parenthood claims these funds go to healthcare for women, but last year, Planned Parenthood performed a record number of abortions while also reducing the number of well-woman exams and breast cancer screenings it performed.”

    In a Dec. 12 press release, Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) questioned the funding provided to Planned Parenthood, citing a report by the U.S. Government Accountability (GAO) to point out that the organization received $1.78 billion in federal taxpayer funding in fiscal years 2019–2021.

    The amount included $90.4 million the group allegedly “illegally siphoned” from the Paycheck Protection Program, a COVID-19 loan program aimed at assisting small businesses affected by the pandemic.

    “While small businesses struggled to make ends meet during the pandemic, Planned Parenthood illegally siphoned over $90 million from the Paycheck Protection Program, specifically designed to help our mom-and-pop shops keep their doors open,” Ms. Blackburn said.

    Commenting on the report, Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), co-chair of the House Pro-Life Caucus, said that federal taxpayer funds “should not be funneled to big abortion corporations like Planned Parenthood, which has killed over 9.3 million unborn children since 1970, including 1.11 million between 2019-2021.”

    The Planned Parenthood annual report comes as abortion is one of the key themes in the upcoming presidential race. Democrats are pushing abortion as a central issue, running ballot initiatives in battleground states.

    In Arizona, a ballot measure seeks to amend the state’s constitution to ensure that abortion is a “fundamental right,” even up to the point where a baby can survive outside the womb, which typically happens around 24 weeks. Nevada, Colorado, and Maryland also have abortion amendments planned out.

    “The Democrats’ strategy heading into this election cycle was to put these measures on the ballot in every big swing state,” Republican strategist Marcus Dell’Artino told The Epoch Times.

    Former President Donald Trump, who is running for his second term in the 2024 elections, has stopped short of echoing other Republicans’ calls for a national abortion ban, saying that the matter is best left to the states.

    “My view is now that we have abortion where everyone wanted it from a legal standpoint, the states will determine by vote or legislation or perhaps both. And whatever they decide must be the law of the land. In this case, the law of the state,” he said in a recent video posted on Truth Social.

    “Many states will be different. Many will have a different number of weeks, or some will have more conservative than others, and that’s what they will be. At the end of the day, this is all about the will of the people.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 19:00

  • Iran-Linked Iraq Militia Says It Is Resuming Attacks On US Forces
    Iran-Linked Iraq Militia Says It Is Resuming Attacks On US Forces

    The prior period of constant attacks on US bases in Iraq and Syria which corresponded with the opening first half of Israel’s operations in Gaza could soon resume, after a Sunday incident saw at least five rockets fired on an American base in northeastern Syria. 

    The Iraqi militant group Kataib Hezbollah – which has close ties with Iran claimed responsibility, and more importantly announced that it is resuming attacks on US bases in the region.

    US occupation of Syria, file image

    Reuters described that “Two security sources and a senior army officer said a rocket launcher fixed on the back of a small truck had been parked in Zummar border town with Syria.” 

    “The military official said the truck caught fire with an explosion from unfired rockets at the same time as warplanes were in the sky,” the report continued. There were no casualties, according to regional correspondents.

    The military official subsequently said: “We can’t confirm that the truck was bombed by US warplanes unless we investigate it”—strongly suggesting the Pentagon’s response was almost immediate, and that air power was deployed.

    Crucially, Sunday’s incident marked the first such attack on a US base since early February. At that time Iranian militia leaders ordered their fighters to temporarily stand down. That order held, given there hasn’t been any notable attack in two months before this weekend.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The Guardian notes further of the timing of this fresh attack:

    It comes one day after Iraq’s prime minister, Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, returned from a visit to the United States and met with Joe Biden at the White House.

    Iraq’s Kataib Hezbollah said Iraqi armed groups had decided to resume attacks on the US presence in the country after seeing little progress on talks to achieve the exit of American troops during al-Sudani’s visit to Washington.

    “What happened a short while ago is the beginning,” the group said.

    On Monday, following Sunday’s brief rocket attack on the US base near the Iraq-Syria border, there was another assault – on the Iraqi side of the border.

    “Another attack on US forces in the region in the last hours, now on Al Assad base in Iraq,” according to Walla News, as cited in news wires. There are unverified reports of US military helicopters airborne over the area and that a response is ongoing.

    During the three to four months following the Oct.7 Hamas terror attack, there were an estimated over 150 drone and rocket attacks against US bases in Iraq and Syria. Among these was the attack which killed three Americans and wounded 40 others at an outpost along the Jordan-Syria border.

    President Biden had in the wake of the Jordan outpost attack ordered airstrikes on Iran-linked militia positions, and following the tit-for-tat, Kataib Hezbollah’s stood down. However, events of this weekend strongly suggest things are about to ramp up again, also as Iraqi and Syrian government officials have long sought to see Pentagon troops finally expelled from their sovereign territories.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 18:40

  • If You’re A Criminal, This Is the County To Avoid
    If You’re A Criminal, This Is the County To Avoid

    Authored by John Haughey via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Across a six-decade career, beginning as a 16-year-old ambulance driver to his ascension as America’s most renowned lawman, Grady Judd has made one thing clear.

    Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd at the PCSO Emergency Communications Center in Winter Haven, Fla., on April 2, 2024. (Edward Linsmier for The Epoch Times)

    He’s that guy, that old-school sheriff whose tough-talking press conferences garner national attention, but he’s also a lifelong student of integrating new-school techniques with emerging technologies, a pioneering innovator in administration, and a conscientious mentor who lives as he leads.

    And so, on this April afternoon, Mr. Judd, 70, is looking back on 54 years in public service by doing what he’s always done, looking forward.

    He’s prioritizing goals for his sixth term as sheriff of Polk County, a 2,000-square-mile sprawl of Central Florida sawgrass savannah between Orlando and Tampa that’s doubled in population in a decade.

    His new term officially begins in January but it actually began the February day he filed to run, instantly clinching his third-straight unopposed re-election.

    There’s plenty of time to talk about the past but, right now, he told The Epoch Times, “There’s plenty of work to do over the next four years in keeping crime down.”

    Mr. Judd said the 1,800-employee Polk County Sheriff’s Office (PCSO), which includes 1,100 deputies, 1,330 vehicles, and a 2,500-bed jail with a $236 million budget, will be busy doing just that every day, all day, while taking on two initiatives.

    He is launching a program to help keep the mentally ill out of jail, a chronic national urgency that defies easy solutions, while training a unit to combat the next great global crime challenge: artificial intelligence (AI).

    “Right now, AI is capable of emulating voices. Right? So we’re going to have to protect the community from false AI allegations and keep evil parasites from attacking us from within as well as internationally,” he said, noting it’s the first such unit created by a local law enforcement agency in the United States.

    A pressing focus everywhere, he said, is to “reduce the need” for first-responders to be roadside therapists in protecting the mentally ill from themselves and others, and to find alternatives to using jails as primary—and often only—sources of medication for many with mental health issues.

    As a newly-minted deputy in 1974, he recalls, those arrested exhibiting mental problems were housed in a regional hospital where inmate patients were treated.

    “Fast-forward to today” and his deputies don’t have that option, Mr. Judd said.

    “The state and federal government did away with mental hospitals. So where did those mentally ill end up? They ended up in prison, in county jail lockups. They ended up underneath overpasses, sleeping behind buildings, out in the woods.”

    Prisoners fill out paperwork before receiving a COVID-19 vaccination in Cleveland, Miss., on April 28, 2021. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

    Institutional options narrowed as pharmaceutical solutions expanded, he said. Advocates for the mentally ill argued, “They have a constitutional right not to be incarcerated’ and, ‘Oh, we have these new medicines. They just have to take the medicines.’”

    Good concept, Mr. Judd said, bad plan.

    “Where do we find them to give them their medicines? And, oh, you’re not going to provide medicines? How’re they going to afford it? It’s very expensive” especially for mentally ill people living “out in the woods,” he said.

    So he has a plan—and $1 million in seed money from Polk County commissioners to provide court-mandated medications for itinerant offenders.

    “We’re in the infant stages of that. We’ve gotten total cooperation from everyone,” Mr. Judd said of a coalescing coalition that includes providers, the courts, state attorney’s office, public defenders, and advocates for the mentally ill. “That’s pretty remarkable that everybody says, ‘Yes, let’s do this.’ It’s a win-win for everyone.”

    In an age of polarity, a “win-win for everyone” is a rare air that Grady Judd exudes.

    He’s doing what he’s wanted to do since he was 4, what he believes God put him here to do, to protect the place where he was born, raised, and lived his whole life, where he married his high school sweetheart and raised two sons, where he pioneered crime-fighting tactics in a changing world while never wavering from fundamental truths such as right from wrong, good from bad.

    In exchange, Polk County got the right sheriff at the right time, a leader to meet the challenges posed by growth as it evolved into an urbanizing I-4 corridor where 100,000 new people have arrived each of the last three years.

    And yet, unincorporated Polk County’s 2023 crime rate of 1.06—one per 100 residents—is less than half the state’s rate and lowest since the metric was created in 1971, lower than when it had three times fewer people and 88 percent less than when it had half as many people.

    A “win-win” for all—except criminals.

    “I’m blessed to live God’s mission for me,” Mr. Judd said. ”All I’ve ever wanted to be was sheriff—the sheriff of Polk County.”

    Sheriff-in-Waiting

    Raised in a Lakeland subdivision of cinder block homes without air conditioning, Mr. Judd shows office visitors a black-and-white 1954 photo of him sitting on an uncle’s lap. His uncle was White County, Tenn., Sheriff Joe McCoy, but it was Grady Judd wearing the sheriff’s star.

    Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd at the agency’s emergency communications center in Winter Haven, Fla., on April 2, 2024. The sheriff will begin serving his sixth term in 2025. (Edward Linsmier for The Epoch Times)

    He was the cop when playing ‘cops and robbers’ with childhood friends, grew up watching TV shows such as ‘Dragnet’ and ‘The Andy Griffith Show,’ and was scanning police radio frequencies and mastering codes at 12.

    As he told The Epoch Times in November 2023, his father, a Cadillac dealership service-manager, was a church deacon. “I was raised in the church,” he said. “We were sometimes the first to arrive and the last to leave.”

    Faith, his “guiding light,” compelled him to be a relentless teenager in informing the sheriffs office he’d be joining them soon and someday be the boss.

    As a high school junior in 1970, he was hired as a $1.65-an-hour ambulance attendant in Winter Haven. He helped deliver a baby at 16 and at 17, convinced the notoriously recalcitrant musician George Jones, in a drunken rage, to get into his ambulance, later admitting he had no idea who the world-famous country star was.

    After going to high school by day, finishing his ambulance shift at night, Mr. Judd hung out at the sheriff’s office, effectively forcing them to hire him two months after graduation as a dispatcher despite a minimum-age requirement of 21.

    He remembers July 21, 1972, a humid, storm-stirred Friday night, his first shift at Bartow’s Hall of Justice, which “housed the entire justice system” and “one teletype computer.”

    Richard Nixon was president, Reuben Askew was governor of Florida, gas was 34 cents a gallon, ‘The Godfather’ was a box office hit, Bill Withers’ ‘Lean On Me’ topped the charts.

    Two months later, Mr. Judd married his fiancé, Marisa, also 18 and also newly hired at a municipal finance department. They lived on combined salaries of $550 a month. They’ve been together since.

    When legislators waived the 21-year-old requirement to be a law enforcement officer. Mr. Judd convinced Sheriff Brannen—the icon of his youth—to send him to the state’s police academy. Just before he turned 20, he was sworn in as the first-ever PCSO deputy under 21.

    He hit the road as a 19-year-old deputy in February 1974 in a green-and-white Ford Galaxy and a pistol his father had to buy because state law precluded him from doing so. Nevertheless, as Mr. Judd says, “The rest is history.”

    Read more here…

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 18:20

  • Congress Passes New Iran Oil Sanctions But Biden Unlikely To Enforce Them
    Congress Passes New Iran Oil Sanctions But Biden Unlikely To Enforce Them

    Over the weekend, as part of the $95 billion package providing funding for aiding Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan which passed by a vote of 360-58 on Saturday, the US House also passed new sanctions on Iran’s oil sector set to become part of a foreign-aid package, putting the measure on track to pass the Senate within days.

    The legislation, as Bloomberg reports, would broaden sanctions against Iran to include foreign ports, vessels, and refineries that knowingly process or ship Iranian crude in violation of existing US sanctions. It would also would expand so-called secondary sanctions to cover all transactions between Chinese financial institutions and sanctioned Iranian banks used to purchase petroleum and oil-derived products.

    About 80% of Iran’s roughly 1.5 million barrels of daily oil exports are shipped to independent refineries in China known as “teapots,” according to a summary of similar legislation.

    Yet while the sanctions could impact Iranian petroleum exports – and add as much as $8.40 to the price of a barrel of crude – they also include presidential waiver authorities, according to ClearView Energy Partners, a Washington-based consulting firm.

    “President Joe Biden might opt to invoke these authorities, vitiating the sanctions’ price impact; a second Trump Administration might not,” ClearView wrote in a note to clients.

    Amrita Sen, founder and research director of Energy Aspects, agreed and told Bloomberg Television in an interview that Biden’s Administration is unlikely to “strongly enforce” the restrictions in an election year.

    “I think all sanctions are sanctions on paper, with anything that remotely causes oil prices to go up, I don’t believe they will enforce it strongly,” the research analyst told Bloomberg.   

    “What I really want to highlight is this is a US election year, so let’s not kid ourselves,” the analyst noted.

    By not kidding ourselves, he meant that when it comes to democratic, liberal ideals, it’s all bullshit when they conflict with self-serving interests of the demented deep state puppet roaming the halls of the White House.

    Moreover, China is buying most of Iran’s crude oil exports, and the majority of buyers in the world’s top crude oil importer are the independent refiners, the so-called ‘teapots’ in the Shandong province, which are not connected with the U.S. financial system in any way.

    Therefore, the U.S. doesn’t have any means to enforce sanctions on China’s independent refiners for buying Iranian crude oil, Sen told Bloomberg. The teapots will continue to import Iran’s crude, while any new restrictions could take up to 500,000 barrels per day (bpd) of Iranian oil off the market, she added.

    Crude oil exports from Iran hit the highest level in six years during the first quarter of the year, data from Goldman recently showed.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The daily average over the period stood at 1.56 million barrels, almost all of which was sent to China, earning the Islamic Republic some $35 billion.

    “The Iranians have mastered the art of sanctions circumvention,” Fernando Ferreira, head of geopolitical risk service at Rapidan Energy Group, told the FT. “If the Biden administration is really going to have an impact, it has to shift the focus to China.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 18:00

  • Markets Can Absorb Geopolitic Risks, To A Point
    Markets Can Absorb Geopolitic Risks, To A Point

    By Michael Msika and Jan-Patrick Barnert, Bloomberg Markets Live reporters and strategists

    Geopolitics is having an impact on investment decisions again, and risks are rising as well as equity volatility. Yet under the hood, the stock market is absorbing the shock relatively well so far.

    Stress levels have had a steep surge as tensions in the Middle East show no sign of abating. Systematic funds are reducing exposure, technicals are showing some cracks, but the big picture for markets hasn’t changed much. In fact, price action on Friday almost seems mild, with a rise in oil prices reversing. Market breadth has cooled, both at a stock and index level, with just a 3% drop this month.

    “This seat has been very busy, but hasn’t seen signs of panic,” says Carl Dooley, head of EMEA trading at TD Cowen. “While optically we see indicators such as the VIX print at similar levels to last October when markets were lower and realized volatility was higher, other indicators we track, such as the demand for crash protection, haven’t moved. It has all felt very orderly and technical.”

    After the market was focused on chasing the upside, there is a more balanced approach to volatility. The pressure from funds selling options is now being matched by options demand from investors hedging positioning. This is “keeping the risk environment far more two-way than anytime in recent history,” says Nomura’s Charlie McElligott.

    US stocks are down about 4.5% over six trading days. That’s a relatively chilled decline given the severity of headlines coming from the Middle East, especially compared to some of the sudden, more elevator-like moves in 2022 and in the summer of 2020. Even Nvidia, the biggest bullish bet in this market, is just down 20% after a 600% gain.

    There’s no talk about emergency meetings to reduce risk and no signs of hasty investment decisions. Commentary from trading desks about hedge funds and other buy-side flows is still carrying a notion of dip buying and is far from a sell everything market. Granted, risk taking is getting a bit of a re-think, positioning is being adjusted along with other thematic indexes that soared in 2024 but now show big 5-day declines.

    Trend followers such as CTAs are a potential wild card, with their still elevated exposure. But their reaction depends on stop-loss levels being breached, and so far both the market reaction and the impact on prices have been reassuring.

    “Leverage concerns about CTAs are easing,” say Societe Generale Sandrine Ungari, adding that positioning has been reduced, while breakpoints, the percentage move needed on the asset for CTAs to reduce exposure, are now less negative. In addition, CTAs are diversified across asset classes, so losses in equities would have been offset by gains in commodities and FX. “A portfolio that allocates equally across asset classes is flat to slightly up,” she says.

    The VIX curve has flipped into concern levels as previously mentioned in this column, and the steep rise is similar to early 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine. Yet the very low base line of stress is keeping markets well below panic levels at this point.

    “Further developments in the Middle East remain subject to increased uncertainty,” says Deka Investment CIO Christoph Witzke. “As a fund manager, I am paying particular attention to the reaction of the oil price and the US dollar. So far, the movement has been muted. If this remains the case, we are currently more likely to see a recovery in equities over the next few days/weeks than the emergence of a new downtrend. The longer-term framework remains quite constructive.”

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Apr 22

Today’s News 22nd April 2024

  • US-Funded Experiments In China Could Secretly Manipulate Viruses: Email
    US-Funded Experiments In China Could Secretly Manipulate Viruses: Email

    Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Experiments in China funded by the U.S. government could manipulate coronaviruses and leave no trace, according to newly disclosed emails.

    An aerial view shows the P4 laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan in China’s central Hubei province on April 17, 2020. (Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images)

    Details of the experiments showed that changing the viruses could be done and “would leave no signatures of purposeful human manipulation,” an unknown person told the FBI on April 23, 2020, one of the emails showed.

    The details were outlined on a webpage for a grant funded by the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the agency headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci until late 2022. The government has funded $4.3 million for the grant. A portion of the funds were sent to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a laboratory located in the same Chinese city in which the first COVID-19 cases appeared in 2019.

    An FBI official forwarded the email to another FBI official about an hour after receipt. “Hey are you going to be in office tomorrow? We just interviewed our person from [redacted] again and he provided us with some alarming new info,” the official wrote. “Give me a call if you can.”

    The identities of the source and FBI officials were redacted in the messages, which were obtained by the nonprofit Judicial Watch through a Freedom of Information Act request.

    The FBI and EcoHealth did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

    “These smoking gun documents showed the FBI quickly understood that Fauci’s agency funded the gain-of-function research that could disguise the resulting coronavirus as ‘natural,’” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “These new documents further demonstrate the need for a comprehensive criminal investigation into Fauci’s gain-of-function scandal.”

    Robert Garry, who has a doctorate in microbiology and also studied virology, said in private messages that genetic manipulation doesn’t leave signatures. One could “synthesize bits of the genes … with perfect provision and then add them back in without a trace,” he wrote in early 2020 while analyzing COVID-19.

    Mr. Garry and others later wrote in a paper called Proximal Origin that the available evidence showed COVID-19 “is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus.” Two of the authors defended the change during a hearing in Congress.

    Records previously obtained by Judicial Watch showed that the FBI opened an inquiry into the research in Wuhan, which was done under a grant called “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.”

    It’s not clear what specific actions the FBI took but the bureau has since determined that COVID-19, a coronavirus, likely originated at the Wuhan lab.

    “You’re talking about a potential leak from a Chinese government-controlled lab that killed millions of Americans,” FBI Director Christopher Wray said in 2023.

    The U.S. intelligence community as a whole is divided on the matter, with at least one other agency also assessing a lab origin as likely while others are undecided or lean towards the natural origin theory.

    COVID-19 is believed to have come from bats. The grant gave money to scientists to gather bat coronaviruses and experiment on them in labs in Wuhan and elsewhere. China has largely blocked investigations into the origins of COVID-19 and declined to make information from the lab public. Similarities between COVID-19 and a virus on which experiments were proposed in a separate EcoHealth funding application are among the evidence pointing to the lab leak theory, experts say. Others say the available evidence, including early cases at a wet market in Wuhan, suggest a natural origin.

    Experiments funded through the U.S. grant did result in a bat coronavirus that made mice sicker than those infected with the original version, government officials have disclosed. Concerns about work at the lab were raised prior to the pandemic, according to an internal report viewed recently by a U.S. senator. Officials renewed EcoHealth’s grant in 2023 but have barred funding to the Wuhan lab after lab leaders stopped sharing information with EcoHealth and U.S. overseers.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 02:45

  • London Museum's 'LGBTQ Audio Guide' Wrongly Claims British Monarch Was "Person Of Colour"
    London Museum’s ‘LGBTQ Audio Guide’ Wrongly Claims British Monarch Was “Person Of Colour”

    Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

    A London museum is facing backlash after it was revealed that a special ‘LGBTQ audio guide’ it is providing to visitors is claiming that the wife of King George III was mixed race.

    The audio guide is being used in the Queen’s House in Greenwich, a publicly funded part of Royal Museums Greenwich.

    A section of the guide references a large golden sculpture of Queen Charlotte, claiming: “Queen Charlotte, the nation’s first royal person of colour.”

    The guide then states “Yep, you heard me. The insecure white boys writing history conveniently forget to mention that bit, because… well, structural racism.”

    There is no evidence at all that the queen, who was of German ancestry, was of any other heritage than white European. 

    Indeed, it appears that one basis for the claim may be that the Netflix series Bridgerton and its spin off show Queen Charlotte has a mixed race actor playing the role of the queen.

    The guide was created as part of a ‘LGBTQ history trail’ by a drag performer called Christian Adore, self described as a “homosexual historian” dedicated to unveiling “deliciously gay stories” from history. 

    Clearly there weren’t that many of those stories to relate on a tour of a royal residence dating back to the 1600s.

    The guide also claims that King James I was bisexual and claims that Charles II had a “progressive, genuinely modern understanding of relationships in the 1660s” because he had a string of mistresses.

    The report also notes that in one section of the audio guide a “migrant goddess” lectures  Lord Nelson about “moving over” and sharing his legacy of bravery with boat migrants who are “unsung heroes of the sea.”

    When asked for an explanation, the Museum stated that the guide was “delivered by a number of performance artists, during LGBTQ+ History Month,” and intended to be “light-hearted entertainment.”

    It added that the guide was originally part of an event called ‘Fierce Queens’ in which “we had a black performer playing Queen Charlotte, which is why this segment was included.”

    “It was not written by or performed by members of RMG staff and as a performance piece, was not ‘fact checked’,” the Museum further noted.

    Commenting on the matter, former Royal Navy officer Chris Parry charged that “This level of stupidity simply degrades and defiles our national reputation for historical scholarship… These antics serve to confuse the ignorant and are profoundly racist. Remove public funding.”

    As we have previously highlighted, this insane fringe effort to blackify history has included baseless claims of black ancient Britons, Romans, scholars, Mesolithic hunter-gatherers, and even ancient Japanese Samurai warriors.

    *  *  *

    Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

    Tyler Durden
    Mon, 04/22/2024 – 02:00

  • The Intel Agencies Of Government Are Fully Weaponized
    The Intel Agencies Of Government Are Fully Weaponized

    Authored by ‘sundance’ via TheConservativeTreehouse.com,

    Barack Obama and Eric Holder did not create a weaponized DOJ and FBI; instead, what they did was take the preexisting system and retool it so the weapons only targeted one side of the political continuum.  This point is where many people understandably get confused…

    In the era shortly after 9/11, the DC national security apparatus was constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all Americans as potential threats.  The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were created specifically for this purpose.

    What Barack Obama and Eric Holder did with that new construct was refine the internal targeting mechanisms so that only their ideological opposition became the target of the new national security system.  This is very important to understand as you dig deeper into this research outline.

    Washington DC created the modern national security apparatus immediately and hurriedly after 9/11/01.  DHS came along in 2002, and within the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 the ODNI was formed.  When Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived a few years later, those newly formed institutions were viewed as opportunities to create a very specific national security apparatus that would focus almost exclusively against their political opposition.

    The preexisting Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Dept of Justice (DOJ) were then repurposed to become two of the four pillars of the domestic national security apparatus.  However, this new construct would have a targeting mechanism based on political ideology.  The DHS, ODNI, DOJ and FBI became the four pillars of this new institution.  Atop these pillars is where you will find the Fourth Branch of Government.

    We were not sleeping when this happened, we were wide awake.  However, we were stunningly distracted by the economic collapse that was taking place in 2006 and 2007 when the engineers behind Obama started to assemble the design.  By the time Obama took office in 2009, we sensed something profound was shifting, but we can only see exactly what shifted in the aftermath.  The four pillars were put into place, and a new Fourth Branch of Government was quietly created.

    As time passed, and the system operators became familiar with their new tools, technology allowed the tentacles of the system to reach out and touch us. That is when we first started to notice that something very disconcerting was happening.  Those four pillars are the root of it, and if we take the time to understand how the Fourth Branch originated, questions about this current state of perpetual angst will start to make sense.

    Grab a cup of your favorite beverage, and take a walk with me as we outline how this was put together.  You might find many of the questions about our current state of political affairs beginning to make a lot more sense.

    Remember, it is not my intent to outline the entire history of how we got to this place where the intelligence community now acts as the superseding fourth branch of government. Such an effort would be exhausting and likely take our discussion away from understanding the current dynamic.

    History provided enough warnings from Dwight D. Eisenhower (military), to John F. Kennedy (CIA), to Richard Nixon (FBI), to all modern versions of warnings and frustrations from HPSCI Devin Nunes and ODNI Ric Grenell. None of those prior reference points are invalid, and all documented outlines of historic reference are likely true and accurate. However, a generational review is not useful, as the reference impacting us ‘right now‘ gets lost.

    Instead, we pick up the expansive and weaponized intelligence system as it manifests after 9/11/01, and my goal is to highlight how the modern version of the total intelligence apparatus has now metastasized into a Fourth Branch of Government. It is this superseding branch that now touches and influences every facet of our life.

    If we take the modern construct, originating at the speed of technological change, we can also see how the oversight or “check/balance” in our system of government became functionally obsolescent.

    After many years of granular research about the intelligence apparatus inside our government, in the summer of 2020 I visited Washington DC to ask specific questions. My goal was to go where the influence agents within government actually operate, and to discover the people deep inside the institutions no one elected and few people pay attention to.

    It was during this process when I discovered how information is purposefully put into containment silos; essentially a formal process to block the flow of information between agencies and between the original branches. While frustrating to discover, the silo effect was important because understanding the communication between networks leads to our ability to reconcile conflict between what we perceive and what’s actually taking place.

    After days of research and meetings in DC during 2020; amid a town that was serendipitously shut down due to COVID-19; I found a letter slid under the door of my room in a nearly empty hotel with an introduction of sorts. The subsequent discussions were perhaps the most important. After many hours of specific questions and answers on specific examples, I realized why our nation is in this mess. That is when I discovered the fourth and superseding branch of government, the Intelligence Branch.

    I am going to explain how the Intelligence Branch works:

    (1) to control every other branch of government;

    (2) how it functions as an entirely independent branch of government with no oversight;

    (3) how and why it was created to be independent from oversight;

    (4) what is the current mission of the IC Branch,

    and most importantly (5) who operates it.

    The Intelligence Branch is an independent functioning branch of government, it is no longer a subsidiary set of agencies within the Executive Branch as most would think. To understand the Intelligence Branch, we need to drop the elementary school civics class lessons about three coequal branches of government and replace that outlook with the modern system that created itself.

    The Intelligence Branch functions much like the State Dept, through a unique set of public-private partnerships that support it. Big Tech industry collaboration with intelligence operatives is part of that functioning; almost like an NGO. However, the process is much more important than most think. In this problematic perspective of a corrupt system of government, the process is the flaw – not the outcome.

    There are people making decisions inside this little known, unregulated and out-of-control branch of government that impact every facet of our lives.

    None of the people operating deep inside the Intelligence Branch were elected, and our elected representative House members genuinely do not know how the system works. I assert this position affirmatively because I have talked to House and Senate staffers, including the chiefs of staff for multiple House & Senate committee seats. They are not malicious people; however, they are genuinely clueless of things that happen outside their silo. That is part of the purpose of me explaining it, with examples, in full detail with sunlight.

    We begin….

    In April of 2016, the FBI launched a counterintelligence operation against presidential candidate Donald Trump. The questioning about that operation is what New York Representative Elise Stefanik cites in March of 2017, approximately 11 months later (First Two Minutes).

    Things to note:

    • Notice how FBI Director James Comey just matter-of-factly explains no one outside the DOJ was informed about the FBI operation. Why? Because that’s just the way things are done. His justification for unilateral operations was “because of the sensitivity of the matter“, totally ignoring any constitutional or regulatory framework for oversight; because, well, quite simply, there isn’t any. The intelligence apparatus inside the DOJ/FBI can, and does, operate based on their own independent determinations of authority.

    • Notice also how FBI Director Comey shares his perspective that informing the National Security Council (NSC) is the equivalent of notifying the White House. The FBI leadership expressly believe they bear no responsibility to brief the Chief Executive. As long as they tell some unknown, unelected, bureaucratic entity inside the NSC, their unwritten responsibility to inform the top of their institutional silo is complete. If the IC wants to carve out the Oval Office, they simply plant information inside the NSC and, from their perspective, their civic responsibility to follow checks-and-balances is complete. This is an intentional construct.

    • Notice how Comey obfuscates notification to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), by avoiding the fact James Clapper was the DNI from outset of the counterintelligence operation throughout the remainder of Obama’s term. When I get deeper into the process, we will understand how the Intelligence Branch has intentionally used the creation of the DNI position (established post 9/11/01) as a method to avoid oversight, not enhance it. Keeping an oblivious doofus like James Clapper in position held strategic value [Doofus Reminder HERE].

    That video of James Comey being questioned by Elise Stefanik was the first example given to me by someone who knew the background of everything that was taking place preceding that March 20, 2017, hearing. That FBI reference point is a key to understand how the Intelligence Branch operates with unilateral authority above Congress (legislative branch), above the White House (executive branch), and even above the court system (judicial branch).

    Also, watch this short video of James Clapper because it is likely many readers have forgotten, and likely even more readers have never seen it.  Watch closely how then White House national security adviser John Brennan is responding in that video.  This is before Brennan became CIA Director, this is when Brennan was helping Barack Obama put the pillars into place.  WATCH:

    [Sidebar: Every time I post this video it gets scrubbed from YouTube (example), so save it if you ever want to see it again.]

    The video of James Clapper highlights how the ODNI position (created with good national security intention) ended up becoming the fulcrum for modern weaponization, and is now an office manipulated by agencies with a vested interest in retaining power. The Intelligence Branch holds power over the ODNI through their influence and partnership with the body that authorizes the power within it, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI).

    Factually, the modern intelligence apparatus uses checks and balances in their favor. The checks create silos of proprietary information, classified information, vaults of information that work around oversight issues. The silos are part of the problem.

    Ironically, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence was created in the aftermath of 9/11/01 expressly to eliminate the silos of information which they felt led to a domestic terrorist attack that could have been prevented. The ODNI was created specifically upon the recommendation of the 9/11 commission.

    The intent was to create a central hub of intelligence information, inside the Executive Branch, where the CIA, NSA, DoD, DoS, and DIA could deposit their unique intelligence products and a repository would be created so that domestic intelligence operations, like the DOJ and FBI could access them when needed to analyze threats to the U.S. This, they hoped, would ensure the obvious flags missed in the 9/11 attacks would not be missed again.

    The DNI office created a problem for those who operate in the shadows of proprietary information. You’ll see how it was critical to install a person uniquely skilled in being an idiot, James Clapper, into that willfully blind role while intelligence operatives worked around the office to assemble the Intelligence Branch of Government.

    • The last federal budget that flowed through the traditional budgetary process was signed into law in September of 2007 for fiscal year 2008 by George W. Bush. Every budget since then has been a fragmented process of continuing resolutions and individual spending bills.

    Why does this matter? Because many people think defunding the Intelligence Community is a solution; it is not…. at least, not yet. Worse yet, the corrupt divisions deep inside the U.S. intelligence system can now fund themselves from multinational private sector partnerships (banks, corporations and foreign entities).

    • When Democrats took over the House of Representatives in January 2007, they took office with a plan. Nancy Pelosi became Speaker, and Democrats controlled the Senate where Harry Reid was Majority Leader. Barack Obama was a junior senator from Illinois.

    Pelosi and Reid intentionally did not advance a budget in 2008 (for fiscal year 2009) because their plan included installing Barack Obama (and all that came with him) with an open checkbook made even more lucrative by a worsening financial crisis and a process called baseline budgeting. Baseline budgeting means the prior fiscal year budget is accepted as the starting point for the next year budget. All previous expenditures are baked into the cake within baseline budgeting.

    Massive bailouts preceded Obama’s installation due to U.S. economic collapse, and massive bailouts continued after his installation. This is the ‘never let a crisis go to waste’ aspect. TARP (Troubled Asset Recovery Program), auto bailouts (GM), and the massive stimulus spending bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA, ie. those shovel ready jobs) were all part of the non budget spending. The federal reserve assisted with Quantitative Easing (QE1 and QE2) as congress passed various Porkulous spending bills further spending and replacing the formal budget process.

    Note: There has never been a budget passed in the normal/traditional process since September of 2007.

    • While Obama’s radical ‘transformation‘ was triggered across a broad range of government institutions, simultaneously spending on the U.S. military was cut, but spending on the intelligence apparatus expanded. We were all distracted by Obamacare, and the Republican party wanted to keep us that way. However, in the background there was a process of transformation taking place that included very specific action by Eric Holder and targeted effort toward the newest executive agency the ODNI.

    The people behind Obama, those same people now behind Joe Biden, knew from years of strategic planning that ‘radical transformation’ would require control over specific elements inside the U.S. government. Eric Holder played a key role in his position as U.S. Attorney General in the DOJ.

    AG Holder recruited ideologically aligned political operatives who were aware of the larger institutional objectives. One of those objectives was weaponizing the DOJ-National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) a division inside the DOJ that had no inspector general oversight. For most people the DOJ-NSD weaponization surfaced with a hindsight awakening of the DOJ-NSD targeting candidate Donald Trump many years later. However, by then the Holder crew had executed almost eight full years of background work.

    • The second larger Obama/Holder objective was control over the FBI. Why was that important? Because the FBI does the domestic investigative work on anyone who needs or holds a security clearance. The removal of security clearances could be used as a filter to further build the internal ideological army they were assembling. Additionally, with new power in the ODNI created as a downstream consequence of the Patriot Act, new protocols for U.S. security clearances were easy to justify.

    Carefully selecting fellow ideological travelers was facilitated by this filtration within the security clearance process. How does that issue later manifest?   Just look around at how politicized every intelligence agency has become, specifically including the FBI.

    • At the exact same time this new background security clearance process was ongoing, again everyone distracted by the fight over Obamacare, inside the Department of State (Secretary Hillary Clinton) a political alignment making room for the next phase was being assembled. Names like Samantha Power, Susan Rice and Hillary Clinton were familiar on television while Lisa Monaco worked as a legal liaison between the Obama White House and Clinton State Department.

    Through the Dept of State (DoS) the intelligence apparatus began working on their first steps to align Big Tech with a larger domestic institutional objective. Those of you who remember the “Arab Spring”, some say “Islamist Spring”, will remember it was triggered by Barack Obama’s speech in Cairo – his first foreign trip. The State Department worked with grassroots organizers (mostly Muslim Brotherhood) in Egypt, Syria, Bahrain, Qatar and Libya. Obama leaned heavily on the organizational network of Turkish President Recep Erdogan for contacts and support.

    Why does this aspect matter to us? Well, you might remember how much effort the Obama administration put into recruiting Facebook and Twitter as resources for the various mideast rebellions the White House and DoS supported. This was the point of modern merge between the U.S. intelligence community and Big Tech social media.

    In many ways, the coordinated political outcomes in Libya and Egypt were the beta test for the coordinated domestic political outcomes we saw in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. The U.S. intelligence community working with social media platforms and political operatives.

    Overlaying all of that background activity was also a new alignment of the Obama-era intelligence apparatus with ideological federal “contractors“. Where does this contractor activity manifest? In the FISA Court opinion of Rosemary Collyer who cited the “interagency memorandum of understanding”, or MOU.

    Hopefully, you can see a small part of how tentacled the system to organize/weaponize the intelligence apparatus was. None of this was accidental, all of this was by design, and the United States Senate was responsible for intentionally allowing most of this to take place.

    That’s the 30,000/ft level backdrop history of what was happening as the modern IC was created. Next we will go into how all these various intelligence networks began working in unison and how they currently control all of the other DC institutions under them; including how they can carve out the President from knowing their activity.

    • When Barack Obama was installed in January 2009, the Democrats held a 60 seat majority in the U.S. Senate. As the people behind the Obama installation began executing their longer-term plan, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was a tool to create the Intelligence Branch; it was not an unintentional series of events.

    When Obama was installed, Dianne Feinstein was the Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), and Democrat operative Dan Jones was her lead staffer. Feinstein was completely controlled by those around her including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. The CIA was in the process of turning over personnel following the Bush era, and as a result of a massive multi-year narrative of diminished credibility (Iraq WMD), a deep purge was underway. Obama/Holder were in the process of shifting intelligence alignment and the intensely political Democrat Leader Harry Reid was a key participant.

    THE TRAP – Many people say that Congress is the solution to eliminating the Fourth and superseding Branch of Government, the Intelligence Branch. This is an exercise in futility because the Legislative Branch, specifically the SSCI, facilitated the creation of the Intelligence Branch. The SSCI cannot put the genie they created back in the bottle without admitting they too are corrupt; and the background story of their corruption is way too intense to be exposed now.

    Every member of the SSCI is compromised in some controlling manner. Those Senators who disliked the control over them; specifically disliked because the risk of sunlight was tenuous and, well, possible; have either left completely or stepped down from the committee. None of the SSCI members past or present would ever contemplate saying openly what their tenure involved.

    [Note: You might remember when Vice Chairman Mark Warner’s text messages surfaced, there was a controlled Republican SSCI member who came to his defense in February of 2018. It was not accidental that exact Senator later became the chair of the SSCI himself. That Republican Senator is Marco Rubio, now vice-chair since the Senate re-flipped back to the optics of Democrat control in 2021.]

    All of President Obama’s 2009 intelligence appointments required confirmation from the Senate. The nominees had to first pass through the Democrat controlled SSCI, and then to a full Senate vote where Democrats held a 60 vote majority. Essentially, Obama got everyone he wanted in place easily. Rahm Emmanuel was Obama’s Chief of Staff, and Valerie Jarrett was Senior Advisor.

    Tim Geithner was Treasury Secretary in 2010 when the joint DOJ/FBI and IRS operation to target the Tea Party took place after the midterm “shellacking” caused by the Obamacare backlash. Mitch McConnell was Minority Leader in the Senate but supported the targeting of the Tea Party as his Senate colleagues were getting primaried by an angry and effective grassroots campaign. McConnell’s friend, Senator Bob Bennett,  getting beaten in Utah was the final straw.

    Dirty Harry and Mitch McConnell saw the TEA Party through the same prism. The TEA Party took Kennedy’s seat in Massachusetts (Scott Brown); Sharon Angle was about to take out Harry Reid in Nevada; Arlen Spector was taken down in Pennsylvania; Senator Robert Byrd died; Senator Lisa Murkowski lost her primary to Joe Miller in Alaska; McConnell’s nominee Mike Castle lost to Christine O’Donnell in Delaware; Rand Paul won in Kentucky. This is the background. The peasants were revolting…. and visibly angry Mitch McConnell desperately made a deal with the devil to protect himself.

    In many ways, the TEA Party movement was/is very similar to the MAGA movement. The difference in 2010 was the absence of a head of the movement, in 2015 Donald Trump became that head figure who benefited from the TEA Party energy. Trump came into office in 2017 with the same congressional opposition as the successful TEA Party candidates in 2011.

    Republicans took control of the Senate following the 2014 mid-terms. Republicans took control of the SSCI in January 2015. Senator Richard Burr became chairman of the SSCI, and Dianne Feinstein shifted to Vice-Chair. Dirty Harry Reid left the Senate, and Mitch McConnell took power again.

    Republicans were in control of the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2015 when the Intelligence Branch operation against candidate Donald Trump was underway. [Feinstein’s staffer, Dan Jones, left the SSCI so he could act as a liaison and political operative between private-sector efforts (Fusion GPS, Chris Steele) and the SSCI.] The SSCI was a participant in that Fusion-GPS/Chris Steele operation, and as a direct consequence Republicans were inherently tied to the problem with President Trump taking office in January of 2017. Indiana Republican Senator Dan Coats was a member of the SSCI.

    Bottom line…. When it came to the intelligence system targeting Donald Trump during the 2015/2016 primary, the GOP was just as much at risk as their Democrat counterparts.

    When Trump unexpectedly won the 2016 election, the SSCI was shocked more than most. They knew countermeasures would need to be deployed to protect themselves from any exposure of their intelligence conduct. Dianne Feinstein stepped down, and Senator Mark Warner was elevated to Vice Chairman.

    Indiana’s own Mike Pence, now Vice President, recommended fellow Hoosier, SSCI Senator Dan Coats, to become President Trump’s Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). [Apply hindsight here]

    • To give an idea of the Intelligence Branch power dynamic, remind yourself how House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), Chairman Devin Nunes, tried to get access to the DOJ/FBI records of the FISA application used against the Trump campaign via Carter Page.

    Remember, Devin Nunes only saw a portion of the FISA trail from his review of a Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) previously given to President Obama. Chairman Nunes had to review the PDB at the White House SCIF due to compartmented intelligence, another example of the silo benefit.

    Remember the massive stonewalling and blocking of the DOJ/FBI toward Nunes? Remember the back and forth battle over declassification surrounding the Nunes memo?

    Remember, after Nunes went directly to House Speaker Paul Ryan for help (didn’t get any), the DOJ only permitted two members from each party within the HPSCI to review the documents, and only at the DOJ offices of main justice?

    Contrast that amount of House Intel Committee railroading and blocking by intelligence operatives in the DOJ, DOJ-NSD and FBI, with the simple request by Senate Intelligence Vice Chairman Mark Warner asking to see the Carter Page FISA application and immediately a copy being delivered to him on March 17th 2017.

    Can you see which intelligence committee is aligned with the deepest part of the deep state?

    Oh, how quickly we forget:

    The contrast of ideological alignment between the House, Senate and Intelligence Branch is crystal clear when viewed through the prism of cooperation. You can see which legislative committee holds the power and support of the Intelligence Branch. The Senate Intel Committee facilitates the corrupt existence of the IC Branch, so the IC Branch only cooperates with the Senate Intel Committee. It really is that simple.

    • The Intelligence Branch carefully selects its own members by controlling how security clearances are investigated and allowed (FBI). The Intelligence Branch also uses compartmentalization of intelligence as a way to keep each agency, and each downstream branch of government (executive, legislative and judicial), at arms length as a method to stop anyone from seeing the larger picture of their activity. I call this the “silo effect“, and it is done by design.

    I have looked at stunned faces when I presented declassified silo product from one agency to the silo customers of another. You would be astonished at what they don’t know because it is not in their ‘silo’.

    Through the advise and consent rules, the Intelligence Branch uses the SSCI to keep out people they consider dangerous to their ongoing operations. Any appointee to the intelligence community must first pass through the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, before they get a full Senate vote. If the SSCI rejects the candidate, they simply refuse to take up the nomination. The president is then blocked from that appointment. This is what happened with President Trump over-and-over again.

    • Additionally, the Intelligence Branch protects itself, and its facilitating allies through the formal classification process. The Intelligence Branch gets to decide unilaterally what information will be released and what information will be kept secret. There is no entity outside the Intelligence Branch, and yes that includes the President of the United States, who can supersede the classification authority of the Intelligence Branch. {Go Deep} and {Go Deep} This is something 99.9% of the people on our side get totally and frustratingly wrong.

    No one can declassify, or make public, anything the Intelligence Branch will not agree to. Doubt this?  Ask Ric Grenell, John Ratcliffe, or even President Trump himself.

    • The classification process is determined inside the Intelligence Branch, all by themselves. They get to choose what rank of classification exists on any work-product they create; and they get to decide what the classification status is of any work product that is created by anyone else. The Intelligence Branch has full control over what is considered classified information and what is not. The Intelligence Branch defines what is a “national security interest” and what is not. A great technique for hiding fingerprints of corrupt and illegal activity.

    [For familiar reference see the redactions to Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages. The Intelligence Branch does all redactions.]

    • Similarly, the declassification process is a request by an agency, even a traditionally superior agency like the President of the United States, to the Intelligence Branch asking for them to release the information. The Intelligence Branch again holds full unilateral control. If the head of the CIA refuses to comply with the declassification instruction of the President, what can the president do except fire him/her? {Again, GO DEEP} How does the President replace the non-compliant cabinet member?  They have to go through the SSCI confirmation.  See the problem?

    Yes, there are ways to break up the Intelligence Branch, but they do not start with any congressional effort. As you can see above, the process is the flaw – not the solution. Most conservative pundits have their emphasis on the wrong syllable. Their cornerstone is false.

    For their own self-preservation, the Intelligence Branch has been interfering in our elections for years. The way to tear this apart begins with STATE LEVEL election reform that blocks the Legislative Branch from coordinating with the Intelligence Branch.

    The extreme federalism approach is critical and also explains why Joe Biden has instructed Attorney General Merrick Garland to use the full power of the DOJ to stop state level election reform efforts. The worry of successful state level election control is also why the Intelligence Branch now needs to support the federal takeover of elections.

    Our elections have been usurped by the Intelligence Branch. Start with honest elections and we will see just how much Democrat AND Republican corruption is dependent on manipulated election results. Start at the state level. Start there…. everything else is downstream.

    People want examples, reference points for work the Intelligence Branch conducts, specifically how it protects itself.

    Here is an example: Julian Assange.

    Yes, the history of the U.S. national security apparatus goes back decades; however, the weaponization of that apparatus, the creation of an apex branch of government, the Intelligence Branch, originated –as we currently feel it– under President Barack Obama.

    Obama took the foundational tools created by Bill Clinton and George W. Bush and used the intelligence system architecture to create a weapon for use in his fundamental transformation. An alliance of ideologues within government (intel community) and the private sector (big tech and finance) was assembled, and the largest government weapon was created. Think about this every time you take your shoes off at an airport.

    After the weapon was assembled and tested (Arab Spring), the Legislative Branch was enjoined under the auspices of a common enemy, Donald J. Trump, an outsider who was a risk to every entity in the institutional construct of Washington DC. Trillions were at stake, and years of affluence and influence were at risk as the unholy alliance was put together.

    To understand the risk that Julian Assange represented to U.S. Intelligence Branch interests, it is important to understand just how extensive the operations of the FBI/CIA were in 2016.

    It is within the network of foreign and domestic intel operations where Intelligence Branch political tool, FBI Agent Peter Strzok, was working as a bridge between the CIA and FBI counterintelligence operations.

    By now, people are familiar with the construct of CIA operations involving Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese professor generally identified as a western intelligence operative who was tasked by the FBI/CIA to run an operation against Trump campaign official George Papadopoulos in both Italy (Rome) and London. {Go Deep}

    In a similar fashion, the FBI tasked U.S. intelligence asset Stefan Halper to target another Trump campaign official, Carter Page. Under the auspices of being a Cambridge Professor, Stefan Halper also targeted General Michael Flynn. Additionally, using assistance from a female FBI agent under the false name Azra Turk, Halper also targeted Papadopoulos.

    The initial operations to target Flynn, Papadopoulos and Page were all based overseas. This seemingly makes the CIA exploitation of the assets and the targets much easier.

    HPSCI Ranking Member Devin Nunes outlined how very specific exculpatory evidence was known to the FBI and yet withheld from the FISA application used against Carter Page that also mentions George Papadopoulos. The FBI also fabricated information in the FISA.

    However, there is an aspect to the domestic U.S. operation that also bears the fingerprints of the international intelligence apparatus; only this time, due to the restrictive laws on targets inside the U.S., the CIA aspect is less prominent. This is where FBI Agent Peter Strzok working for both agencies was important.

    Remember, it’s clear in the text messages Strzok had a working relationship with what he called their “sister agency”, the CIA. Additionally, former CIA Director John Brennan has admitted Strzok helped write the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) which outlines the Russia narrative; and Peter Strzok wrote the July 31st, 2016, “Electronic Communication” that originated FBI operation “Crossfire Hurricane.” Strzok immediately used that EC to travel to London to debrief allied intelligence officials connected to the Australian Ambassador to the U.K, Alexander Downer.

    In short, Peter Strzok acted as a bridge between the CIA and the FBI. The perfect type of FBI career agent for the Intelligence Branch and CIA Director John Brennan to utilize.

    Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson hired CIA Open Source analyst Nellie Ohr toward the end of 2015; at appropriately the same time as “FBI Contractors” were identified exploiting the NSA database and extracting information on a specific set of U.S. persons, the 2015 GOP candidates for President.

    It was also Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson who was domestically tasked with a Russian lobbyist named Natalia Veselnitskaya. A little reported Russian Deputy Attorney General named Saak Albertovich Karapetyan was working double agents for the CIA and Kremlin. Karapetyan was directing the foreign operations of Natalia Veselnitskaya, and Glenn Simpson was organizing her inside the U.S.

    Glenn Simpson managed Veselnitskaya through the 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr. However, once the CIA/Fusion-GPS operation using Veselnitskaya started to unravel with public reporting… back in Russia Deputy AG Karapetyan died in a helicopter crash.

    Simultaneously timed in late 2015 through mid 2016, there was a domestic FBI operation using a young Russian named Maria Butina tasked to run up against republican presidential candidates. According to Patrick Byrne, Butina’s private sector handler [NOTE: remember, the public-private sector partnership], it was FBI agent Peter Strzok who was giving Patrick Byrne the instructions on where to send Butina. {Go Deep}

    All of this context outlines the extent to which the FBI/CIA was openly involved in constructing a political operation that eventually settled upon anyone in candidate Donald Trump’s orbit. The international operations of the Intelligence Branch were directed by the FBI/CIA; and the domestic operations were coordinated by Peter Strzok operating with a foot in both agencies. [Strzok gets CIA service coin]

    Recap: 

    • Mifsud tasked against Papadopoulos (CIA).

    • Halper tasked against Flynn (CIA), Page (CIA), and Papadopoulos (CIA).

    • Azra Turk, pretending to be a Halper asst, tasked against Papadopoulos (FBI).

    • Veselnitskaya tasked against Donald Trump Jr (CIA, Fusion-GPS).

    • Butina tasked against Donald Trump Jr (FBI). All of these activities were coordinated.

    Additionally, Christopher Steele was a British intelligence officer, hired by Fusion GPS to assemble and launder fraudulent intelligence information within his dossier. And we cannot forget Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch, who was recruited by Asst. FBI Director Andrew McCabe to participate in running an operation against the Trump campaign and create the impression of Russian involvement. However, Deripaska refused to participate.

    All of this foreign and domestic engagement was directly controlled by collaborating U.S. intelligence agencies from inside the Intelligence Branch. And all of this coordinated activity was intended to give a specific Russia influence/interference impression.

    The key point of all that background context is to see how committed the Intelligence Branch was to the constructed narrative of Russia interfering with the 2016 election. The CIA, FBI, and by extension the DOJ and DOJ-NSD, put a hell of a lot of work into it.

    We also know that John Durham looked at the construct of the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA); and talked to CIA analysts who participated in the construct of the January 2017 report that bolstered the false appearance of Russian interference in the 2016 election. This is important because it ties in to the next part that involves Julian Assange and Wikileaks.

    On April 11th, 2019, the Julian Assange indictment was unsealed in the EDVA. From the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018:

    (Link to pdf)

    On Tuesday April 15th more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to….

    The FBI investigation took place prior to December 2017, and it was coordinated through the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) where Dana Boente was U.S. Attorney at the time. The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until after Mueller completed his investigation, April 2019.

    Why the delay?

    What was the DOJ waiting for?

    Here’s where it gets interesting….

    The FBI submission to the Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after Congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Julian Assange in August of 2017: “Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents … did not come from Russia.”

    (August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.

    Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years.

    Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.

    “Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.”

    Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more)

    Knowing how much effort the Intelligence Branch put into the false Russia collusion-conspiracy narrative, it would make sense for the FBI to take keen interest after this August 2017 meeting between Rohrabacher and Assange, monitor all activity, and why the FBI would quickly gather specific evidence (related to Wikileaks and Bradley Manning) for a grand jury by December 2017.

    Within three months of the EDVA grand jury, the DOJ generated an indictment and sealed it in March 2018.

    The DOJ sat on the indictment while the Mueller/Weissmann probe was ongoing.

    As soon as the Mueller/Weissmann probe ended, on April 11th, 2019, a planned and coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was executed; Julian Assange was forcibly arrested and removed from the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and the EDVA indictment was unsealed (link).

    As a person who has researched this fiasco; including the ridiculously false 2016 Russian hacking/interference narrative: “17 intelligence agencies”, Joint Analysis Report (JAR) needed for Obama’s anti-Russia narrative in December ’16; and then a month later the ridiculously political Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) in January ’17; this timing against Assange is too coincidental.

    It doesn’t take a deep researcher to see the aligned Deep State motive to control Julian Assange. The Weissmann/Mueller report was dependent on Russia cybercrimes for justification, and that narrative was contingent on the Russia DNC hack story which Julian Assange disputes.

    • This is critical. The Weissmann/Mueller report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election. This claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview, and by Julian Assange on-the-record statements.

    The predicate for Robert Mueller’s investigation was specifically due to Russian interference in the 2016 election.

    The fulcrum for this Russia interference claim is the intelligence community assessment; and the only factual evidence claimed within the ICA is that Russia hacked the DNC servers; a claim only made possible by relying on forensic computer analysis from Crowdstrike, a DNC and FBI contractor.

    The CIA holds a self-interest in upholding the Russian hacking claim; the FBI holds an interest in maintaining that claim; the U.S. media hold an interest in maintaining that claim. All of the foreign countries whose intelligence apparatus participated with Brennan and Strzok also have a self-interest in maintaining that Russia hacking and interference narrative.

    Julian Assange is the only person with direct knowledge of how Wikileaks gained custody of the DNC emails; and Assange has claimed he has evidence it was not from a hack.

    This “Russian hacking” claim was ultimately important to the CIA, FBI, DOJ, ODNI and U.K intelligence apparatus, it forms the corner of their justification. With that level of importance, well, right there is the obvious motive to shut Julian Assange down as soon as intelligence officials knew the Weissmann/Mueller report was going to be public.

    …. and that’s exactly what they did. They threw a bag over Assange.

    • COLLAPSED OVERSIGHT – The modern system to ‘check’ the Executive Branch was the creation of the legislative “Gang of Eight,” a legislative oversight mechanism intended to provide a bridge of oversight between the authority of the intelligence community within the Executive Branch.

    The Go8 construct was designed to allow the President authority to carry out intelligence operations and provide the most sensitive notifications to a select group within Congress.

    The Go8 oversight is directed to the position, not the person, and consists of: (1) The Speaker of the House; (2) The Minority Leader of the House; (3) The Chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, HPSCI; (4) The Ranking Member (minority) of the HPSCI; (5) The Leader of the Senate; (6) The Minority Leader of the Senate; (7) The Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, SSCI; and finally (8) the Vice-Chair of the SSCI.

    Example: When the Chief Executive (the President) initiates an intelligence operation on behalf of the United States, the President triggers a “finding memo.” In essence, the instruction to the intel agency or agencies to authorize a covert operation. When that process takes place, the Go8 are the first people notified. Depending on the sensitivity of the operation, sometimes the G08 are notified immediately after the operation is conducted. The notification can be a phone call or an in-person briefing.

    Because of the sensitivity of their intelligence information, the Gang of Eight hold security clearances that permit them to receive and review all intelligence operations. The intelligence community are also responsible for briefing the Go8 with the same information they use to brief the President.

    ~ 2021 Gang of Eight ~

    The Go8 design is intended to put intelligence oversight upon both political parties in Congress; it is designed that way by informing the minority leaders of both the House and Senate as well as the ranking minority members of the SSCI and HPSCI. Under the concept, the President cannot conduct an intelligence operation; and the intelligence community cannot carry out intelligence gathering operations without the majority and minority parties knowing about it.

    The modern design of this oversight system was done to keep rogue and/or corrupt intelligence operations from happening. However, as we shared in the preview to this entire discussion, the process was usurped during the Obama era. {GO DEEP}

    Former FBI Director James Comey openly admitted to Congress on March 20, 2017, that the FBI, FBI Counterintelligence Division, DOJ and DOJ-National Security Division, together with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the CIA, had been conducting independent investigations of Donald Trump for over a year without informing the Go8. Comey justified the lack of informing Go8 oversight by saying, “because of the sensitivity of the matter.”

    Stupidly, Congress never pressed James Comey on that issue. The arrogance was astounding, and the acceptance by Congress was infuriating. However, that specific example highlighted just how politically corrupt the system had become. In essence, Team Obama usurped the entire design of congressional oversight…. and Congress just brushed it off.

    Keep in mind, Comey did not say the White House was unaware; in fact he said exactly the opposite, he said, “The White House was informed through the National Security Council,” (the NSC). The implication, the very direct and specific implication; the unavoidable implication and James Comey admission that everyone just brushed aside, was that President Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, was totally informed of the intelligence operation(s) against Donald Trump. After all, the NSC reports to the National Security Advisor.

    Does the January 20, 2017, Susan Rice memo look different now?

    Again, no one saw the immediate issue. What Comey just described on that March day in 2017 was the total usurpation of the entire reason the Gang of Eight exists; to eliminate the potential for political weaponization of the Intelligence Community by the executive branch. The G08 notifications to the majority and minority are specifically designed to make sure what James Comey admitted to doing was never supposed to happen.

    Team Obama carried out a political operation using the intelligence community and the checks-and-balances in the system were intentionally usurped. This is an indisputable fact.

    Worse still, the entire legislative branch of Congress, which specifically includes the Republicans that now controlled the House and Senate, did nothing. They just ignored what was admitted. The usurpation was willfully ignored.  The mechanism of the G08 was bypassed without a twitch of condemnation or investigation…. because the common enemy was Donald Trump.

    This example highlights the collapse of the system. Obama, the executive branch, collapsed the system by usurping the process; in essence the process became the bigger issue and the lack of immediate legislative branch reaction became evidence of open acceptance. The outcomes of the usurpation played out over the next four years, Donald J. Trump was kneecapped and lost his presidency because of it. However, the bigger issue of the collapse still exists.

    The downstream consequence of the Legislative Branch accepting the Executive Branch usurpation meant both intelligence committees were compromised. Additionally, the leadership of both the House and Senate were complicit. Think about this carefully. The Legislative Branch allowance of the intelligence usurpation meant the Legislative Branch was now subservient to the Intelligence Branch.

    That’s where we are.

    Right now.

    That’s where we are.

    Term-3 Obama is now back in the White House with Joe Biden.

    Term-1 and Term-2 Obama usurped the ‘check and balance‘ within the system and weaponized the intelligence apparatus.

    During Trump’s term that weaponization was covered up by a compliant congress, and not a single member of the oversight called it out.

    Now, Term-3 Obama steps back in to continue the cover up and continue the weaponization.

    Hopefully, you can now see the scale of the problem that surrounds us with specific citation for what has taken place. What I just explained to you above is not conspiracy theory, it is admitted fact that anyone can look upon. Yet….

    Have you seen this mentioned anywhere? Have you seen this called out by anyone in Congress? Have you seen anyone in media (ally or adversary) call this out? Have you seen any member of the Judicial Branch stand up and say wait, what is taking place is not okay? Have you seen a single candidate for elected office point this out? Have you seen anyone advising a candidate point this out?

    This is our current status. It is not deniable. The truth exists regardless of our comfort.

    Not a single person in power will say openly what has taken place. They are scared of the Fourth Branch. The evidence of what has taken place is right there in front of our face. The words, actions and activities of those who participated in this process are not deniable.

    There are only two members of the Gang of Eight who have existed in place from January 2007 (the real beginning of Obama’s term, two years before he took office when the Congress flipped). Only two members of the G08 have been consistently in place from January of 2007 to right now, today.

    All the others came and went, but two members of the Gang of Eight have been part of that failed and collapsed oversight throughout the past 15 years, Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell.

    TECHNOLOGY

    On a global scale – the modern intelligence gathering networks are now dependent on data collection to execute their intelligence missions. In the digital age nations have been executing various methods to gather that data. Digital surveillance has replaced other methods of interception. Those surveillance efforts have resulted in a coalescing of regional data networks based on historic multi-national relationships.

    We have a recent frame of reference for the “U.S. data collection network” within the NSA. Through the allied process the Five Eyes nations all rely on the NSA surveillance database (U.K, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and U.S.) The NSA database provides the digital baseline for intelligence operations in defense of our allies. The portals into the NSA database are essentially an assembly of allies in like-minded ideological connection to the United States.

    Unfortunately, there have been some revelations about the NSA database being used to monitor our allies, like in the example of Germany and surveillance on Angela Merkel’s phone. As long as “the good guys” are operating honorably, allies of the United States can feel confident about having protection from the NSA surveillance of global digital data. We warn our friends if we detect something dangerous etc.

    The U.S. has nodes on communication pipelines to intercept and extract data. We have also launched hundreds, perhaps thousands, of satellites to conduct surveillance and gather up data. All of this data is fed into the NSA database where it is monitored (presumably) as a national security mechanism, and in defense of our allies.

    However, what about data collection or data networks that are outside the NSA database? What do our enemies do? The NSA database is just one intelligence operation of digital surveillance amid the entire world, and we do not allow access by adversaries we are monitoring. So what do they do? What do our allies do who might not trust the United States due to past inconsistencies, ie. the Middle East?

    The answers to those questions highlight other data collection networks. So a brief review of the major players is needed.

    CHINA

    China operates their own database. They, like the NSA, scoop up data for their system. Like us, China launches satellites and deploys other electronic data collection methods to download into their database. This is why the issues of electronic devices manufactured in China becomes problematic. Part of the Chinese data collection system involves the use of spyware, hacking and extraction.

    Issues with Chinese communication company Huawei take on an added dimension when you consider the goal of the Chinese government to conduct surveillance and assemble a network of data to compete with the United States via the NSA. Other Chinese methods of surveillance and data-collection are less subversive, as in the examples of TicTok and WeChat. These are Chinese social media companies that are scraping data just like the NSA scrapes data from Facebook, Twitter and other Silicon Valley tech companies. [ Remember, the Intelligence Branch is a public-private partnership. ]

    RUSSIA

    It is very likely that Russia operates their own database. We know Russia launches satellites, just like China and the USA, for the same purposes. Russia is also very proficient at hacking into other databases and extracting information to store and utilize in their own network. The difference between the U.S., China and Russia is likely that Russia spends more time on the hacking aspect because they do not generate actual technology systems as rapidly as the U.S. and China.

    The most recent database creation is an outcome of an ally having to take action because they cannot rely on the ideology of the United States remaining consistent, as the administrations ping-pong based on ideology.

    SAUDI ARABIA

    Yes, in 2016 we discovered that Saudi Arabia was now operating their own intelligence data-gathering operation. It would make sense, given the nature of the Middle East and the constant fluctuations in political support from the United States. It is a lesson the allied Arab community and Gulf Cooperation Council learned quickly when President Obama went to Cairo in 2009 and launched the Islamist Spring (Arab Spring) upon them.

    I have no doubt the creation of the Saudi intelligence network was specifically because the Obama administration started supporting radical Islamists within the Muslim Brotherhood, and threw fuel on the fires of extremism all over the Arab world.

    Think about it., What would you do if you were Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, Kuwait, the UAE, Jordan, Oman or Yemen and you knew the United States could just trigger an internal uprising of al-Qaeda, ISIS and the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood to seek your destruction?

    Without a doubt, those urgent lessons from 2009, 2010, 2011 triggered the formation of the Arab Intelligence Network as a network to defend itself with consistency. They assembled the network and activated it in 2017 as pictured above.

    Israel

    Along a similar outlook to the Arab network, no doubt Israel operates an independent data collection system as a method of protecting itself from ever-changing U.S. politics amid a region that is extremely hostile to its very existence. Like the others, Israel launches proprietary satellites, and we can be sure they use covert methods to gather electronic data just like the U.S. and China.

    As we have recently seen in the Pegasus story, Israel creates spyware programs that are able to track and monitor cell phone communications of targets. The spyware would not work unless Israel had access to some network where the phone meta-data was actually stored. So yeah, it makes sense for Israel to operate an independent intelligence database.

    Summary:

    As we understand the United States Intelligence Branch of government as the superseding entity that controls the internal politics of our nation, we also must consider that multiple nations have the same issue. There are major intelligence networks around the world beside the NSA “Five-Eyes” database. China, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Israel all operate proprietary databases deploying the same tools and techniques for assembly.

    The geopolitical conflict that has always existed has now shifted into a digital battle-space. The Intelligence Agencies from these regions are now operating as the backbone of the government that uses them, and has become dependent on them. [<- Reread that].

    Once you accept the digital-era intelligence apparatus of China, Russia, Saudi-Arabia, The United States and Israel, are now the primary national security mechanisms for stabilization of government; then you accept the importance of those intelligence operations.

    Once you understand how foundational those modern intelligence operations have become for the stability and continuity of those governments…… then you begin to understand just how the United States intelligence community became more important than the government that created it.

    Public Private Partnership – The modern Fourth Branch of Government is only possible because of a Public-Private partnership with the intelligence apparatus. You do not have to take my word for it, the partnership is so brazen they have made public admissions.

    The biggest names in Big Tech announced in June their partnership with the Five Eyes intelligence network, ultimately controlled by the NSA, to: (1) monitor all activity in their platforms; (2) identify extremist content; (3) look for expressions of Domestic Violent Extremism (DVE); and then, (4) put the content details into a database where the Five Eyes intelligence agencies (U.K., U.S., Australia, Canada, New Zealand) can access it.

    Facebook, Twitter, Google and Microsoft are all partnering with the intelligence apparatus. It might be difficult to fathom how openly they admit this, but they do. Look at this sentence in the press release (emphasis mine):

    […] “The Group will use lists from intelligence-sharing group Five Eyes adding URLs and PDFs from more groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters and neo-Nazis.”

    Think about that sentence structure very carefully. They are “adding to” the preexisting list…. admitting the group (aka Big Tech) already have access to the the intelligence-sharing database… and also admitting there is a preexisting list created by the Five Eyes consortium.

    Obviously, who and what is defined as “extremist content” will be determined by the Big Tech insiders themselves. This provides a gateway, another plausible deniability aspect, to cover the Intelligence Branch from any oversight.

    When the Intelligence Branch within government wants to conduct surveillance and monitor American citizens, they run up against problems due to the Constitution of the United States. They get around those legal limitations by sub-contracting the intelligence gathering, the actual data-mining, and allowing outside parties (contractors) to have access to the central database.

    The government cannot conduct electronic searches (4th amendment issue) without a warrant; however, private individuals can search and report back as long as they have access. What is being admitted is exactly that preexisting partnership. The difference is that Big Tech will flag the content from within their platforms, and now a secondary database filled with the extracted information will be provided openly for the Intelligence Branch to exploit.

    The volume of metadata captured by the NSA has always been a problem because of the filters needed to make the targeting useful. There is a lot of noise in collecting all data that makes the parts you really want to identify more difficult to capture. This new admission puts a new massive filtration system in the metadata that circumvents any privacy protections for individuals.

    Previously, the Intelligence Branch worked around the constitutional and unlawful search issue by using resources that were not in the United States. A domestic U.S. agency, working on behalf of the U.S. government, cannot listen on your calls without a warrant. However, if the U.S. agency sub-contracts to say a Canadian group, or foreign ally, the privacy invasion is no longer legally restricted by U.S. law.

    What was announced in June 2021 is an alarming admission of a prior relationship along with open intent to define their domestic political opposition as extremists.

    July 26 (Reuters) – A counterterrorism organization formed by some of the biggest U.S. tech companies including Facebook (FB.O) and Microsoft (MSFT.O) is significantly expanding the types of extremist content shared between firms in a key database, aiming to crack down on material from white supremacists and far-right militias, the group told Reuters.

    Until now, the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism’s (GIFCT) database has focused on videos and images from terrorist groups on a United Nations list and so has largely consisted of content from Islamist extremist organizations such as Islamic State, al Qaeda and the Taliban.

    Over the next few months, the group will add attacker manifestos – often shared by sympathizers after white supremacist violence – and other publications and links flagged by U.N. initiative Tech Against Terrorism. It will use lists from intelligence-sharing group Five Eyes, adding URLs and PDFs from more groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters and neo-Nazis.

    The firms, which include Twitter (TWTR.N) and Alphabet Inc’s (GOOGL.O) YouTube, share “hashes,” unique numerical representations of original pieces of content that have been removed from their services. Other platforms use these to identify the same content on their own sites in order to review or remove it. (read more)

    The influence of the Intelligence Branch now reaches into our lives, our personal lives. In the decades before 9/11/01 the intelligence apparatus intersected with government, influenced government, and undoubtedly controlled many institutions with it. The legislative oversight function was weak and growing weaker, but it still existed and could have been used to keep the IC in check. However, after the events of 9/11/01, the short-sighted legislative reactions opened the door to allow the surveillance state to weaponize.

    After the Patriot Act was triggered, not coincidentally only six weeks after 9/11, a slow and dangerous fuse was lit that ends with the intelligence apparatus being granted a massive amount of power. The problem with assembled power is always what happens when a Machiavellian network takes control over that power and begins the process to weaponize the tools for their own malicious benefit. That is exactly what the installation of Barack Obama was all about.

    The Obama network took pre-assembled intelligence weapons we should never have allowed to be created, and turned those weapons into tools for his radical and fundamental change. The target was the essential fabric of our nation. Ultimately, this corrupt political process gave power to create the Fourth Branch of Government, the Intelligence Branch. From that perspective the fundamental change was successful.

    WHAT NOW? 

    There is a way to stop and deconstruct the Intelligence Branch, but it requires some outside-the-box thinking and reliance on the Constitution as a tool to radically change one element within government. In the interim, we must remain focused on the three tiers that we need for success.

    • Tier One is “tactical civics” at a local level. Engaged and active citizen participation at the community, city, town and hamlet level of society. This is what might be described as grassroots level, school board level; city council level; county commissioner level.

    • Tier Two is “extreme federalism” at a state level. Engaged and active citizen participation through your State House and State Senate representative. This is state level assembly and action demands upon the State House, State Senate and State Governor.

    • Tier Three the challenge of “federal offices” on a national level {Go Deep}.  This is the part where we need President Donald Trump, and his power to confront the issues comes directly from us.

    I am confident that ultimately “We The People” will win.  How we can execute the solution is more challenging; in the interim, tactical civics and extreme federalism are doable right now, in this next 2024 election cycle.

    It sucks that a UniParty congress extended FISA-702.  However, even if the hail-Mary pass on Monday fails, FISA was still extended for only two-years.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 23:20

  • Ukraine Gets Their Billions Despite CIA Director Reportedly Warning Zelenksy To Stop Stealing So Much Money
    Ukraine Gets Their Billions Despite CIA Director Reportedly Warning Zelenksy To Stop Stealing So Much Money

    Democrats cheered and waved Ukrainian flags, chanting “Ukraine, Ukraine!” in some pavlovian response to Congress passing a bill that will send (another) $61 billion to Ukraine with no questions asked

    Rand Paul, among many others, was incensed:

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Ukrainian president Zelenskyy was very pleased, personally thinking Speaker Johnson

    I am grateful to the United States House of Representatives, both parties, and personally Speaker Mike Johnson for the decision that keeps history on the right track.

    Democracy and freedom will always have global significance and will never fail as long as America helps to protect it.

    The vital U.S. aid bill passed today by the House will keep the war from expanding, save thousands and thousands of lives, and help both of our nations to become stronger. Just peace and security can only be attained through strength.

    We hope that bills will be supported in the Senate and sent to President Biden’s desk. Thank you, America!

    ‘War is Peace’, America!

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Of course he’s pleased… why wouldn’t he be, as who knows where that money will end up?

    As Seymour Hersh recently reported, CIA Director Burns had to warn Zelensky to stop stealing so much money.

    The issue of corruption was directly raised with Zelensky in a meeting last January in Kiev with CIA Director William Burns.

    His message to the Ukrainian president, I was told by an intelligence official with direct knowledge of the meeting, was out of a 1950s mob movie.

    The senior generals and government officials in Kiev were angry at what they saw as Zelensky’s greed, so Burns told the Ukrainian president, because “he was taking a larger share of the skim money than was going to the generals.”

    Burns also presented Zelensky with a list of thirty-five generals and senior officials whose corruption was known to the CIA and others in the American government.

    Zelensky responded to the American pressure ten days later by publicly dismissing ten of the most ostentatious officials on the list and doing little else.

    “The ten he got rid of were brazenly bragging about the money they had—driving around Kiev in their new Mercedes,” the intelligence official told me.

    Zelensky’s half-hearted response and the White House’s lack of concern was seen, the intelligence official added, as another sign of a lack of leadership that is leading to a “total breakdown” of trust between the White House and some elements of the intelligence community.

    Hersh went on to note that one estimate by analysts from the Central Intelligence Agency put the embezzled funds at $400 million last year, at least; another expert compared the level of corruption in Kiev as approaching that of the Afghan war, “although there will be no professional audit reports emerging from the Ukraine.”

    But, remember, the first rule of sending money to corrupt Ukraine is… you don’t talk about how corrupt Ukraine is (or you get impeached).

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 22:45

  • Congressmen Are "Terrified Of The Intel Agencies"; Tucker Carlson Warns They'll Frame Them With "Kiddie Porn"
    Congressmen Are “Terrified Of The Intel Agencies”; Tucker Carlson Warns They’ll Frame Them With “Kiddie Porn”

    Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson sat down for a wide-ranging three-hours-plus discussion last week, touching on everything from UFOs, spirituality, and religion; from artificial intelligence costs and benefits to questioning ‘science’ consensus; and from government secrecy and lying to the threat to democracy driven by our domestic intelligence agencies.

    They begin by discussing a recently leaked government project named “Project Aqua” which involves advanced aerospace vehicles and their interaction with humans, leading to medical injuries and even deaths.

    “Here’s what we know is that US servicemen have died as a result of contact with or being in the proximity of these vehicles and we know that because there are a lot of suits working their way through the VA system.”

    The conversation turns specifically to the nature of UFOs, suggesting they could be more than just physical or technological phenomena, potentially tied to spiritual or supernatural origins.

    On supernatural explanations for UFOs:

    “It’s pretty clear to me that they’re spiritual entities whatever that means are Supernatural and which is to say Supernaturals means above the natural above the observable uh nature.”

    The troublesome twosome highlighted how certain revelations or events can lead to a deeper questioning of what is commonly accepted as truth, fostering a mindset of skepticism and curiosity.

    On questioning assumptions:

    “I began a process still ongoing of reassessing a lot of other things like okay well if that was not true what else is not true and what else that they told me was a conspiracy theory might actually have some basis in fact.”

    Rogan reiterates his long-held fear of the potential for artificial intelligence to evolve beyond human control, transforming into a new form of life that could dramatically alter our understanding and existence.

    On artificial intelligence and humanity’s future:

    “Digital Life it’s going to give birth to a new life form and I think we’re real close to that I think we’re way closer than that to that than most people would ever want to admit.”

    Carlson then opens up on his views about the current state of politics and society, particularly criticizing the dishonesty and manipulation in governmental and media structures.

    The perennial topic of power corruption comes up next, with the two men comparing the intoxication of leadership to the historical behaviors of cult leaders and tyrants.

    On power and control:

    “It’s very intoxicating and it’s common in that it’s always existed throughout human history. It’s a thing that people do when they get power—they abuse the fuck out of it.”

    On ideological indoctrination:

    “Woke is clearly a cult; it’s a mind virus… it’s very similar to all kinds of religions… everybody has to believe very specific things and you can’t differ from the doctrine.”

    The pair elaborate further on the influence of ideologies that suppress dissenting views and the impact of governmental lies on public trust, emphasizing the importance of honesty in communication, slamming the government’s tendency to prioritize power over transparency and the well-being of its citizens.

    On the facade of democracy:

    “When they stand up and pass a $60 billion funding bill for Ukraine when 70% of the population doesn’t want it… and they call it a democracy, that will drive you insane because it’s just too dishonest.”

    On personal and governmental honesty:

    “Maybe just assess everything that way – is someone lying? I don’t care what your justification for it is… You can’t participate in lying… try to tell the truth all the time.”

    “You can’t lie. You can’t lie about anything, just don’t lie about anything. Try to tell the truth all the time,” he says.

    “If you just stick with that, you get pretty quickly back to reason and order, don’t you?”

    Joe Rogan contunues by pointing out the themes of control and misinformation, particularly in the context of media, that are growuing more and more powerful. He points out the shift in what is considered mainstream media, highlighting the growing significance of platforms like Twitter and YouTube over traditional news outlets. Rogan stresses the increasing visibility of lies and the public’s growing ability to discern truth from misinformation due to the accessibility of alternative information sources online.

    On the problem with mainstream media:

    “Mainstream media used to be CNN; it’s not really anymore. Mainstream media is what in terms of the volume consumed, more people are consuming things on X [Twitter] than there are on anything else.”

    The former Fox News host exclaims his clear disdain for the manipulation and deceit he perceives at the highest levels of power.

    “This is not self-government. You don’t run this country, we do. Shut up and obey,” says Carlson regarding what the reality of our government really is, adding that “what makes it particularly galling and hard to live with is when you call that system a democracy.”

    Rogan and Carlson also touch upon the effects of technology and social media on personal interactions and societal norms. They discuss the negative impacts of constant connectivity, lamenting the loss of meaningful face-to-face interactions.

    “When people lie and when people bullshit and gaslight, it’s more offensive now than it’s ever been before,” Rogan points out.

    “The lies aren’t sophisticated. It’s something incredibly insulting and demeaning to tell me a lie when I know it’s a lie.”

    And then the discussion gets ominously dark as the pair reflect on the re-authorization of the ‘spying on Americans’ bill (we note that the two gentlemen met before the bill was re-authorized).

    ‘Kiddie Porn’ blackmail fear…

    Stunningly, Carlson tells Rogan that congressmen were “terrified” that intelligence agencies will frame them with “kiddie porn” if they openly opposed the “warrantless spying” bill.

    Specifically, he says US lawmakers “told” him that they are “worried” about being punished by intel agencies if they oppose reauthorizing Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

    “People don’t say that because they’re worried about being punished. They’re worried about someone putting kiddie porn on their computer. Members of Congress are terrified of the intel agencies. I’m not guessing at that. They’ve told me that — including people on the intel committee, including people who run the intel committee,” Carlson said.

    “The people whose job it is to oversee and keep in line these enormous, secretive agencies whose budgets we can’t even know – their ‘black budgets’,” Carlson continued, raising his hands into air-quotes.

    That it is “tyranny”, not democracy, for “unelected people who are not accountable to anyone making the biggest decisions”, Carlson raged, to force congressmen to support reauthorizing “warrantless spying” of American citizens because “they’re threatened.”

    “They’re the parents, the agencies are the children. They’re afraid of the agencies. That’s not compatible with democracy.”

    “It’s playing out in front of everyone, and no one cares and no one does anything about it,” Carlson said.

    “I think the reason is because they’re threatened. And if you look at the committee chairman who allowed this shit to happen year after year, they’re all – and I don’t know, people say, ‘Oh, they’re compromised or being blackmailed,’ whatever. I don’t have evidence of that. But I know them. And they have all the things to hide. I know that for a fact.”

    “It’s not a stretch of imagination to imagine that, you know, some committee chairman who’s allowing warrantless spying on Americans to continue, or whatever abuse they’re allowing… It’s not impossible to imagine that some guy with a drinking problem or a weird sex life — and that’s very common, very common up there — that’s why they’re doing it. Because they don’t want to be exposed,” Carlson added.

    “I said to somebody, a very powerful person, the other day, in a conversation in my kitchen, an elected official – holds a really senior position…

    But I was like, ‘All these people are controlled. They’ve all got weird s*x lives, and all these things they’re hiding, and they’re being blackmailed by the intel agencies.’

    And he said, and I’m quoting, ‘I know.’ I was like, okay, so at this point, we’re just sort of admitting that’s real? Like, why do we allow that to continue?”

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Finally, and in a more calming conclusion, Carlson reminisces about his unconventional childhood, emphasizing the value of communal meals and genuine conversations, which he contrasts starkly with the superficial interactions encouraged by social media platforms. Rogan agrees, but fears we have gone to far to ever be able to come back.

    On the value of personal interaction:

    “When you get people in a club and you take their phones away and just have them just be actual human beings and not be filming everything, just being completely trapped with this idea of capturing something and then putting it online, then you get to have a human experience.”

    The dialogue shifts to the topic of creativity and its survival in modern America.

    On the state of creativity:

    “Creativity, art has been completely destroyed and eliminated in the United States. There’s like, you can’t be creative if you’re not honest. It’s that simple, and we can’t be honest so there’s no creativity.”

    Carlson expresses a belief that true creativity cannot exist without honesty, asserting that a lack of genuine expression has led to a decline in artistic and cultural development, except in fields like comedy and music which still manage to thrive amidst societal constraints.

    On the power of rhythm in music:

    “I love the fact that they had two drummers… the architecture is rhythm and it’s the universal sound that every culture appreciates because it reflects something that’s pre-existing that’s in you.”

    On societal change and comedy:

    “Comedy’s never been better. Amazing time. It came close, oh yeah, the walls got breached… It felt like, oh wow, you know, people can’t tell jokes anymore. We kept doing it.”

    Both hosts discuss the vitality of art forms that manage to operate outside the mainstream narratives, suggesting that these are crucial for maintaining a vibrant cultural landscape.

    Overall, the discussion encapsulates a broad critique of contemporary societal issues, from government secrecy and the erosion of personal freedoms to the challenges facing creative expression and public discourse in the digital age.

    Both Carlson and Rogan advocate for a more open, honest, and engaged society that values personal interaction and intellectual freedom above conformity and control.

    “I’m going to go crazy because I just can’t deal with the lying,” Carlson concludes.

    Watch the full three hour discussion below:

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 22:25

  • Tit-For-Tat Responses From Beijing To Trade Restrictions May Bring About A Full-Blown Trade War
    Tit-For-Tat Responses From Beijing To Trade Restrictions May Bring About A Full-Blown Trade War

    By John Liu, Zhu Lin and Abhishek Vishnoi, Bloomberg Markets Live reporters and strategists

    China’s most-promising industries are facing a growing threat of trade restrictions from Western governments, blurring the outlook for stocks that have the potential to fuel the nation’s market growth.

    The sectors under scrutiny by Europe and the US are as wide-ranging as electric vehicles, wind and solar projects, medical devices and chips, but have one thing in common: they are of strategic importance to President Xi Jinping’s bid for leadership in the global race toward green transition and high-tech development.

    The rising tensions come at an inopportune time. Stocks were starting to emerge from a multi-year slump as investors bought into China’s efforts to build new growth engines and achieve self-sufficiency along key supply chains. A materialization of those threats can hinder China’s global expansion, while tit-for-tat responses from Beijing may bring about a full-blown trade war that would drastically alter the investment landscape.

    “Geopolitical pressures will only rise — any exports can be targeted since it’s no longer really about trade fairness,” said Vey-Sern Ling, managing director at Union Bancaire Privee. “It dampens the export growth drivers for China’s economy.”

    China’s CSI 300 Index has climbed about 3% this year, regaining some footing after a third-annual loss. Performances among leaders in the green and high-tech industry have been mixed as geopolitical risks add to concerns over oversupply and price competition.

    Battery giant Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Ltd has jumped nearly 17% onshore this year while EV leader BYD Co. has advanced 6%. Longi Green Energy Technology Co. and Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. have lost about 20% each.

    The biggest Chinese firms that get at least a fifth of their revenue from exports command more than a 14% weight in the CSI 300, with many of them including CATL and BYD trading at a higher price-to-earnings ratio than the benchmark, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

    While trade spats have become a permanent feature in China-Western relations under Xi, recent months saw tensions worsen. The European Union has joined US-styled protectionist moves as a complex mix of national security concerns, economic and political considerations play out.

    President Joe Biden’s call for tariffs as high as 25% on some Chinese steel and aluminum products shows how China-bashing will ratchet up in a presidential election year. In Europe, policymakers are responding to growing complaints from local manufacturers that China’s industrial overcapacity is crowding them out.

    The range of targeted products largely overlap with Xi’s industrial priorities labeled “new productive forces.” Investors had been hunting for stock winners since the phrase was listed on Beijing’s top agenda in early March, triggering a brief rally in shares from robotics companies to chip makers.

    “While the new productive forces may have policy tailwinds, these may be somewhat offset by rising geopolitical tensions, particularly in an election year where noise will likely increase,” said Marvin Chen, a strategist at Bloomberg Intelligence.

    The focus is now on which sector will end up next in the crosshairs. EVs have so far been a key target, with Gavekal Research pointing to the EU’s worsening trade balance with China in the industry.

    “The cyclical positioning of Europe and China points to the trade balance tipping in China’s favor,” Gavekal analysts Cedric Gemehl and Thomas Gatley wrote in a note dated April 15. European domestic demand is strengthening, which should spur more purchases of Chinese goods, while EU exports to China are likely to flat-line at best on weak demand, they said.

    Shen Meng, director at Chanson & Co. in Beijing, expects lithium battery makers to face growing pressure. The industry falls under the category of clean tech and has been a top driver of China’s export growth in past years, he said. Key players include CATL, Eve Energy Co. and Gotion High-Tech Co.

    In some sense, there’s a bright side to the tensions as they can help accelerate China’s industrial upgrade. A technical breakthrough by Huawei Technologies Co., which is not listed and faces US sanctions, has spurred a surge in the shares of its suppliers.

    “While immediate impacts of such geopolitical tensions might constrain certain sectors temporarily, the long-term outcome could favor Chinese companies that innovate and adapt to changing regulatory and market dynamics,” said Tareck Horchani, head of prime brokerage dealing at Maybank Securities Pte.  

    The various restrictions mulled will also take time to deliver. A planned probe by Europe into Chinese medical devices procurement has sent stocks like Shenzhen Mindray Bio-Medical Electronics Co. plunging following the report, but most have since partially recovered their losses.  

    All things considered, the unpredictable nature of geopolitical tensions increases the risk of investing in Chinese stocks, an asset class that many were already avoiding due to regulatory uncertainties and a slowing economy.

    “Any future EU protectionist moves against China will further impede trade and capital flows into the Chinese economy and add to the already heavy downward pressure on its stock market,” said Han Piow Liew, fund manager at Maitri Asset Management Pte. “What all these means is that investing in Chinese stocks in such an environment is an arduous endeavor requiring razor-like focus on stocks.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 22:10

  • Northern California City Relaxes Homeless Rules Amid Federal Lawsuit
    Northern California City Relaxes Homeless Rules Amid Federal Lawsuit

    Authored by Brian Back via The Epoch Times,

    The city council of San Rafael in Marin County, California, voted unanimously in a public hearing last week, to approve a more relaxed version of its ordinance dealing with homeless camps and where they are allowed.

    The ordinance was originally approved by the council in July 2023 to help curb violence, crime, fires, and littering at an encampment dubbed “Camp Integrity” in the Mahon Creek area near James B. Davidson Middle School.

    Several days before the ordinance was set to take effect, a group of homeless residents represented by a local chapter of the California Homeless Union filed a lawsuit to block it in federal court. A judge tentatively granted their request and has since issued preliminary orders to limit certain aspects of the city ordinance.

    San Rafael Mayor Kate Colin told the Marin Independent Journal the city has passed numerous ordinances in recent years as encampments have grown along with increased calls for police and fire response, but “has been sued in federal court every single time.”

    Officials say the ordinance passed Monday, which goes into effect in June, allows campsites to double in size to up to 200 square feet for one person or up to 400 square feet for up to four people living together, provided the camps are located more than 250 feet away from schools and have 10-foot buffers between sites. It also prohibits camping 100 feet from playgrounds—about one-third of a regulation football field—and 10 feet from private property and public utility infrastructure.

    San Rafael’s “Camp Integrity” has grown significantly over the past year with tents and other structures, and the accompanying drug use, sanitation problems, physical violence, and other issues are posing public health and safety hazards, according to the city.

    “My business is surrounded,” Jay Ress, general manager of East Bay Tire Co., told the council at the meeting.

    East Bay Tire purchased its property on Lincoln Avenue two-and-a-half years ago and invested $750,000 to renovate the site, Mr. Ress said. If the situation does not turn around soon they will be forced to shut down, he added.

    “We moved into San Rafael because of the reputation the city has had in supporting the business community,” Mr. Ress said.

    “But with the current situation, that reputation is being completely ruined, and I think the city is doomed to more people leaving.”

    Christine Miller, who with her husband Rick owns the 103-year-old nearby business Marin County Roofing Co., also pleaded with the council in a letter. She wrote the encampment next to her property has led to violent attacks against employees and resulted in the death of at least one homeless person in front of her business.

    “These are not people who lost their jobs and have fallen on hard times,” Ms. Miller wrote.

    “These are people who are addicted to drugs and actively engaging in drug related activity. Nothing is being done to hold them accountable.”

    City staff said rules at “Camp Integrity” have been enforced with incentives and voluntary compliance, and under the new ordinance, no homeless individuals will be charged with violations unless their unlawful conduct is knowing or willful.

    “Is it enforcement never? Is that what you’re saying?” asked City Councilmember Maribeth Bushey.

    Told some enforcement tools do remain available, Ms. Bushey asked, “And when, pray tell, will the city plan to exercise those tools?”

    The law remains unsettled as to whether or not cities have the right to evict homeless campers on public property, and if San Rafael violated their federal injunction, the city could be held in contempt of court, officials noted.

    The “Camp Integrity” homeless encampment on Andersen Drive in San Rafael, Calif., on April 16, 2024. (Brian Back/The Epoch Times)

    In a similar case that could guide the fate of lawsuits targeting San Rafael and other cities, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear opening arguments April 22 in Grants Pass v. Johnson, which explores how far the Oregon city and others can go in policing homeless camps.

    The case addresses the Eighth Amendment dealing with “cruel and unusual punishment,” which has been invoked to block oversight of encampments in cities where limited taxpayer-funded housing is available for homeless individuals. Lower court decisions in the case have focused on whether people are “involuntarily” homeless and would agree to leave an encampment and occupy a shelter bed if available.

    The “Camp Integrity” homeless encampment on Andersen Drive in San Rafael, Calif., on April 16, 2024. (Brian Back/The Epoch Times)

    As “Camp Integrity” has grown, the city has added garbage collection services, hand-washing stations, and six portable restrooms, two of which are ADA compliant. Some of the health and safety upgrades were requested by campers in a city-administered survey.

    Marin County and the City of San Rafael jointly applied for $5.9 million in state funds earlier this year and say they are optimistic they will be awarded the money this month. The grant would add outreach staff, case managers, facilities such as mobile showers, and provide funds for interim housing.

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom attended Redwood High School, just a few miles from San Rafael, and he previously lived with his family in a nearby Marin County estate that sold for $5.9 million before he was elected governor.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 21:00

  • Sidney Powell Handed Win After Judges Dismiss Disciplinary Effort By Texas State Bar
    Sidney Powell Handed Win After Judges Dismiss Disciplinary Effort By Texas State Bar

    Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Sidney Powell speaks during a press conference at the Republican National Committee headquarters in Washington on Nov. 19, 2020. (Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)

    Sidney Powell, a lawyer who filed lawsuits after the 2020 election, got a win in Texas after an appeals court ruled that the Texas bar did not prove that she engaged in misconduct or fraud.

    A panel of judges on the Fifth District of Texas Court of Appeals in Dallas ruled Wednesday that the state bar’s arguments lacked merit and evidence. They found that state bar prosecutors “employed a ’scattershot’ approach to the case” that had alleged Ms. Powell did not have a reasonable basis to file lawsuits that challenged the 2020 election’s outcome in battleground states.

    “The Bar employed a ‘scattershot’ approach to the case, which left this court and the trial court ‘with the task of sorting through the argument to determine what issue ha[d] actually been raised,‘” Justice Dennise Garcia wrote in the court’s ruling. “Having done so, the absence of competent summary judgment compels our conclusion that the Bar failed to meet its summary judgment burden.”

    A separate court had sided with Ms. Powell in the case last year, finding “numerous defects” in the evidence presented by the State Bar of Texas Commission for Lawyer Discipline. The court also found that the bar couldn’t provide evidence that she filed frivolous lawsuits.

    “Under these circumstances and on this record, we conclude the trial court did not err in granting Powell’s no-evidence motion for summary judgment,” the appeals court wrote.

    The State Bar of Texas Commission for Lawyer Discipline has not yet issued a statement on the matter. A representative for the Texas State Bar told Reuters that the commission would meet to determine its next steps but declined to comment further.

    “The Dallas Court of Appeals has affirmed the Texas state court’s dismissal of the Texas Bar’s case against Powell. After three years of litigation, the Court of Appeals held the Bar had no evidence Powell violated any disciplinary rule in filing four federal lawsuits in the aftermath of the 2020 election,” she said in a statement this week after the court’s decision.

    In court papers filed with the appeals court, Ms. Powell disputed the bar’s allegations that she provided altered evidence in her legal filings. She said the documents were provided by other attorneys involved in the case.

    The court appeared to agree with her arguments. “Regardless of whether the challenged conduct must be knowing, intentional, or otherwise, a question we need not resolve here, it is axiomatic that dishonesty involves some conscious perversion of truth,” the judge wrote Wednesday.

    Following the 2020 contest, Ms. Powell was among the most prominent attorneys to file lawsuits, alleging there was enough fraud in battleground states that swung it in favor of President Joe Biden. A federal judge in Detroit sanctioned Ms. Powell and other lawyers in 2021 over the lawsuits.

    The 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals largely upheld those sanctions, and the U.S. Supreme Court recently declined to hear Ms. Powell’s appeal.

    Ms. Powell in October 2023 pleaded guilty in Georgia and took a plea deal with Fulton County prosecutors after she was charged with illegally attempting to overturn the 2020 election results. President Trump, the Republican Party’s presumptive 2024 presidential nominee, has also been charged in the case.

    He and more than a dozen other co-defendants in the case have pleaded not guilty. President Trump has said the Fulton County case is an attempt to interfere with the 2024 election, describing the charges as baseless.

    Under the terms of her plea deal, Ms. Powell had to write an apology. “I apologize for my actions in connection with the events in Coffee County,” she wrote in the letter, made public in December.

    Fani Willis, the embattled Democrat district attorney of Fulton County who presented the charges to a grand jury, said that the apology letters needed to include “real contrition” but that they did not need to be long.

    Jenna Ellis, another lawyer who was charged and took a plea deal in Fulton County, also wrote an apology letter. However, she read hers aloud in court while pleading guilty.

    In response to Ms. Powell’s apology letter, President Trump wrote on social media last year that Ms. Powell never worked for him in an official capacity.

    “Sidney Powell was one of millions and millions of people who thought, and in ever increasing numbers still think, correctly, that the 2020 Presidential Election was rigged & stolen,” he wrote on Truth Social. He added that Ms. Powell “was not my attorney and never was.” If she was, “she would have been conflicted,” the former president wrote at the time.

    “Ms. Powell did a valiant job of representing a very unfairly treated and governmentally abused General Mike Flynn, but to no avail. His prosecution, despite the facts, was ruthless. He was an innocent man, much like many other innocent people who are being persecuted by this now Fascist government of ours, and I was honored to give him a Full Pardon,” he added.

    Reuters and Zachary Stieber contributed to this report.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 19:50

  • "Seven F*cking Dollars!": Social Media Influencer Rages After Paying $7 For An Apple At Whole Foods
    “Seven F*cking Dollars!”: Social Media Influencer Rages After Paying $7 For An Apple At Whole Foods

    We’re being told that Bidenomics is working and that inflation is under control.

    Yet, when we see articles about shoppers in America paying $7 for an apple, it’s hard to make peace with the narrative the current administration is trying to convince its populace of. 

    That was the case last week when a Boston-based influencer took to Tik Tok to claim that she paid $7 for an apple – and only an apple – at a Whole Foods, according to a report by the NY Post. 

    “Literally just did grocery shopping at Whole Foods and look at this. Guess how much this is. This is an apple, it’s called a Sugarbee f–king apple apparently and look at it,” she said. 

    She continued: “The size of my palm. I thought it was like probably 2 to 3 dollars. I scanned this motherf–ker I scanned it — 7 f–king dollars, 7!”

    The user @via..li shared a video of her expensive purchase on social media, which has been widely re-circulated. The video, now deleted from her account, featured her removing an apple from a bag outside an unnamed Whole Foods store.

    As the Post notes, Whole Foods’ website prices the Organic Sugarbee Apple at $3.99 per pound across most Boston areas, though rates can differ by location. In her video, the TikToker even confirmed the price with a store employee.

    She added: “Genuinely what economy are we all f–king living in that it costs 7 dollars to buy an apple? I could have sworn that some other like apple that I bought was not 7 f–king dollars. It’s crazy, like 7 dollars for a latte? OK. This apple better be tasting so f–king good.”

    Viewers responded with an array of comments, with some supporting the influencer and others questioning her. One user wrote: “On average a pound will give you 2-3 apples. Maybe her anxiety was leaning on the scale.”

    Another added: “Even more insane when you realize that’s almost an entire hour of labor for some people even in the US. Imagine working an entire hour in exchange for 1 apple…”

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 19:11

  • 15 State Officials Warn Bank Of America About 'De-Banking' Of Christians
    15 State Officials Warn Bank Of America About ‘De-Banking’ Of Christians

    Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

    A group of 15 financial officials from 13 states sent a notice to Bank of America, raising concerns about the institution’s “de-banking” of Christians.

    “We write to express our concerns over Bank of America’s troubling track record of politicized de-banking. Bank of America’s de-banking policies and practices threaten the company’s financial health, its reputation with customers, our nation’s economy, and the civil liberties of everyday Americans,” the officials wrote in an April 18 letter to Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan.

    “We are especially troubled by Bank of America’s track record of discriminating against religious ministries. Notable examples include Memphis-based charity Indigenous Advance Ministries, the Timothy Two Project, and Christian author and speaker Lance Wallnau.”

    In April 2023, Bank of America shut down the account of Indigenous Advance Ministries, which partners with groups in the African nation of Uganda to provide care and education for orphaned and at-risk children. The bank closed accounts of a Memphis church which donated to the organization.

    Bank of America provided “vague reasons” for the closure of these accounts, claiming the organization’s activities exceeded the institution’s “risk tolerance” and that it no longer wanted to serve its “business type.”

    “Months later—after being confronted by an international media organization—the bank then claimed that it closed the accounts because the for-profit business engaged in ‘debt collection.’ Neither Indigenous Advance Ministries nor the church collect debts, nor was the bank able to point to any policy prohibiting account holders from engaging in such activities,” the letter said.

    “In other words that rationale was a ruse, and even if legitimate, would only apply to one of the closed accounts.”

    In 2020, the bank closed the account of Timothy Two Project International, which trains pastors in more than 65 nations. In a letter to the group, the bank claimed the closure was due to Timothy Two operating “a business type we have chosen not to service.”

    The financial institution also froze the accounts of author Mr. Wallnau, alleging he was suspected of money laundering. However, the bank failed to provide any evidence supporting such accusations.

    While the bank eventually unfroze the account, they required Mr. Wallnau to answer a series of invasive questions.

    “This pattern of religious de-banking strongly suggests that systemic drivers of religious and political bias may be at work within Bank of America,” the letter said.

    “One objective indicator of such a problem is the bank’s egregiously low score on the Viewpoint Diversity Score Business Index, the premier benchmark for measuring corporate respect for free speech and religious freedom. Bank of America scored a meager 8 percent out of a possible 100 percent.”

    The letter pointed out that Bank of America’s vague terms of service allow them to deny services for political or religious views. For instance, the company’s policy says it can refuse services to clients deemed to “promote intolerance … or hate.”

    This policy can be weaponized by the bank against clients who express certain views, which are protected by the First Amendment, the officials wrote.

    “Bank of America funds and partners with anti-free speech organizations like the Human Rights Campaign and the Center for American Progress while preventing employees from giving to faith-based groups in their employee gift match program.”

    Bank of America, being the second largest bank in the nation and a recipient of a host of government subsidies, is obligated to ensure equal access to marketplace for all Americans and “not play politics,” officials wrote.

    The letter was written by officials from Alabama, Arizona, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Utah.

    They demanded that the institution implement certain recommendations, including eliminating “existing viewpoint discriminatory terms” governing customers, updating its terms of service to include a commitment to not discriminate on the basis of religion or politics, and taking part in a survey to assess how the bank’s policies impact the civil liberties of its customers.

    The Epoch Times reached out to the bank for comment.

    De-banking of Conservatives

    The issue of de-banking conservatives has been a hot topic in recent years. A November 2022 statement signed by 60 financial professionals alleged that banks like JP Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Capital One, and Morgan Stanley were engaged in political or religious discrimination.

    “JP Morgan Chase refused to process payments for a GOP-aligned organization,” it said.

    In addition, the bank “shuttered the National Committee for Religious Freedom’s account without explanation, demanding that the nonprofit disclose its donors and provide a list of the political candidates it intends to support as a condition of resuming service.”

    Meanwhile, Morgan Stanley refused to do business with organizations that raised “significant human rights, environmental, health, and safety or social responsibility issues.”

    Similarly, credit behemoth Visa mandated that merchants do not use its services in any manner deemed “hateful.”

    “What these vague, unspecified terms mean in practice is subject to the arbitrary interpretation of each of your companies, or any one of thousands of employees charged with enforcing them,” the statement said.

    “Policies like these place customers and clients at risk of being ‘debanked’ simply because a company employee disagrees with their point of view on any number of contentious social issues.”

    Meanwhile, states are taking action to end financial discrimination against conservatives by the banking industry.

    Iowa earlier this year introduced Senate Study Bill 3094, which bans financial institutions from discriminating against customers using a “social credit score.”

    The bill defines “social credit score” as any evaluation of a person’s “speech, religious exercise, association, expression, or conduct protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.”

    If a financial institution is found violating the law, the attorney general can bring a civil action against the institution. A court can order the institution to pay damages, restitution, or other compensation.

    In February, State Rep. Jason Zachary (R-Tenn.) introduced a similar bill in Tennessee. “This legislation prohibits the 20 largest banks in our country from denying financial services to any Tennessean based on political speech, religious belief, or a social credit score,” he said at a state House Banking and Consumer Affairs Committee hearing.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 18:40

  • NYC High School Soccer Game Cancelled After Migrants Refuse To Leave The Field
    NYC High School Soccer Game Cancelled After Migrants Refuse To Leave The Field

    New York City has long been out of space, but the constant stream of migrants arriving in the Big Apple is truly making it clear just how much of a premium real estate really is on the island. And those who pay for it are apparently no longer entitled to it. 

    A New York City high school soccer game, held on a public field in East Harlem, had to be cancelled this past week after a group of migrants reportedly refused to leave the pitch, according to the NY Post. 

    The match was slated to be the Manhattan Kickers versus FA Euro New York.

    Even after the police showed up, the group of migrants refused to leave the field, the report says. There were about 30 migrants, who “appeared to be African” and “spoke little English”, according to the report. 

    Erik Johansson, the coach of the Manhattan Kickers 17-year-old boys travel team, told the Post: “I directly asked them to leave and some of them kind of took it into consideration, but then four or five of them said, ‘You know what, f–k it, we don’t have to leave, we can do whatever we want.’”

    The police asked to see the teams’ city permits, prompting Johansson to say: “When you show up with two teams in uniform, a ref and two coaches, usually nobody is asking to see your permit.”

    The game was delayed 30 minutes as a result of waiting for permits to be forwarded and, by then, “the teams didn’t feel safe”, the report says. 

    “Even when the game is over, you don’t know if they’re waiting for you, so even if the cops kicked them out, it may not be over. So we just all agreed, this is too dangerous,” Johansson said.

    He told the Post that in his home country of Sweden, “clashes” with migrants on public pitches were “all too common”. 

    “I have seen this before, I know how bad it can get,” he concluded.

    Maud Maron, a mother to a boy that plays on the Kickers, said: “It’s so frustrating that the guys who refused to follow the rules won.”

    She said New York City is becoming “lawless”. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 18:05

  • People Who Rent Will Decide the 2024 Presidential Election
    People Who Rent Will Decide the 2024 Presidential Election

    By Mish Shdlock of MishTalk

    Immigration won’t decide the election. Polls have not yet captured what will. This may come as a surprise, but the top issue housing. More explicitly, it’s shelter costs.

    The Economy

    The economy is a very broad category that encompasses inflation, jobs, unemployment, wages, rent, and housing.

    Other polls split the economy in various pieces, such as inflation and jobs. Not a single poll mentioned housing specifically.

    Q: What is it that young voters really have on their minds?
    A: Rent

    The CPI Rose Sharply in March Led by Shelter and Gasoline

    The CPI rose 0.4 percent in March. Rent was up another 0.4 percent with gasoline up 1.7 percent. Together, the pair was about half of the total rise.

    Rent of primary residence, the cost that best equates to the rent people pay, jumped another 0.4 percent in March.  Rent of primary residence has gone up at least 0.4 percent for 31 consecutive months! 

    The “rents are falling” (or soon will) projections have been based on the price of new leases and cherry picked markets. But existing leases, much more important, keep rising.

    Only 8 to 9 percent of renters move each year. It’s been a huge mistake thinking new leases and finished construction would drive rent prices.

    Rent does not really go up every month. The BLS smooths things out over time. Instead, rent has surged once a year more than wages have kept up.

    Immigration Not the Key Issue Where It Matters

    I sympathize with the view that immigration is the key issue, and perhaps it is to voters nationally.

    Mayors in Chicago, Denver, and New York city are all bitterly complaining. So are governors Greg Abbot in Texas and Ron DeSantis in Florida. Add in California for good measure.

    Those six states provide 188 of the 270 electoral college votes but none of them are in play.

    The six swing states are Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Georgia, and Arizona. Immigration is only a hot issue in Arizona where abortion is also in play.

    Blacks Abandon Biden

    A WSJ Swing State Poll show blacks, especially black males, are abandoning Biden in huge numbers.

    In the swing states, 30 percent of black males now support Trump. That’s up from 12 percent in the 2020 election. Trump support from black females is up from 6 percent to 11 percent.

    The numbers are not directly comparable because the 2020 numbers are national. However, the numbers flash a huge warning sign.

    The WSJ poll confirms the NYT/ Siena poll from last October: Trump Leads in 5 Critical States as Voters Blast Biden, Times/Siena Poll Finds

    Young Voters Say Their Discontent Goes Deeper Than Israel and Gaza

    Israel is a big issue in Michigan, likely more so than immigration.

    But across the board, Young Voters Say Their Discontent Goes Deeper Than Israel and Gaza

    Generational Homeownership Rates

    Who Are the Renters?

    The answer is younger voters and blacks. The Apartment List 2023 Millennial Homeownership Report shows Millennial homeownership seriously lags other generations.

    Generation Z homeownership is dramatically lower still. And according to the National Association of Realtors, the homeownership rate among Black Americans is 44 percent whereas for White Americans it’s 72.7 percent.

    That’s the largest Black-White homeownership rate gap in a decade.

    Home Prices Hit New Record High

    The latest Case-Shiller housing data shows home prices hit a new record high.

    Adding insults and costs, the 30-year mortgage rate ended last week at 7.30 percent according to Mortgage News Daily.

    Those looking to buy a home are very angry about being priced out while watching rent soar for nearly three years.

    Explaining the Polls

    The homeownership discrepancy (Black/White, and Young/Old) fully explains the polls. Yet not a single pollster or economist is in tune with relationship.

    A high percentage of blacks and young voters are likely vote for Biden, but the shift vs 2020 is what will matter.

    President Biden and economists in general keep singing the praises of the economy.

    On average the economy is doing OK. And asset holders have generally fared well in this economy. But averages will not decide the election.

    The Abortion Issue Comes Alive in Arizona

    On April 17, I wrote The Abortion Issue Comes Alive in Arizona, It Could Cost Republicans Dearly That’s still my position with an emphasis on the word “could”.

    What About Trump’s Legal Issues?

    Trump will lose some Republicans and undecided voters who may sit the election out on grounds that Trump was part of an insurrection or contributed to one. However, The Need to Prevent a Biden Economic Collapse Outweighs Charges Against Trump

    Republicans are willing to look the other way on the charges against Trump.

    So, if current trends hold, it’s the economy that will matter.

    Specifically, the election will be decided by extreme unhappiness in the block of voters who rent but want to by a home, concluding things were better under Trump.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 17:30

  • Recent IRA Inheritors Get Another Year With No Distribution Requirement
    Recent IRA Inheritors Get Another Year With No Distribution Requirement

    In what’s becoming an annual ritual, the IRS has once again waived required minimum distributions for the current year for people who inherited an IRA from someone who died in 2020 or after. That’s welcome news, but some uncertainty still hangs over a growing number of people whose inherited IRAs are subject to new rules precipitated by the SECURE Act, which was passed in December 2019.  

    That law killed the so-called “stretch IRA” — which let beneficiaries minimize distributions by spreading them out over their life expectancies. The SECURE Act now requires most non-spouse beneficiaries to completely empty an inherited IRA by Dec. 31 of the year containing the 10th anniversary of death. For example, a child who inherited an IRA from a parent who died on Oct. 20, 2021 has until Dec. 31, 2031 to take all the money out. 

    That all seemed straightforward and simple enough. Tax professionals and financial planners universally assumed that people with inherited IRAs subject to the SECURE Act’s “10-year rule” could take out as little or as much as they wanted until the 10th year, when the remainder would have to be withdrawn. 

    Aggravatingly, the IRS had other ideas. When it drafted the regulations to enforce Congress’s “10-year rule,” the despised organization needlessly complicated things for situations where the deceased retirement account owner was old enough to have been subjected to RMD requirements.  

    Specifically, it decreed that — during Years 1 through 9 — heirs would have to take annual required minimum distributions (RMDs) based on their life expectancies and calculated with a factor from an IRS table. Then, in Year 10, they’d have to withdraw whatever’s left. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    The IRS didn’t issue those proposed regulations until 2022 — which meant affected people who hadn’t taken RMDs in 2021 had broken a rule that hadn’t been created yet. That unjustness combined with a broad uproar from taxpayers, tax advisors and financial institutions over the complexity of the proposed regs prompted the IRS to announce that it would waive the penalty for not taking RMDs in 2021 and 2022.

    As the IRS continued wringing its hands over its mess — and as IRA heirs continued wondering if the final regulations might turn out mercifully simpler — the IRS issued another RMD-penalty waiver for 2023. On Tuesday, the IRS similarly announced there’d be no penalty for failing to take RMDs from affected accounts in 2024.

    All the while, the wait for final regulations continues. With its announcement of the 2024 waiver, the IRS said those final regs are expected to apply to RMDs for 2025, which implies they’ll be published later this year — close to five years after the legislation that triggered the need to lay out new rules for taxpayers. 

    This IRA inheritor doesn’t have to take an RMD in 2024, but should consider if a huge withdrawal in Year 10 might backfire

    Generally speaking, withdrawals from traditional IRAs are fully taxable as ordinary income. While we’re conditioned to defer taxation, there may be some circumstances where it’s not in your best interest to wait until Year 10 to take most of the money out.

    For example, if the account is big enough, a large, single withdrawal could push you into a higher tax bracket, or have a domino affect on other elements of your tax return that key off your adjusted gross income. Then there’s the question of what future tax rate you’ll be subjected to in a late-stage empire that’s $34.7 trillion in debt.

    If the IRS goes forward with requiring distributions in Years 1 through 9, you’ll be responsible for making sure you take out at least the right amount; you can take more if it suits your tax-planning. In the first few years after the SECURE Act passed, many financial institutions threw up their hands on inherited IRA RMD calculations, merely telling investors ask a tax advisor. Now, they’re starting to come around. Vanguard, for example, offers an online, inherited IRA RMD calculator that anyone can access.  

    Two final points of emphasis:

    • The 10-year rule only applies to IRAs inherited from owners who died in 2020 or later. Earlier-inherited accounts use the old rules, which allow for “stretch IRA” distributions over their lifetime.
    • The same grandfathered treatment generally applies to IRA-inheritors who fall into any of five classes of “eligible designated beneficiaries”: Surviving spouses, minor children of the account owner, disabled people, the chronically ill, and people who are either older than or not more than 10 years younger than the deceased IRA owner. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 16:55

  • Pardon Me? Michael Avenatti Flips, Willing To Testify On Trump's Behalf
    Pardon Me? Michael Avenatti Flips, Willing To Testify On Trump’s Behalf

    Imprisoned former CNN demigod Michael Avenatti has come out in support of Donald Trump, telling the NY Post that he’s willing to testify on Trump’s behalf after being in contact with Trump’s legal defense team about his willingness to testify against his former client, Stormy Daniels.

    “The defense has contacted me,” Avenatti told the Post in a phone call from Terminal Island, a minimum-security federal prison in Los Angeles where he’s serving a 19-year sentence for extortion, tax evasion, fraud, embezzlement and other federal crimes.

    “I’d be more than happy to testify, I don’t know that I will be called to testify, but I have been in touch with Trump’s defense for the better part of year,” Avenatti continued.

    A person close to the former president confirmed the ongoing discussions.

    While Avenatti made his name as one of Trump’s most ferocious critics — and even publicly called for Trump’s indictment in 2018 — the defense attorney sang a different tune from the clink.

    “There’s no question [the trial] is politically motivated because they’re concerned that he may be reelected,” Avenatti said. “If the defendant was anyone other than Donald Trump, this case would not have been brought at this time, and for the government to attempt to bring this case and convict him in an effort to prevent tens of millions of people from voting for him, I think it’s just flat out wrong, and atrocious.

    “I’m really bothered by the fact that Trump, in my view, has been targeted. Four cases is just over the top and I think there’s a significant chance that this is going to all backfire and is going to propel him to the White House,” he added. –NY Post

    According to Avenatti, “Depending on what happens, this could constitute pouring jet fuel on his campaign.”

    Avenatti captured national attention in 2018 while representing Stormy Daniels, the porn star who alleges she had an affair with Trump in 2006, and was paid $130,000 by former Trump attorney Michael Cohen in 2016 in order to allegedly buy her silence.

    In November 2018, however, Avenatti’s world began imploding after he was booked on charges of domestic violence. Less than 18 months later he was convicted of trying to extort Nike for up to $25 million. And in 2022, he was found guilty of pilfering $300,000 in book advance money from Daniels – and pleaded guilty to federal fraud and tax charges in the same month.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 15:45

  • Biden's Title IX Trans-formation Puts Women's Progress & Protections "On The Chopping Block"
    Biden’s Title IX Trans-formation Puts Women’s Progress & Protections “On The Chopping Block”

    Authored by Savannah Hulsey Pointer via The Epoch Times,

    The Biden administration’s overhaul of Title IX met with pushback today from lawmakers in favor of preserving female-only spaces.

    Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) speaks during a House Committee on Oversight and Reform hearing

    Among the dissenters was Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), who serves as the Education and the Workforce Committee Chair. Ms. Foxx asserted that the Department of Education’s final Title IX rule puts a radical agenda of left-wing ideologues over the safety of women and girls.

    “The Department of Education has placed Title IX, and the decades of advancement and protections for women and girls that it has yielded, squarely on the chopping block,” Ms. Foxx said in a press release from the committee.

    On April 19, the rule overhauling Title IX was finalized by the Biden administration. As a result, universities and colleges nationwide have only a few months to revise their policies regarding the handling of sex discrimination complaints in light of the expanded definition of sex.

    The Title IX Act, which is federal legislation, explicitly forbids any form of sex discrimination in funded educational programs or activities, including sexual harassment and sexual violence.

    The new rule defines sexual harassment as including harassment based on sex stereotypes, sex characteristics, pregnancy, sexual orientation, and gender identity.

    In her castigation of the changes, Ms. Foxx went on to say:

    “This final rule dumps kerosene on the already raging fire that is Democrats’ contemptuous culture war that aims to radically redefine sex and gender.

    “The rule also undermines existing due process rights, placing students and institutions in legal jeopardy and again undermining the protections Title IX is intended to provide. Evidently, the acceptance of biological reality and the faithful implementation of the law are just pills too big for the Department to swallow—and it shows.”

    According to the U.S. Department of Education, this redefining of sex is intended to be in accordance with the logic of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Bostock v. Clayton County, which was issued in 2020. In that case, a child welfare worker was purportedly terminated after his employer discovered that he was gay.

    In its decision, which was reached by a vote of 6–3, the Supreme Court provided a broad interpretation of Title VII, the federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in the workplace. The court came to the conclusion that it is unconstitutional to take into consideration sexual orientation and gender identity when making employment choices.

    U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona said in an April 19 press release, announcing the change:

    “For more than 50 years, Title IX has promised an equal opportunity to learn and thrive in our nation’s schools free from sex discrimination.

    “These final regulations build on the legacy of Title IX by clarifying that all our nation’s students can access schools that are safe, welcoming, and respect their rights.”

    On his first day in office, President Joe Biden issued a comprehensive executive order that directed all federal agencies to apply the Bostock framework to all of their operations, including Title IX enforcement. This was despite the fact that Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion that Bostock would only narrowly apply to Title VII.

    “Children should be able to learn without worrying about whether they will be denied access to the restroom, the locker room, or school sports,” President Biden’s day-one order stated.

    “Adults should be able to earn a living and pursue a vocation knowing that they will not be fired, demoted, or mistreated because of whom they go home to or because how they dress does not conform to sex-based stereotypes.”

    The department’s new rule does not address the issue of transgender athletes competing in high school and college sports, which is now the subject of a rule-making process that is still ongoing. It is considered improbable that a comprehensive sports rule will be established before the general election later this year.

    The White House did not immediately respond to The Epoch Times’s request for comment.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 15:10

  • "Hard Crash": Construction Jobs In Philadelphia Set To Plunge As Residential Projects Hit A Wall
    “Hard Crash”: Construction Jobs In Philadelphia Set To Plunge As Residential Projects Hit A Wall

    Construction jobs in Philadelphia could plunge soon as a result of a “glut” of residential projects finishing up with questionable demand waiting behind them, according to a new report from BisNow. 

    In fact, some developers are calling for a “hard crash” after a rush to capitalize on the city’s 10-year tax abatement program “temporarily sent activity into the stratosphere”.

    Construction is bustling along the city’s main thoroughfares as teams tackle a large backlog of projects permitted before the expiration of a key tax abatement program in January 2022. Over 26,000 units were approved in 2021, a significant increase from 2020, with the work expected to conclude within the next 18 months, the report says. 

    Driven by low interest rates and the rush to meet the tax break deadline, a surge in construction began in 2022. Last year saw over 10,000 units hit the market, with another 16,000 upscale units expected to finish in the next 18 months.

    However, new housing permits have dipped significantly, with only 949 issued in January and 986 in February across the Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington region, per census data.

    Vince Jolly, founder and president of CVA Commercial Group, said: “It’s not even anticipating a downturn. The downturn’s already here.” 

    He continued, telling BisNow: “I think construction workers, obviously, are going to get hit hard. Because once these jobs dry up, I mean, what else are they going to do?”

    Construction employment in the city increased by 1.5% from 2021 to 2023, with 121,000 local workers in the trade by late last year, according to census data. However, new apartment construction starts have dropped over 30% from their late 2022 peak, and 99 projects comprising 17,000 units have been halted at the proposal stage, as per CoStar data.

    The Riverwards Group Managing Partner Mo Rushdy commented: “That glut of apartments will solve itself, let’s say, by May 2025. The real problem is, No. 1, jobs. We hear from our friend in the trade unions and from others that projects are going to dry up in terms of the residential industry and when it comes to new jobs coming from the pipeline of ’26 and ’27.”

    “I’ll tell you from experience, we’re not even seeking financing,” Rushdy added.

    “I see the bigger players are starting to be impacted. Companies that were very profitable for the past couple of years are barely making it,” Calvin Snowden, founder and managing partner of Philadelphia-based construction management firm BDFS Group said.

    “I’m an engineer, not an economist, [but] I know there’s a problem. I know the interest rates have to come down since the projects don’t make sense anymore. The numbers just don’t work.”

    Despite nearly 100 multifamily projects being put on hold, such as Alterra Property Group’s 352-unit building in University City, some large projects are continuing. Notably, Tower Investments is progressing with its 1,111-unit project in Center City, which represents 6.5% of all units currently under construction in the metro area and is the nation’s 11th-largest ongoing apartment project.

    However, large projects are becoming rare. Mark Cartella of Alterra Group suggests that the industry may see a decline in large-scale projects before smaller ones. Meanwhile, redevelopments are driving activity for Benchmark Construction Group, with projects underway in Fishtown and other areas of high demand like South and North Philadelphia, focusing on both new construction and existing housing.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 14:35

  • Judge Who Handed Down $454 Million Trump Penalty Set To Rule On Validity Of Reduced Bond
    Judge Who Handed Down $454 Million Trump Penalty Set To Rule On Validity Of Reduced Bond

    Authored by Catherine Yang via The Epoch Times,

    After weeks of trying to secure a bond and arguing to an appeals court that a $454 million bond was “impossible,” former President Donald Trump secured a $175 million bond to stay judgment only to now have to make the case all over again why this should satisfy the New York Attorney General and stop her from seizing his properties.

    On April 22, New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron, the trial court judge who set the $454 million judgment, will hear the attorney general’s challenge to the sufficiency of President Trump’s bond.

    The $175 million figure had been set by the appellate division of the New York Supreme Court, and President Trump has frequently criticized Justice Engoron for “ignoring” appeals court orders, such as when he allowed evidence past the statute of limitations set by the appellate division during the trial.

    Who’s Backing the Bond?

    The attorney general has sought to cast doubt on the stability of LA-based Knight Specialty Insurance Company (KSIC), calling it a “small insurer” and arguing it is not authorized to do business in New York.

    They argued that KSIC has never before written a surety bond, and has “a total policyholder surplus of just $138 million.”

    Amit Shah, president of the insurance company, demanded the court compel the attorney general to show cause, or prove the allegation that the insurance company is not sufficient.

    Mr. Shah submitted a sworn affidavit explaining that KSIC now has control over a bank account of President Trump’s that will maintain $175 million cash for the duration of the appeal. The insurance company entered into a collateral agreement with the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust. Mr. Shah submitted documents establishing that his company is in “good standing” and was approved for excess line eligibility in New York in June 2021.

    “As an eligible excess line insurer in the state of New York, KSIC is, therefore, properly authorized to issue the surety on behalf of Defendants,” he stated.

    This authorization stands as long as the insurance company meets the Excess Line Association of New York’s requirement of maintaining a minimum $47 million policyholder surplus, and Mr. Shah stated his company is maintaining a $48 million surplus minimum.

    He added that as of the end of 2023, the insurance company had $539 million in assets and $138 in equity, and its parent company, Knight Insurance Company, had on a consolidated basis $1 billion in assets and $1 billion in equity. The parent company also maintains $56 million in cash and $937 million in marketable securities to support reinsurance obligations.

    “At my direction, KSIC also performed diligence to confirm its legal authority to act as surety before issuing the subject bond,” Mr. Shah stated.

    “Although KSIC had not before placed a surety bond in New York, KSIC is an excess line insurer in the state of New York.”

    The attorney general also took issue with the fact that KSIC does not have “exclusive right” to the account containing $175 million in cash, and highlighted the fact that it would need “two days’ notice” to move that cash.

    State attorneys urged the court to “not rely on KSIC’s financial summary” because the insurance company “sends 100% of its retained insurance risk to affiliates in the Cayman Islands,” which they argued “artificially bolsters its surplus.”

    They argued that excess line insurers are only authorized if the management is found “trustworthy and competent,” and KSIC did not qualify because “its management has been found by federal authorities to have operated affiliated companies within KSIC’s holding company structure in violation of federal law on multiple occasions within the past several years.”

    Knight is under The Hankey Group of financial companies, which includes the affiliate Westlake Financial Services LLC. The attorney general argued that Westlake was found to have “violated numerous federal laws by pressuring borrowers through the use of illegal debt collection tactics, including using phony caller ID information, falsely threatening to refer borrowers for investigation or criminal prosecution” in 2015 by the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The company was fined and provided $44 million in restitution to consumers.

    The attorney general is requesting that President Trump be required to post a replacement bond within seven days.

    30 Companies Said No

    The bond required was originally $454 million, but attorneys for President Trump argued that they had employed four brokers who for weeks negotiated with the largest sureties in the world to no avail.

    Some 30 companies would not fill the bond, they argued, because sureties normally will not take hard assets—like real estate, Trump Organization’s primary asset—as collateral.

    Instead, they would require the bond amount in cash, plus additional premiums given the unusually large size, totaling to what they estimated to be more than $550 million cash.

    On the eve of the deadline for posting bond, President Trump took to social media to claim that he had close to $500 million in cash, but had planned to use much of it on his reelection campaign and did not want to hand it over to a New York court as he fights to keep his buildings.

    He further claimed in a follow-up press conference that the $454 million figure was one the attorney general and judge arbitrarily settled on because they had seen a number similar to it in his bank accounts, which have been disclosed to the court during the course of the civil fraud case.

    The attorney general had originally sought $250 million, which increased to about $370 million by the end of the trial. Plus backdated interest, President Trump was ordered to pay $454 million in all.

    Trump attorneys submitted a sworn affidavit from one of the brokers hired to negotiate the $454 million bond, who explained that in the surety world, $100 million was a large bond, and hardly issued to private individuals. He stated that only a “handful” of sureties are even authorized by the federal government to issue bonds that big, and many had internal policies limiting bonds they issue to $100 million. He also affirmed that sureties do not take hard assets as collateral, because they are not designed to quickly liquidate them in the event a bond has to be paid.

    The attorney general urged the court not to take these affidavits at face value, calling into question the lawyer and broker’s credibility by claiming they had prior connections with President Trump. The state attorneys suggested that the reason President Trump could not fill the bond was instead because his companies may not be in as good standing as he claimed.

    Trump attorneys pointed out that a court-appointed monitor has given the attorneys and court full access to Trump Organization finances since 2022, and the finances have been transparent.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 14:00

  • Should I Stay Or Should I Go?
    Should I Stay Or Should I Go?

    By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

    Should I Stay or Should I Go?

    Coming up for air after what was an intense week on the geopolitical and market side of things, I’m really being forced to reconsider my current recommendations (bearish bonds, stocks, and credit).

    I keep thinking:

    If I go, there will be trouble
    And if I stay, it will be double

    Bearish rates has worked well from the start. We turned negative on credit right near the lows, so that too has worked. On equities, by the time we turned bearish, it definitely moved against us. We had some drawdowns, and they seesawed back and forth between potentially making sense and looking very stupid (sometimes, on the same day). Well, the Nasdaq 100 (the main focus of our ire) is now down 7% since April 11th (6 trading days). We saw a rather nasty 2% drop on Friday (even after it had largely recovered from overnight Geopolitical concerns) and is now only up 1%. Our call had been that the market was highly susceptible to a rapid 5% to 10% decline, which we stretched to 10% as it continued to “defy” gravity. Remember, for all the hype about “all-time highs” and “tech is all you need”, the Nasdaq 100 closed above 18,300 all the way back on March 1st and barely got any higher than that in what is now almost 2 months.

    We’ve updated this chart since we sent it around in an “informal” report, and the story is even more bleak, though not as bleak as it would have been had the markets closed at 3:45pm when this index was below 17,000.

    Based on closing pricing, no one who bought the Nasdaq 100 since January 18th has made money. If you started the year long, you are now sitting on a relatively measly 1% gain – which just does not seem at all consistent with the hype.

    In Thursday’s T-Report – We Can Drive it Home, With One Headlight, we reiterated our bearish views, while devoting much of the space to the section “AI valuations seem questionable.” There are some big stocks (some in the AI space) down around 10%. If you are keeping track at home, the leveraged single stock ETF that has caught my attention actually had net inflows on Friday, despite being down 20% – indicating that we haven’t seen a wipe out. I also distinctly remember headline after headline when we had record-setting market cap gains for individual companies, yet crickets on what had to be a historic drop in market cap. Another sign that we have not seen a washout.

    But before we go through our analysis and recommendations coming into this week, I have to admit, “Should I Stay or Should I Go” isn’t close to being my favorite song by the Clash. But, I’ve already used “Magnificent Seven”, “Clampdown” seemed too harsh, “Lost in the Supermarket” would have made more sense when inflation was spiking, and “Death or Glory” sadly seems destined to pop up in a piece on geopolitics (the way the world is going). I did want to do I Fought the NDX and I Won, but the Clash cover stuck to the traditional title, and it was the Dead Kennedys who changed it to “I won” rather than “the law won.” But in the end it hasn’t been a resounding win, and I didn’t want to jinx myself too badly if I come out still bearish (spoiler alert, I am).

    Equities

    Today we will focus on what is “new” as the bear case was well covered in the previously referenced One Headlight piece.

    The most bullish thing I can say is that equities are now 5% to 7% cheaper than a week or so ago. So, if you were planning on “backing up the truck” and loading up on stocks, you have that opportunity. You literally have missed nothing by not being massively overweight the Nasdaq 100 since the start of the year. Two issues fighting this come to mind:

    • There have been multiple small dips this year, so how much dip buying capacity remains?
    • My view is that when people say “I would load the boat if that stock drops 5%”, what they really mean is “I would load the boat if that stock drops 5% in otherwise calm markets, for no apparently good reason, basically letting me buy the same story, but 5% cheaper”. Well, the story and market dynamics have changed. Geopolitical risk has risen. Questions about valuation, easily dismissed when stocks seemed to be up every day (they weren’t but that was the narrative), are not so easily dismissed. As the chart highlights, anyone who bought this year is now likely under water on their new investments in this index (or ETFs like QQQ). Don’t get me started on ARKK, my “go to” proxy for “innovation” and “disruption,” which is down 20% on the year now. I will admit, Bitcoin might be a haven for some of the riskiest risk takers, as it is up strongly on the year, though it too has done very little (except cost buyers money) since the end of February. The “halving” is supposed to take it to the next level. How paying someone 50% less (for the same work that they did) helps the price is beyond me. I mean, I get the miners in particular are incentivized to jack up prices, but the “bitcoin always goes higher after the halving” arguments are based on such a small sample size, that I think it will not work this time as the entire crypto universe seems to think it will.

    But anyways, I digress, I just think that enough has changed and enough dips have been bought, that there is no trove of “rescue” money about to flood the market with new buying liquidity.

    Since AI remains too important, I will add one thing to the laundry list from Thursday:

    • Using Google trends, searches for things like ChatGPT are down and declining. Same for some broader themes on AI. You cannot have FOMO without the Fear of Missing Out and I don’t think we are ripe with Fear any longer. If anything, maybe it is the fear that valuations have gotten ahead of themselves.

    Earnings will be important, and we will get several from very important companies this week.

    • Maybe it is my imagination (it could be, since there are few data points so far), but the “reaction function” to earnings seems to have changed. As we rallied late last year and at the start of this year, it seemed that the market focused on positives and dismissed negatives. It also seemed to rally on the “same” news, day after day. One stock in a sector would report positives and the market would take the sector significantly higher. A day or two later another company in the sector would give the market something to cheer about and the entire sector would pop again. Wasn’t some of that good news already priced in? I believe we have much higher hurdles this time and the markets are looking for excuses to sell, rather than to buy. I could be wrong on the reaction function or earnings could all beat by so much that we get a reversal, but I’m skeptical on that.

    Think like an algo.

    • I tend to be a “profit” taker (and “double downer”). When things work, I like to take chips off the table. What I constantly need to remind myself of is that algos are often wired in the opposite direction. They press winners. They tend to follow momentum. They tend to be quick to stop themselves out. I believe algos/quantitative trading models have been exiting stocks. Are they out? Possibly, we have seen higher volumes on this down move. Have they turned from buyers to sellers and are happy to establish shorts and push those? That I don’t know, but my fear of “systematic” trading systems (often described simply as CTAs, but a universe much bigger than that) makes me want to stay bearish.

    In the end, I’ve started to reduce shorts, but remain bearish, and think that the correct strategy is to sell bounces and keep reloading shorts, until something occurs that forces me to change my views.

    Bond Yields

    In the end, on equities, it turned out to be “more of the same” (maybe slightly less pounding on the table), but bonds are far more interesting in terms of “staying” or “going” from a bearish perspective.

    We’ve been bearish on yields for most of this year and it has largely worked. Not a one-way street by any stretch of the imagination, but not bad. In fact, we’ve raised our range on the 10-year yield, from 4.2%-4.4% to 4.3%-4.5% and then from 4.4%-4.6%. I don’t think we’ve officially changed the band, but it is implicit that if 10-years are at 4.62% and I’m still bearish (though far less so than at 3.9% where we started the year), the band must be higher. Do we raise the range again? That is always a dangerous game, as many equity analysts, who felt compelled to raise price targets in the past few months, can tell you. Were we too low originally? Have things changed that significantly? Take the win? I’m not sure if repeatedly raising your bands is something that should be considered in current analysis, but it makes sense (at least for me).

    Aside from many specific reasons to be bearish, we had the catch-all of “nothing that was in place to push 10s to 5% last fall has been resolved.” That is still true.

    What is the bull case for bonds?

    • Inflation. While I was never part of the “Super Users” group, I think I can relate to my understanding of the “gist” of the story – wanting more data to better understand what the heck the BLS actually comes up with for inflation. Let’s for the moment assume that inflation has “become sticky” around 2.5% (to pick a number). Then lets think about all the issues with measuring inflation. Hedonic quality adjustments. Substitution. Difficulty measuring. Flawed measurements (housing and rent, while ignoring the always “curious” use of Owners Equivalent Rent, have a lag effect built in, for gosh knows what “useful” reason). Last month, in at least one of the reports, it all came down to auto insurance. So, let’s assume that any given month is within 0.2% of being an accurate representation for that month (somehow, I feel I’m generous). Then it is at 2.4% annualized. So if we are centered around 2.5% (or 0.2% per month), then we could easily see a month with no inflation that annualizes to “problem solved.” While I believe on-shoring, near-shoring, geopolitical inflation, and the realization that we need to build out traditional and new energy sources, etc., will be inflationary, I would have to bet on seeing what would now be considered a surprise (a month where inflation data looks really good), especially given the current levels of expectations. One big fear I have about remaining bearish, is that not only would I not be surprised to see some good inflation data before the June meeting, but also I would be shocked if we didn’t. More about measurement and reporting than any real change in the underlying inflation rate.

    • Carry. Yes, the path to hell is paved with carry (or interest), but it is real. The back-up in yields provides more protection. While I’m constantly aware that selling can beget more selling (see my equity concerns), the case for “buying the dip” in bonds is stronger. More yield. Interest coming in every month that can be re-invested. Less inversion, making the decision between 2s and 10s more complicated even for “yield hogs” who focus more on yield than duration.

    • “No Bounce” and “American Exceptionalism” have become so consensus that it wouldn’t take much to tip the apple cart and put some level of fear about the state of the economy back on the table. I think earnings, and more importantly outlooks, may paint that picture for us.

    I am worried about “faux” liquidity, even in the Treasury market. Electronic trading and a multitude of platforms tend to make liquidity appear more abundant than it really is. There aren’t 50 people sitting on the bid. There are 10, they just happen to all put them on 5 platforms, assuming they can yank the bid in time. There are really only 5 buyers, the other 5 just “see” them buying, so are along for the ride hoping to scalp some money and thinking they can pull their bids if necessary. That is why we get “air pockets” in pricing and will continue to do so. Positioning is better than it was (not everyone is long), but this “gap” risk is real – in both directions.

    I like the 2-year at 5% and am “tolerant” of 10s at 4.6%.

    Credit

    Credit spreads for me are now largely just a proxy for equites. Yes CDX, credit spreads, and even high yield held their own on Friday amidst the debacle of an equity market, but that will be difficult to sustain.

    I see no fundamental problems in credit, but it is difficult to remain bearish on equities and like credit. Also, the aforementioned “faux” liquidity is even more obvious in credit markets and creates far more gap risk. While that gap risk is usually somewhat symmetric, I think the gap risk to much wider is higher than the risk to a gap tighter. Still like 65-70 as range on CDX.

    Geopolitical Base Case

    Academy Securities has sent a lot out on the current situation in the Middle East. We’ve done what we can with our team of retired Generals and Admirals. Not just via written word (please see the “new” Daily Brief that we’ve been sending on Bloomberg), but also through more video calls than I can keep track of.

    Even with their expertise, there is a range of “error” or “doubt” centered around “what has happened” let alone “what might happen.”

    There have been some fast and furious discussions about deterrence and General (ret.) Ashley highlighted this Rand publication – Understanding Deterrence from 2018. Academy’s game theory centric piece – Geopolitical Chicken – is worth reading if you haven’t already.

    Anyways, my base case is:

    • Iran’s attack on Israel was not just symbolic. They planned to cause damage and are really concerned that they didn’t. I’m agreeing with the argument that you send “a handful” of drones/missiles (all of the lowest quality) if you want to ensure that they don’t get through. Sending 100s with a range of capabilities, was an actual attack that failed. Others make the case that it was symbolic and designed to be destroyed en route. I find that argument less plausible, hence, not my base case.

    • Therefore, much like Russia, they have to recalculate their war effort. If the attack was somewhere between Fail and Epic Fail, you need to rethink your strategy. It is far too early for them to have understood what went wrong, let alone how to “correct” it, so of course they will downplay the Israeli attack on Iranian soil. You cannot afford to have a second failed attack. You might convince the world that you launched a “second symbolic” attack, but that’s a stretch of the imagination.

    Therefore, my base case is that Iran is trying to figure out how to attack again, which may take some time, and a lot could change between now and then, but the current “quiet” is more about a failed attack than any meaningful de-escalation.

    That may or may not be your base case, and even by working so closely with our Geopolitical Intelligence Group, you can find support for a range of “base cases,” but this is my working assumption. This means that I think possible shocks are still on the table. From Hedging Geopolitical Risk I think any shock will be bad for equities, temporarily good for bonds (but fade that quickly), and good for oil.

    Bottom Line

    There is very little I can find in equities. I’m not even “loving” long China (for a trade) versus short Nasdaq 100 (though I’d be remiss to point out for the past 3 months, FXI is up 10.8% while QQQ is down 1.4%). Remember, I think that as time goes by, more people will question whether slower sales into China are a function of problems with the Chinese economy or part of a broader strategy to suppress sales of Western brands in favor of domestic brands – The Threat of Made by China 2025.

    • I still own energy and commodities but biased towards owning the equities (not the underlying commodities). It is interesting that the equities (looking at XLE) did so well on Friday. Maybe reduce some positions here, but this is my favorite sector. Iran seems unlikely to respond soon, given my base case, and my bet is that we see some signals of a slowing economy emerge from earnings calls.
    • Neutral to mildly bullish Treasuries. There, I’ve done it. I’ve flipped. For now, buy some Treasuries. Stick to a 4.45% to 4.6% band on 10s. This is for a “trade” rather than a fundamental shift. If there is any market where deep out of the money options make sense, it could be here, as faux liquidity makes me fear a “flash crash” type of scenario. If this “bull case” sounds tepid, it is because it is tepid, but I’ve flip-flopped here to the bull side (again, for a trade, tepidly, and acknowledging the risk of a gap to much higher yields).
    • Credit. Moderately bearish, based primarily on having a bearish outlook on equities. I don’t see fundamental issues, but that doesn’t matter for the next 10 bps on IG credit. Rising Treasury yields have helped credit spreads (got the higher yield on IG and even High Yield without having to demand wider spreads). If I’m correct and Treasuries bounce, then spreads are likely to feel a little bit of pain as you see a “flight to quality” (as opposed to a “flight to safety”).

    Hopefully, by the time you read this report it is still relevant in a world where countries don’t adhere to a policy of attacking only during U.S. trading hours!

    Good luck navigating this and please feel free to use Academy’s resources, as we as a firm are at your disposal!

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 13:25

  • "You Are Quite Openly Jewish": London Police Under Fire For Confrontation With Man Near Anti-Israeli March
    “You Are Quite Openly Jewish”: London Police Under Fire For Confrontation With Man Near Anti-Israeli March

    Authored by Jonathan Turley,

    The London police are under fire this week for threatening to arrest a man wearing a kippah near a pro-Palestinian march.

    Officers inform Gideon Falter, head of the Campaign Against Antisemitism watchdog, that he was “antagonizing” the protesters by being “openly Jewish” near such a march. He was told that, if he tried to cross the street while being “openly Jewish,” he would be arrested for breach of the peace.

    In the video, one police officer said: “You are quite openly Jewish, this is a pro-Palestinian march, I’m not accusing you of anything but I’m worried about the reaction to your presence.”

    Another officer then added later: “You will be escorted out of this area so you can go about your business, go where you want freely or, if you choose to remain here, because you are causing a breach of peace with all these other people, you will be arrested.”

    Falter was also told that being openly Jewish near such a march was “antagonizing”.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Activists have long protested the dangers of “driving while black” in prompting stops by police and threats of arrest. Falter appears to have established a danger of “walking while Jewish” in London.

    The Metropolitan Police later apologized, but had to issue a second apology after saying in a now deleted statement that

    “In recent weeks we’ve seen a new trend emerge, with those opposed to the main protests appearing along the route to express their views. The fact that those who do this often film themselves while doing so suggests they must know that their presence is provocative, that they’re inviting a response and that they’re increasing the likelihood of an altercation.”

    Calling an openly Jewish man “provocative” only reaffirmed the original statements made by the officers.

    As a result, the police had to issue a new statement, which said that the previous one had “been removed. We apologize for the offense it caused.”

    What is equally disturbing is the threat to arrest a man who was doing nothing wrong based on his identity.

    These threats were being made as protesters were hurling abuses at him because he is Jewish.

    Notably, the United Kingdom has embraced a wide array of criminalized speech, arresting people for hateful or denigrating comments made against groups or individuals.

    A man was convicted for sending a tweet while drunk referring to dead soldiers. Another was arrested for an anti-police t-shirt. Another was arrested for calling the Irish boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend a “leprechaun.” Yet another was arrested for singing “Kung Fu Fighting.” A teenager was arrested for protesting outside of a Scientology center with a sign calling the religion a “cult.”

    We also discussed the arrest of a woman who was praying to herself near an abortion clinic. English courts have seen criminalized “toxic ideologies” as part of this crackdown on free speech.

    I have opposed those laws.

    Yet, this incident illustrates the arbitrary enforcement of such laws. The police simply ignored the anti-Semitic comments being leveled at Falter and confronted him on being openly Jewish. 

    That is not to say that I favor the enforcement of criminal speech laws. Rather, it shows the added danger of such laws in their selective enforcement.

    Tyler Durden
    Sun, 04/21/2024 – 12:50

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Apr 21

Today’s News 21st April 2024

  • Israel Fostered The Rise Of Hamas To Preclude A Two-State Solution
    Israel Fostered The Rise Of Hamas To Preclude A Two-State Solution

    In Wednesday’s ZeroHedge debate on Israel, Iran and Palestine, Dave Smith emphasized a little-known fact about the Gaza conflict — that Israel “cynically, intentionally funded and propped up” Hamas “so they wouldn’t face external pressure to give the Palestinians their freedom.” Via Brian McGlinchey at Stark Realities, here’s a deeper look at the history Smith was referring to.  

    In the aftermath of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by the Palestinian group Hamas, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared, “The forces of civilization must support Israel in defeating Hamas…In fighting Hamas, Israel is not only fighting for its own people, it is fighting for every country that stands against barbarism.”

    Those sentiments are quite different from ones Netanyahu privately shared in 2019.

    “Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” Netanyahu told Likud Party legislators, according to Haaretz, Israel’s longest-running newspaper. Doing so would help prevent the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority (PA) from ruling Gaza and giving Palestinians a relatively moderate, unified voice at the negotiating table. “This is part of our strategy — to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.”

    Members of the Hamas al-Qassam Brigade at an event marking the anniversary of Israel’s 2014 war on Gaza (EPA-EFE/Mohammed Saber via Euractiv)

    Israel’s reckless exploitation of Hamas is as old as the group itself. Indeed, decades before Netanyahu’s closed-door candor, the Israeli government pushed Hamas into its initial prominence, with direct and indirect financial support.

    Throughout the 1970s, Israel’s nemesis was the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). In stark contrast to Hamas — which emerged from the Muslim Brotherhood — the PLO was a secular, leftist organization, led by Yasser Arafat, who headed the PLO’s Fatah faction.

    As a former senior CIA official told UPI’s Richard Sale in 2001, Israel’s initial boosting of Hamas “was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative.”

    Islamist groups began rising in prominence in Gaza in the wake of the 1967 War, as they undertook educational, cultural, social and infrastructure initiatives to make life better for Palestinian refugees there.

    When it first registered with Israeli authorities in 1978, Hamas was led by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, a half-blind, wheelchair-bound Muslim cleric who launched schools and clinics throughout Gaza. Israel backed his efforts, and also approved the founding of the Islamic University of Gaza…which would become an extremist hub deemed worthy of Israeli bombs.

    Israeli Brigadier General Yitzhak Segev, who was governor of Gaza and in frequent touch with Yassin, told the Wall Street Journal that he fully grasped Yassin’s ultimate aims — to replace Israel with an Islamic state — and the dangers of the Hamas ideology. However, at the time, Israel prioritized undermining the PLO-leading Fatah.

    Israel cooperated with early Hamas leader Ahmed Yassin — but killed him in 2004 with a rocket fired from a helicopter gunship as he was wheeled to prayer in Gaza City (BBC)

    In the wake of Iran’s 1979 revolution that saw a secular, US-backed regime replaced with an Islamic republic, Hamas and other Islamists grew more popular, ambitious — and violent. Regardless, Israel’s financial backing continued, a US intelligence source told UPI in 2001, saying the support now had an additional rationale — to gain intelligence and identify the most dangerous of Hamas members.

    However, another US government official highlighted a far more sinister Israeli aim: to obliterate the chance for progress in resolving the Israel-Palestinian conflict. “The thinking on the part of some of the right-wing Israeli establishment was that Hamas and the other groups, if they gained control, would refuse to have anything to do with the peace process and would torpedo any agreements put in place,” the official said.

    That would enable Israel to continue paying lip service to a two-state solution while disingenuously bemoaning its lack of a “partner for peace” on the Palestinian side. In the mean time, Israel would continue changing “facts on the ground” by demolishing Palestinian homes, authorizing more West Bank Israeli settlements and precluding the creation of a contiguous Palestinian state in the Israeli-occupied territory.

    Israeli settlements have seemingly eliminated the possibility of a contiguous Palestinian state in the West Bank (graphic via Vox)

    In 2015, Bazalel Smotrich, leader of the Religious Zionist Party and now Israel’s finance minister said, “On the international playing field, in this game of the delegitimization…the PA is a liability and Hamas is an asset. It’s a terrorist organization. Nobody will recognize it, nobody will give it status at the [International Criminal Court] and nobody will let them push resolutions at the UN.”

    “In the eyes of the Israeli right, the real threat to Israel is not Hamas’ violence and terrorism — the danger is a peace agreement…and the establishment of a Palestinian state,” wrote Meron Rapoport at Tel Aviv-based +972 Magazine.

    Note that Hamas isn’t the only extremist group the Israeli right has shown a soft spot for. Under an earlier Netanyahu government, Israel gave medical assistance to wounded al-Qaeda members and sent them back to fight the secular, Iran-aligned government in Syria…where their group would abduct, torture and murder civilians too. Former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy said Israel’s aid was acceptable because “Al Qaeda, to the best of my recollection, has not attacked Israel.”

    Before Oct. 7, referring to Hamas and Lebanon-based Hezbollah during a deposition for one of the corruption cases against him, Netanyahu said something that showcased the Israeli right’s overconfidence in its ability to manage extremists on its borders:  

    “We have neighbors who are bitter enemies…It’s impossible to reach an agreement with them…Everyone knows this, but we control the height of the flames.”

    Stark Realities undermines official narratives, demolishes conventional wisdom and exposes fundamental myths across the political spectrum. Read more and subscribe at starkrealities.substack.com 

    * * *

    Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 23:40

  • Charter School Founders Accused Of Massive Fraud
    Charter School Founders Accused Of Massive Fraud

    Authored by Michael Clements via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Prosecutors are accusing three men of bilking Oklahoma out of millions of dollars in public school funds through a charter school plan that one of the defendants told a state district court prioritized income.

    Former owners of Epic Youth Services Ben Harris (L) and David Chaney (R) enter the District Court of Oklahoma County in Oklahoma City with Mr. Chaney’s lawyer, Gary Wood (C) on March 28, 2024. (Michael Clements/The Epoch Times)

    Lawyers from the Oklahoma Attorney General’s office began outlining their case during preliminary hearings March 25–March 29 in the District Court of Oklahoma County, in Oklahoma City.

    Their case is based on an investigation by the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation (OSBI) and an investigative audit report released by the State Auditor and Inspector’s office on Oct. 1, 2020.

    However, a lawyer for one of the defendants says his client is a legitimate businessman who has become the victim of incompetent state officials running a politically motivated investigation.

    David Lee Chaney and Benjamin Scott Harris each face prison time and possibly millions in restitution if convicted of 15 criminal charges for their alleged scheme to defraud the state through Epic Charter Schools.

    Joshua Brock, former chief financial officer, has agreed to plead guilty and testify for the state in exchange for 15 years of probation with restitution to be determined.

    Slouched in the witness stand of Special Judge Jason Glidewell’s courtroom in the Oklahoma County District Court in Oklahoma City, Mr. Brock testified in a low monotone. He wore the tired, disinterested expression of a man who wants his case to end.

    The Cushing native was friends with Mr. Harris and had a background in accounting and business finance. He said that around 2009, Mr. Harris began talking with him about charter schools. Mr. Brock also liked the idea of a public school run like a private school.

    “I believe in the concept,” Mr. Brock testified.

    In Oklahoma, charter schools are publicly funded and open to any student. A board oversees them and may not charge tuition. Charter schools must comply with open records and open meeting laws.

    However, they are exempt from such requirements as collective bargaining and credentialing. Students can be taught online, in brick-and-mortar locations, or a combination of both. Parents and teachers have broad latitude in curriculum, hours, and other aspects of a child’s education.

    The Oklahoma Department of Education website states that charter schools receive, “Flexibility in exchange for accountability.”

    During a 2011 meeting in an Oklahoma City restaurant, Mr. Brock agreed to be the CFO for EYS and Indoor Air Quality Services (IAQS), a business Messrs. Harris and Chaney operated.

    In those early days, IAQS paid Mr. Brock. Later, EYS would contract with Mr. Brock’s company, JAB Consulting.

    According to a special investigative audit report released by Oklahoma State Auditor and Inspector Cindy Byrd in October 2020, the trio raked in at least $125 million of the $458 million in government funds disbursed to the school from 2015 to 2020.

    Of that, $45.9 million was paid to Epic Youth Services, a for-profit management company the men set up to handle school affairs.

    According to the report, EYS had no employees and was controlled entirely by Messrs. Harris, Chaney, and Brock.

    EYS, and therefore the three men, controlled a “Student Learning Fund,” through which $79.3 million in public funds flowed, the report stated.

    Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation (OSBI) Special Agent Mark Drummond testified that there may be even more. He said his investigation had found more than 100 accounts that might contain Epic Charter School money.

    During preliminary hearings the week of March 25–March 29, 2024, Mr. Brock said EYS had few if any employees and one main objective.

    “To minimize costs and maximize profit.”

    (Left) Benjamin Harris; (Right) David Chaney each face 15 charges of alleged fraud committed while affiliated with Epic Charter Schools in Oklahoma. (Michael Clements/The Epoch Times)

    Ms. Byrd confirmed that some law enforcement agencies are still investigating Epic Charter Schools, though she wouldn’t specify which ones.

    She said she is holding on to a second audit report so as not to interfere.

    “The second report is pending in the event that it may be needed,” she told The Epoch Times.

    According to court records, Mr. Harris founded the non-profit Community Strategies Inc. (CSI) in 2005.

    He and Mr. Chaney reportedly set up the for-profit Epic Youth Services (EYS) as the management company for the non-profit Epic Charter Schools. CSI, doing business as Epic Charter Schools, began operating in December 2010.

    According to the audit report, funding from the State Department of Education and the federal government went to Epic’s sponsors, who kept 3 percent of sponsorship fees. The remaining 97 percent went to the charter schools through CSI.

    The report states that the schools sent 10 percent of the total revenue, including the fees kept by the sponsors, to EYS and money to the Student Learning Fund, which EYS controlled.

    Epic Charter’s first sponsor was Graham Public School in Ofuskee County, Oklahoma. Mr. Brock said the small K–12 school was struggling financially and was glad for the cash infusion.

    In 2018, Epic split into Epic One-on-One, the online school, and Epic Blended.

    Epic Blended is a virtual school that also provides work centers where students can use computers with internet access and receive other types of classroom support.

    Rose State College now sponsors Epic Blended, and the Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board sponsors Epic One-on-One, an online charter school.

    On paper, EYS’s purpose was to handle Epic Charter School’s administrative work and manage its finances. Mr. Brock said that, in reality, EYS had a single purpose.

    Joshua Brock (L), talks with his attorney Chris Box (R) in the Oklahoma County courthouse in Oklahoma City on March 29, 2024. (Michael Clements/The Epoch Times)

    “The object was to minimize costs, maximize profit,” Mr. Brock testified on March 28.

    Mr. Brock said it was the practice to ensure that all invoices added up to the total 10 percent management fee outlined in EYS’s contract. Early on, that was not difficult, as the invoices listed the fee amount.

    However, in 2019, HB1395 became the law in Oklahoma. The new law mandated the Oklahoma Cost Accounting System (OCAS), which requires invoices to be itemized using OCAS codes.

    Mr. Brock said that rather than lose money by accurately itemizing, he wrote computer code that automatically divided the fee among the same 14 OCAS codes each month.

    So, regardless of how much funding Epic received or what EYS’s actual expenses were, the system would produce invoices totaling 10 percent of the revenue received every month.

    Jeanice Wynn said she noticed the questionable invoices soon after she started work at Epic.

    She was hired as Deputy Superintendent of Finance in 2021, shortly after the audit report was released. She testified that she took the job with some trepidation.

    Epic had already been in the news due to a conflict with the Oklahoma Department of Education.

    Disputes over enrollment, attendance requirements, and other issues had prompted then-Gov. Mary Fallin requested OSBI to look into the fledgling charter school in 2013.

    While Epic prevailed in most of those disputes, rumors continued to fly.

    Ms. Wynn testified that she believed her job had been created in response to the audit report. She said some things, like those oddly uniform invoices, caught her attention almost immediately.

    She said the same 14 OCAS codes were used each month, and they always added up to 10 percent of Epic’s total revenue from the state.

    According to Ms. Wynn, that is unusual at best.

    “That doesn’t happen,” she said.

    In addition, some of the codes seemed questionable. For example, invoices for the online school included food service.

    When asked how much EYS paid to provide food for Epic’s online students, Mr. Brock answered succinctly.

    “Not much, zero,” he said.

    But, thanks to those invoices, by the time the Epic Charter School Board ended its management agreement with EYS on May 21, 2021, Mr. Harris had made $24.8 million, Mr. Chaney brought in $23 million, and Mr. Brock had received $8.7 million, Brenda Holt, director of the Investigative Audit Division of the State Auditor and Inspector’s office testified.

    The Student Learning Fund is marketed as an account for each student to spend up to $1,000 for computers, books, musical instruments and lessons, extracurricular activities, tutoring, and similar education-related purchases.

    For each Learning Fund purchase, EYS assessed an $85 service fee.

    Ms. Wynn was tasked with addressing the auditors’ concerns over the fund. But, she only had access to money under Epic’s Tax ID number.

    EYS controlled the Student Learning Fund, which auditors claimed was public money managed by Epic workers who were state employees.

    “I expected [the Learning Fund personnel] to be on the payroll for EYS,” she told the court. (Mr. Brock) was approving (the EYS invoices), then receiving the payment [from Epic],” she said.

    The auditors noted this as well.

    “As the EYS CFO, Brock appears to be responsible for the submission of EYS’ invoices … for both the management fees and the Student Learning Fund.

    “As the One-on-One and Blended CFO, he oversees the payment of the same invoices. There is no system of checks and balances in place between the related entities,” the audit report reads.

    Ms. Holt also testified about how credit cards were used in the Epic Charter School Student Learning Fund. She found the arrangement to be unusual.

    “I had never seen that before,” she said.

    Oklahoma City lawyer Joe White (L) leaves a District Court of Oklahoma County courtroom with Ben Harris (C) and co-counsel Kate White (R) on March 25, 2024. (Michael Clements/The Epoch Times)

    The Student Learning Fund had two credit cards. A Visa card that was issued to the fund. Each Visa bore the name of the employee authorized to use it. The other was an American Express card issued to IAQS.

    Ms. Holt said she learned that IAQS stood for Indoor Air Quality Services, the business owned by Mr. Chaney, who had initially been paid Mr. Brock for his services.

    Ms. Holt said Epic Charter School employees made purchases using credit cards. EYS invoiced the purchases, and Epic Charter Schools paid those invoices with Learning Fund money.

    She said auditors found approximately $817,000 worth of alleged personal purchases made with that card.

    Of this, $748,000 appears to have been spent on purchases by Mr. Chaney and his wife.

    The remaining $69,000 in personal purchases was split between two Learning Fund employees.

    Ms. Holt said the charges included Southwest Airlines, Stub Hub, Men’s Wearhouse, Starbucks, and political donations, including two $2,700 donations to former Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instruction Joy Hofmeister, who ran against Gov. Kevin Stitt in 2022.

    Ms. Holt said she found that Mr. Chaney repaid $446,000 of those purchases, which left $327,000 for the Learning Fund to cover.

    Court records also indicate that Mr. Brock allegedly received more than $1 million in illegal overpayments on a Visa card issued to him and used by the Student Learning Fund.

    Ms. Holt said that a claim in the Oct. 21 audit report that EYS lawyers tried to prevent auditors from seeing any of the Learning Fund records was true.

    According to the investigative report, auditors didn’t get a clear picture of the Student Learning Fund until they were able to access information OSBI had obtained in its investigation.

    “[The State Auditor and Inspector] respects the privacy of private companies but is adamant that the stewardship and management of $79.3 million in state appropriated funds designated for student education should be transparent and the records be made available for audit,” the report reads.

    Defense lawyers contend that EYS was a private business, so any money paid to it, including state monies meant for the Student Learning Fund, was private money no longer subject to government oversight.

    David Chaney (2nd L) and Ben Harris (3rd L) sit at the defense table with Harris’s lawyers Joe White (2nd R) and Kate White (L) on March 28, 2024. (Michael Clements/The Epoch Times)

    Joe White, of Oklahoma City, represents Mr. Harris. Mr. White is tall and speaks with a country drawl and self-deprecating manner that belies a man ready to exploit any perceived chink in his opponent’s argument.

    In court, he aggressively argued that the Student Learning Fund was money EYS earned, comparing it to a state employee’s paycheck.

    “Once you get paid, the state doesn’t get to audit your personal bank account, does it?” he asked Ms. Holt.

    According to Ms. Holt, the figures in the audit report are relatively conservative. She said it’s her office’s policy to give the audited parties the benefit of the doubt.

    “We always try to err on the side of grace and not overstate any of the numbers,” she told the court.

    The auditors claim that the Student Learning Fund was used to benefit more than Oklahoma students and the owners of EYS.

    Ms. Wynn testified that in 2018, Mr. Harris told the board that Epic Charter Schools Oklahoma had opened Community Strategies—CA, LLC (CS-CA). CS-CA is the non-profit management company for Next Generation, Inc., doing business as Epic Charter Schools California.

    “He informed those present that money had flowed to Epic California. There was discussion at that time about that money being paid back,” Ms. Wynn said.

    In response to Mr. White’s question, she said she had seen no evidence that the money had been repaid.

    According to the audit report, this resulted in the illegal use of Oklahoma tax money and employees to benefit California taxpayers.

    Assistant Attorneys General McKenzie McMahon (L) and Colleen Galaviz (R), leaving a District Court of Oklahoma County courtroom on March 25, 2024. (Michael Clements/The Epoch Times)

    Salesha Wilken is a former investigative reporter. She has worked for the State Auditor and Inspector’s office for the past nine years. She testified to finding evidence that EYS transferred Student Learning Fund money to Community Strategies California to “support expansion of EYS.”

    She said it appeared the money was used to help the California operation meet payroll. California Strategies was also used to funnel money to the Panola Public Schools in Oklahoma when that district had a cash shortfall, she said.

    According to the audit report, Epic One-on-One employees racked up $242,654.42 in labor between 2017 and 2020 working for CS-CA in California and Panola Public Schools in Oklahoma. Panola Public Schools was not part of Epic at that time.

    The report states that none of this money was repaid until auditors began asking questions in 2020.

    Auditors also found that $203,000 was transferred directly from the student Learning Fund into an Epic-California bank account at one point.

    They have found no evidence that money was ever repaid, the report states.

    “It shows that those funds were not being used for the students but were being used to enrich EYS,” Ms. Wilken testified. “EYS is the steward of those funds.”

    Defense attorneys denied that any public money was misused.

    They said the Student Learning Fund was an account owned by EYS, a private company. They contend that the money in the fund belongs to EYS to be used at EYS’s discretion.

    “Private companies can dictate the rules concerning their private funds,” Mr. Chaney’s lawyer, Gary Wood, said.

    The resolution to that question will determine more than the legal status of a bank account. When the EYS management contract ended in May 2021, there was approximately $5 million in the Student Learning Fund, which prosecutors say EYS was supposed to return to Epic Charter Schools. Instead, they say, the money was invested in several treasury bill accounts.

    That money is now the subject of a lawsuit.

    When Epic Charter Schools began operation in 2010, CSI’s board oversaw the work. Soon after, most of the CSI board members resigned and were replaced by Robert Stem, Peter Regan, Doug Scott, and Travis Burkett, the court file states.

    EYS Attended Board Meetings

    “[The board members] were largely acquaintances of Mr. Harris and or Mr. Chaney,” Mr. Brock testified. Investigators and former board member Douglas Scott said at least one of the defendants was present at most board meetings. However, they differ about the sway they held over the board.

    “[Harris and Chaney’s] actions and behaviors were indicative of individuals with great influence over the school and the board.

    “The board consistently voted unanimously during meetings, rarely questioning the recommendations given or actions taken by Chaney, Harris, and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Brock,” the court file reads.

    Douglas Scott is an attorney from Tulsa who served on the board from 2010 to 2021. He has known Mr. Chaney since they were both boys. But he denied that he or Mr. Harris unduly influenced the board.

    “They attended the meetings,” Mr. Scott testified. “They had a broad range of duties.”

    Mr. White said the implication that the board was manipulated ignores their commitment to the charter school.

    He said board members were volunteers who helped build the largest public school in Oklahoma, which at its height had an enrollment of 60,000 students.

    “And the enrollment kept going up, up, and up, didn’t it?” he asked Mr. Scott.

    Mr. Scott agreed, saying that he spent a significant amount of time and resources working on behalf of the schools.

    Jimmy Harmon, an assistant attorney general prosecuting the case, told the court that auditors found that board members did benefit from their association with Epic Charter Schools.

    He said that former board member Robert Stem’s lobbying firm, Capitol Gains, was awarded a contract from Epic the same day he resigned from the board.

    According to Mr. Brock, the lobbying deal netted Capitol Gains $520,000.

    Mr. Harmon said Mr. Scott’s brother benefitted as well.

    “His brother Greg received tens of thousands of dollars for computer work,” Mr. Harmon said.

    Mr. White disputes the audit report’s findings.

    He pointed out that Mr. Harris was arrested just five days before Ms. Byrd won her party’s nomination for state auditor and inspector. He doesn’t believe that’s a coincidence.

    Ms. Byrd dismisses that contention as grasping at straws.

    She says the investigations and audits began long before the 2020 elections and that she doesn’t need any high-profile cases to boost her campaign in an election she said she won by 70 points.

    “I just can’t even believe that that’s a good defense,” she said.

    Each man is charged with one count of racketeering, six counts of embezzlement, two counts of using a computer system or computer network to execute a scheme to defraud, two counts of presenting false claims to the state, and one count each of acquiring unlawful proceeds, acquiring unlawful proceeds in excess of $50,000, obtaining money by false pretenses, and money laundering.

    Preliminary hearings are set to resume in May; no trial date has been set.

    Epic Charter Schools and Epic Charter School California are still in operation with a new board and are no longer affiliated with Messrs. Brock, Chaney, or Harris.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 23:05

  • From Fringe To Mainstream: The Rise Of The BJP In India
    From Fringe To Mainstream: The Rise Of The BJP In India

    Voters in India are getting set to head to the polls in what has been dubbed the world’s biggest election.

    Nearly 1 billion people are eligible to vote and to determine whether 73-year-old Narendra Modi, leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), will rule the nation for a third consecutive term.

    The elections kicked off yesterday (Friday) and will be carried out in seven phases due to the sheer size of the country, ending June 4.

    As Statista’s Anna Fleck shows in the following chart, the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance alliance won 303 out of 550 parliamentary seats in India’s Lok Sabha general elections in 2019 and 282 out of 543 parliamentary seats five years before. In this year’s elections, the NDC is projected to win as many as 399 seats.

    Infographic: From Fringe to Mainstream: The Rise of the BJP in India | Statista

    You will find more infographics at Statista

    Opposition parties have banded together, led by the Indian National Congress party (INC), to form a 26-member alliance, named the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) in an attempt to stop this from happening.

    Critics decry the BJP as Hindu nationalists and fear that India will become further divided, accusing the incumbent government of having enabled the persecution of minorities, particularly Muslims, under their rule. Supporters meanwhile praise Modi for securing India’s place as a major global economic power.

    The rise of the BJP as India’s majority party was an unlikely one.

    Its predecessor, the right-wing Bharatiya Jana Sangh (BJS) party, gained only marginal support and joined the Janata Party (People’s Party), which won the 1977 elections as a catch-all union opposing the declaration of a state of emergency in the country.

    After the Janata Party dissolved in 1980, the party was recreated as the BJP and started from the bottom again, gaining followers emphasizing Hindu national pride and hardline politics.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 22:30

  • Calif. Dems Tout Ties To Criminal Leniency Group
    Calif. Dems Tout Ties To Criminal Leniency Group

    Authored by Susan Crabtree via RealClearPolitics,

    The mayors of California’s three biggest cities have rankled some progressive activists in recent months by joining a wave of fellow Democrats renouncing once popular initiatives to defund the police, reduce sentencing, and undertake other criminal justice reforms amid deep concerns over public safety. 

    Facing a public backlash over rampant thefts and an epidemic of fentanyl deaths related to drug trafficking, San Francisco Mayor London Breed and San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria in recent months have joined the GOP fight to dismantle Proposition 47. That law, approved by voters in 2014, recategorized thefts below $950 from felonies to misdemeanors, and many critics blame it for the spate of smash-and-grab robberies at department and convenience stores across California. 

    “We should be locking up criminals, not laundry detergent,” Gloria, who refers to himself as a progressive Democrat, declared in his state-of-the-city address in January. 

    Meanwhile, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has called for adding hundreds of police officers to the city’s rolls and boosting their pay. 

    But Democratic incumbents and candidates in several of the most competitive U.S. House of Representatives races across California – the outcome of which will play a critical role in determining control of the chamber in the next Congress – are either swimming against the tough-on-crime tide or trying to avoid alienating a key ally. 

    These Democrats have been touting their close ties to a progressive lobbying powerhouse that helped usher in some of the most controversial changes to criminal justice laws across the state in recent years. 

    Equality California began as a Sacramento-based LGBTQ+ advocacy group 20 years ago but has since become a major player on several issues, including its self-proclaimed priority of transforming the Golden State’s criminal justice system. The influential organization, which rakes in millions from Hollywood celebrities and business interests and received a state grant windfall last year, has been instrumental in promoting a reform agenda that many prominent California Democrats are now trying to reverse. 

    The group campaigned aggressively to eliminate cash bail for many types of crimes, legalize prostitution, shorten probation periods for misdemeanors and some felonies, and end qualified immunity for police, making it easier for victims of alleged excessive force and other police misconduct to sue officers. The push to lift legal protections for police failed on the federal level but largely succeeded in California when Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a Senate bill into law in the fall of 2021. 

    In 2022, the group’s PAC also contributed $5,000 to embattled Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascon, the original author of Proposition 47. Gascon survived a close recall effort in 2022, just two months after San Francisco voters ousted District Attorney Chesa Boudin in a blow to the national movement toward more lenient prosecution given the city’s status as one of the nation’s most liberal enclaves. 

    In the middle of the riots after the police-custody death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Equality California was one of several organizations that called for donations to groups on the “frontlines” of the protests, including the Minnesota Freedom Fund. That fund eventually received $35 million in donations during the tumultuous summer of 2020 and used the money to bail out dozens of defendants, including those accused of murder, violent felonies, and sex crimes. 

    Like Equality California, the Minnesota Freedom Fund aggressively pushed for defunding the police and ending cash bail for all individuals accused of crimes. 

    Under the “issues” section on its website, Equality California lists “criminal justice reform” first among all the issues it works on, including education, faith and religion, gun safety, hate crimes and safety, health care and HIV issues. 

    “LGBTQ+ people face disproportionate rates of arrest, conviction, incarceration, and recidivism compared to their non-LGBTQ+ peers,” the website asserts in explaining why the group prioritizes reducing criminal penalties and is pushing for more leniency in other aspects of criminal justice law. 

    Seven Democrats in the most competitive House races have touted their Equality California endorsements on social media. They include Adam Gray, Josh Harder, Joe Kerr, David Min, Will Rollins, Rudy Salas, and George Whitesides.

    Whitesides (pictured at top), a former aerospace executive challenging GOP Rep. Mike Garcia in a key House battleground north of Los Angeles, has the closest ties to Equality California. He and his wife donated an undisclosed amount to the group in both 2020 and 2021. 

    Those donations qualified the Whitesides as Equality California’s “regional influencers” for 2020 and 2021. It’s a title the couple shared with the hedge-fund billionaire Tom Steyer, record executive David Geffen’s foundation, California Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis and her husband, as well as Rep. Sara Jacobs (the granddaughter of Qualcomm founder Irwin Jacobs), and Tom Sandoval, a cast member of the TV reality series “Vanderpump Rules.” (The 2020 and 2021 annual reports do not list an amount associated with the “regional influencers” tier, but the group’s 2019 annual reports notes that a such a designation is earned for contributions of $10,000 to $19,999.)

    Whitesides’ campaign did not respond to a request for comment about whether he backs Equality California’s criminal justice priorities. 

    In February, Will Rollins, a former federal prosecutor challenging veteran GOP Rep. Ken Calvert in a district stretching from Riverside to Palm Springs, touted his Equality California endorsement on X.com, along with a photo of himself dining with the group’s board of directors. 

    “It was great joining @eqca board members of their board of directors lunch,” Rollins tweeted. “I am proud to be endorsed by Equality California in my race for Congress. When I get to D.C., I am going to fight to advance LGBTQ+ rights for all Americans. Together, we will win.” 

    The Calvert-Rollins race is a closely fought rematch, with crime taking center stage. Rollins has touted his role as a prosecutor and has criticized Calvert for voting in favor of the First Step Act, President Trump’s signature justice reform package, which released more than 2,200 federal inmates in 2019. The bill was passed with broad bipartisan support in Congress before the pandemic-era crime spikes while the criminal justice reform agenda was gaining Republican and Democratic support. Media outlets have since reported that it released more than 100 violent criminals and sex offenders. 

    In a local newspaper op-ed, Calvert tried to lump Rollins into the same camp as Gascon and Boudin, calling him “the worst kind of liberal prosecutor” who “routinely cuts soft plea deals with perps and wants to reduce sentences for criminals wreaking havoc on our streets.” Last month, Calvert’s campaign also cut a television ad calling Rollins “extreme” and noting that he “even supports reducing sentences for violent criminals including drug traffickers while California fentanyl deaths skyrocket.” 

    Rollins has denied the accusations about supporting cash bail and lighter sentences for violent criminals and drug traffickers, asserting that he had a 99% conviction rate and helped put “murders, terrorists, MS-13 and Sinaloa cartel members in prison.” He was less forthright about cash bail, noting that defendants that pose a danger to society or are a flight risk should be detained before trial, but Rollins didn’t indicate whether he supports ending cash bail in other circumstances. 

    The results of the Calvert-Rollins face-off in 2022 were so close that the Democratic hopeful was attending a new member orientation in Washington when new alerts came across his phone that he had lost to Calvert, the dean of the California delegation. 

    David Min, a Democratic state senator running against GOP attorney and former state legislator Scott Baugh in a tight race for the Orange County seat vacated by Rep. Katie Porter, was the only Democrat to respond to RCP’s inquiry about the Equality California’s endorsement, and whether he backs the group’s criminal justice agenda.  

    Concerns about public safety have been making headlines in the country in recent weeks as the traditionally more conservative area strives to discourage criminal elements from nearby Los Angeles from becoming active there. Last month, the Orange County District Attorney’s Office announced a novel public safety campaign aimed at deterring thieves with a message plastered on billboards and bus ads: “Crime doesn’t pay in Orange County.” 

    “If you steal, we prosecute,” the signs sternly warn. 

    Min, who was arrested last year for drunk driving in a taxpayer-funded car, still managed to outmaneuver fellow Democrat Joanna Weiss in the primary and secure the endorsement of Porter and the California Democratic Party. 

    Min campaign spokesman Orrin Evans forwarded the lawmaker’s endorsements from the state’s largest police union, the Peace Officers Research Association of California, or PORAC, and the California Fraternal Order of Police. Evans also touted Min’s record of supporting police budget priorities, including successful requests he made for $2 million for a “real-time crime center” to help police track crime quickly and $1 million for new electric police cruisers. 

    “Sen. Min has always ensured that law enforcement and first responders have the tools they need to keep Southern California’s families safe and secure,” Roger Hilton, president of the state Fraternal Order of Police, said in a statement along with the endorsement. 

    In contrast, Baugh has the backing of Orange County Sheriff Don Barnes and several House Republican leaders. In an interview with RCP, the former GOP leader of the state assembly cited a strong tough-on-crime record dating back to the 1990s. Barnes and local District Attorney Todd Spitzer also voted for Baugh to become the chairman of a local gang reduction and intervention program. 

    Baugh, who previously served as county GOP chairman, countered that Min has supported some of the same sweeping criminal justice reforms as Equality California during his time in Sacramento. Min voted in favor of a 2021 bill eliminating cash bail and another measure in 2022 to automatically seal many felons’ criminal records, including domestic violence convictions. 

    “Min’s hiding behind the PORAC labor endorsement to run from his progressive policies, including support for no-cash bail,” Baugh said in the interview. “This is the type of cowardly behavior we don’t need in Congress.” 

    Equality California also keeps track of state and federal lawmakers’ legislative records on key priorities and issues an annual scorecard. In 2022, the score included votes on several bills, including the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, which, if passed, would have eliminated qualified immunity for police. According to the Congressional Budget Office, it also would have cost local departments hundreds of millions of dollars in training and equipment just when several major cities across the country had slashed funding for police. 

    While Congress was considering the measure, the Fraternal Order of Police argued that ending qualified immunity was “anti-police” and would drastically reduce the number of candidates choosing to become police officers. 

    Over the past several years, police departments across the country, including in San Francisco and Los Angeles, have faced severe staffing shortages as they struggle to recruit and retain officers. At the height of the defund the police movement, California lost 2,100 police officers (with full arrest powers) and roughly 1,100 civilian staff, diminishing the number of patrol officers to 1991 levels. 

    In 2021 Equality California scored votes on a handful of bills, including the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act and a measure that would have allowed adults who entered the U.S. as undocumented children to become lawful permanent residents and citizens. That year (and in 2022), Reps. Mike Levin, who is facing a rematch from GOP challenger Matt Gunderson, and Harder, who is in a tight contest against Stockton Mayor Kevin Lincoln, earned 100% ratings from Equality California. 

    As state legislators, Gray, Min, and Salas received a 100% rating on the group’s 2022 scorecard, with Min maintaining his perfect rating from 2021. 

    With so many leading California Democrats backtracking on criminal justice reforms, Republicans plan to hammer their opponents who remain undecided about repealing Proposition 47 and other more lenient laws as soft on crime and weak on the border. Despite polls showing voters deeply concerned about illegal immigration and President Biden’s open border policies, California Democrats have continued to support broad amnesty for illegal immigrants and the state’s controversial sanctuary state law, both of which Equality California strongly backs. 

    In the state, border issues may divide some heavily Latino districts, but Republicans have a greater chance for traction when it comes to crime. Americans’ worries about what they describe as the nation’s crime problems are at a recent high, with 63% characterizing public safety concerns as either extremely or very serious in a November Gallup survey. That’s up from 54% when Gallup last polled voters on the issue and the highest level the polling company has recorded in recent years. The prior high of 60% was recorded in the initial 2000 polling, as well as in 2010 and 2016. 

    It’s hard to predict whether support for specific criminal justice reforms, such as eliminating cash bail, will hold sway with voters. But with Breed, who is in a tough reelection fight for mayor, and other Democrats pivoting away from the reform movement, it will be easier to focus voters on the issue. 

    While there is little comprehensive research about the impact of eliminating cash bail on crime, a study by the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office in Northern California early last year found that individuals released on cash-free or low-cost bail were much more likely to re-offend than those who pasted bail. They were also far more likely to commit new violent offenses. 

    The study used a random sample of 100 people arrested during the county’s zero-bail policy, which was in effect from April 2020 through May 2021. It compared those results to 100 people who were arrested and posted bail in 2018 and 2019. The study found that people released were arrested for new crimes at an average rate 70% higher than those who posted bail, committed felonies 90% more often, and committed misdemeanors 123% more often. 

    Susan Crabtree is RealClearPolitics’ national political correspondent.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 21:55

  • 'Like Toys, Not Drones': Iran Continues Mocking Israel's Attack As Contrasting Narratives Emerge
    ‘Like Toys, Not Drones’: Iran Continues Mocking Israel’s Attack As Contrasting Narratives Emerge

    Iran has continued mocking Israel’s limited attack which happened in the early hours of Friday morning. In a fresh interview with NBC, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian dismissed much of the initial reporting in the West concerning the strike, which appeared to center on the city of Isfahan – which hosts a nuclear energy site – as “not accurate”.

    “What happened last night was not a strike,” the Iranian top diplomat asserted. He claimed that the the attack involved merely two or three small UAVs, which “were more like toys that our children play with, not drones.”

    Sensitive military sites in and around Isfahan, via The Guardian.

    He said that the UAV’s were all taken out by Iran’s anti-air defenses, and even claimed they took off from inside Iran, suggesting that the attack took place by proxy.

    Iranian state TV had reported shortly after midnight as the attack was unfolding that “three drones were observed in the sky over Isfahan. The air defense system became active and destroyed these drones in the sky.”

    However, Israeli media along with the New York Times are saying the whole thing was meant as a strong symbolic message to Iran that Israel can inflict severe damage at will if it chooses to:

    The alleged Israeli strike overnight Thursday-Friday on Iranian air defenses near the Natanz nuclear site used a high-tech missile that was able to evade Iran’s radar systems, in a move “calibrated to make Iran think twice” before launching another direct attack on Israel, The New York Times reported on Saturday.

    Two unnamed Western officials cited by the newspaper said the missile aimed to show Tehran that Israel is able to dodge and neutralize its defenses.

    Two Iranian officials said the strike hit a Russian-made S-300 air defense system. They told the newspaper that Iran had not detected intrusions into its airspace from drones, missiles or aircraft.

    Israeli sources say that IAF jets were able to launch missiles from outside Iranian airspace, and further did not use Jordanian airspace, given concerns that Amman could be dragged into the conflict.

    “Satellite imagery seen by the Times of Israel showed damage to the radar of an S-300 system at the Eighth Shekari Air Base in Isfahan, said to be part of an array defending the nearby top-secret Natanz nuclear site,” Israeli media reports further. “The imagery was not immediately permitted for publication, per the policy of the agency that took the photo.”

    But there are contrary reports among Western press accounts. For example, there’s this satellite imaging analysis in CNN which points to an attack which did almost nothing in terms of serious damage:

    There does not appear to be any extensive damage at an air base purportedly targeted by an Israeli military strike, according to exclusive satellite images obtained by CNN from Umbra Space. 

    The synthetic aperture radar (SAR) satellite images were taken around 10:18 a.m. local time. 

    There does not appear to be any large craters in the ground and there are no apparent destroyed buildings. Additional visual satellite imagery will be needed to check for burn scars – which cannot be seen by SAR images — around the complex.

    The Iranians have not confirmed or admitted to any fighter jet-launched missiles being used in the attack, as they continue to intentionally downplay it…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Some Israeli officials actually agree that it was too small of a retaliatory strike. Most notably, Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir had quickly tweeted out in the wake of the overnight attack that the attack on Iran was in the end “lame”.

    Iranian leaders have meanwhile declared the utter ‘failure’ of efforts to attack the Islamic Republic, and have further warned that Tehran won’t hesitate to strike back ‘harder’ if attacked by Israel. But the strategy of Iranian officials for now seems to be to simply deny that any level of major operation by Israel took place.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 21:20

  • Contracts Between US Universities, China Total More Than $2 Billion: Investigation
    Contracts Between US Universities, China Total More Than $2 Billion: Investigation

    By Micaiah Bilger of The College Fix

    Report comes amid concerns about CCP’s influence, human rights violations…

    American universities have entered more than $2.3 billion in contracts with China in the past decade amid on-going concerns about the influence of its communist government on U.S. higher education, a new investigation found.

    These contracts included agricultural research regarding orange crops, trainings for airline pilots, and medical trials for a tumor treatment drug developed by a Chinese pharmaceutical company, the Wall Street Journal reported.

    The investigation uncovered approximately 2,900 contracts from 2012 and 2024 between Chinese businesses and about 200 U.S. public colleges and universities in all 50 states.

    Some involved specialized training, such as $37 million in contracts between Chinese airlines and the University of North Dakota to train and license pilots.

    Another $1.8 million in contracts with China’s Institute of Navel Orange at Gannan Normal University and the University of Florida involved researching tree genetics and diseases affecting citrus fruit, according to the investigation.

    But others were less specific.

    For example, “all three of China’s major government-owned oil companies have funded contracts for $100,000 or more at the University of Texas at Austin, which the school describes only as ‘research activity,’” the investigation found.

    The report continued:

    Some of the biggest-value China contracts feature franchise-type arrangements for overseas satellite campuses. New York University, which the Education Department database shows has been the largest single recipient of Chinese funding, reported two contracts totaling over $46.5 million for 2021 alone for its Shanghai branch.

    The Juilliard School has disclosed over $133 million in such funding over more than a decade for its Tianjin Juilliard School near Beijing, appointed with some 120 Steinway pianos.

    These partnerships have U.S. politicians, academics, and students concerned. The Chinese Communist Party has been accused of numerous human rights abuses, from free speech censorship to forced labor and torture to genocide of the Uyghurs, an ethnic minority population.

    According to the report:

    The Federal Bureau of Investigation and other agencies warn that China’s state has encouraged theft of technological secrets at universities, spread pro-Beijing propaganda, stifled campus debate and harassed students.

    Beijing dismisses such characterizations. Its officials say ethnic Chinese students and professors have been unfairly targeted in the U.S., including on American campuses, and urged the U.S. to be mindful of its reputation for academic freedom. The Chinese Embassy in Washington didn’t respond to detailed questions about the university contracts.

    American defense officials raised similar concerns about China and artificial intelligence technology in a 2021 report by the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence.

    “China’s domestic use of AI is a chilling precedent for anyone around the world who cherishes individual liberty,” the report stated.

    Meanwhile, the Athenai Institute, a bipartisan student-led organization, is urging U.S. universities to divest from Chinese government-controlled entities, The College Fix reported this month.

    Lawmakers also have been taking action. In 2023, for example, Florida enacted a law restricting public universities and colleges “from accepting grants from or participating in partnerships or agreements” with China and other foreign countries “of concern.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 20:45

  • Securities Analyst Jobs In China Are "Permanently" Disappearing
    Securities Analyst Jobs In China Are “Permanently” Disappearing

    The days of million dollar analyst jobs in the securities industry in China look to be all but gone.

    That was the topic of a new Bloomberg article last week which detailed exactly how the industry is “retrenching after years of expansion”. Bloomberg’s description of the industry’s cutbacks is based on discussions with about 20 analysts and former analysts, who chose to remain anonymous or only use their first names.

    These reductions are occurring amidst a prolonged market downturn that has lowered trading commissions and increased regulatory restrictions on research publications. It marks a significant shift from previous years when brokerages were actively recruiting and offering substantial salaries to top analysts.

    Several senior analysts at Shanghai’s state-owned Guotai Junan Securities resigned following pay cuts and stricter performance requirements, the article points out.

    Another Shenzhen-based brokerage cut 40% of its analyst staff and reduced their 2023 bonuses by over 50%. Additional cost-cutting measures at other firms include decreased meal and travel budgets.

    Sun Jianbo, a former chief strategist at China Galaxy Securities Co. who now runs China Vision Capital, told Bloomberg: “Now with the trading fees cut, the bubble in the research circle will also burst.”

    “There’s no other way around. The only thing that matters now is to stay employed. So my approach is to grab a job first and see what comes next,” said one 28 year old energy analyst named Anna. 

    She said her team was cut down from 7 analysts to 2. 

    Chinese brokerages have traditionally assessed their research analysts based on the trading commissions—referred to as “soft dollars” or paidian—they generate from clients, rather than the accuracy of their forecasts, Bloomberg writes.

    This approach spurred the aggressive expansion of research teams and high salaries for analysts. According to China Vision Capital, the number of sell-side analysts in China has surged by almost 70% over the last decade, now exceeding 4,800.

    Major firms like China International Capital and Citic Securities employ over 300 and nearly 200 analysts, respectively. Top-performing analysts, particularly winners of popular research contests like New Fortune, could earn up to 10 million yuan annually.

    According to Brook Zhang of Bo Le Associates, analysts with ten years of experience might earn a basic salary of about 800,000 yuan, while those with five years can earn around 500,000 yuan, with bonuses ranging from three to 24 months of pay depending on market conditions.

    However, the landscape is shifting due to recent regulatory changes reducing trading fees and discouraging the use of commissions for research payments. Additionally, investor interest in China’s stock market has waned after three years of losses, diminishing demand for equity research.

    This, along with a downturn in sectors like proprietary trading and investment banking and new restrictions on stock market practices, is driving brokerages to significantly cut costs.

    “I think these cuts reflect a structural change in the securities business and are hence permanent,” concluded Chen Zhiwu, a professor of finance at the University of Hong Kong. You can read Bloomberg’s full report here. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 20:10

  • Amid Budget Shortfall, San Francisco Reexamines Tax Burden On Big Businesses
    Amid Budget Shortfall, San Francisco Reexamines Tax Burden On Big Businesses

    Authored by Brian Back via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Facing mounting budget woes this election year, as spending far outpaces revenues, the City of San Francisco is scrambling to reform its infamously large and complex tax burden on business.

    Several San Francisco companies have been mired in tax disputes with the city. Above, a view of downtown on Feb. 6, 2019. (Josh Edelson/AFP/Getty Images)

    San Francisco’s five largest employers now account for nearly a quarter of the city’s total business tax revenue, according to an April 14 report in the San Francisco Examiner. If any were to relocate outside of the city, such would leave San Francisco—currently facing an $800 million budget deficit—vulnerable.

    As such, Mayor London Breed and city officials are currently negotiating with business and labor leaders to devise tax reform measures for the November ballot that could simplify its tax code and even out the load on top businesses, the San Francisco Examiner reported.

    In particular, city officials say they would like to see changes that would not incentivize businesses to move jobs out of San Francisco, since the city’s largest employers are required to pay a disproportionate amount of business taxes.

    But shifting the tax burden elsewhere, such as increasing the city’s already large sales tax, could hurt a retail sector that has been decimated by a flurry of closures in recent years, analysts say.

    City Controller Greg Wagner has said the complexity and number of new taxes passed by voters in recent years combined with a poor economy have increased tax disputes between the city and large businesses, according to Alyssa Sewlal, a spokesperson for his office.

    Such disputes include a legal demand from General Motors for more than $121 million in tax refunds, as well as tens of millions of dollars in refund claims, and settlements and lawsuits on behalf of companies who say they were overtaxed such as Deloitte, Gap, WeWork, AppLovin, Chime Financial, and Block—formerly Square—since 2020, according to the San Francisco Examiner.

    At the same time, the mayor’s office has been trying to direct more attention toward helping tourist-reliant businesses including hotels, restaurants, and arts and entertainment groups, including launching new small business grants and laying out plans to revitalize its downtown. Several such businesses have denounced the city’s street conditions, crime, costly permitting, and escalated taxes.

    Factors such as a struggling office market aided by the rise of remote work, retail and commercial vacancies, poor recovery from the pandemic, and lagging tourism have played a role in revenues not keeping up with city spending that has increased significantly over the past decade.

    Currently at $14.6 billion, San Francisco’s budget rivals most major U.S. cities. Because it is forecast to escalate by more than $1 billion over the next five years, the city will be on track to post a deficit surpassing $1 billion by 2027 barring major changes, the San Francisco Examiner reported.

    City employee salaries, pension benefits, and health care costs are projected to increase by about $500 million within the upcoming four fiscal years, according to Ms. Breed’s office.

    The mayor, who is up for re-election in November, told city departments in December they will be required to cut their budgets by about 10 percent in the upcoming fiscal year, and that they must also consider an additional 5 percent in cuts as a “contingency reduction.”

    The city’s next budget, which goes into effect July 1, is scheduled to go before the San Francisco Board of Supervisors for a vote June 1.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 19:35

  • "First Real Image" Of Chinese Supersonic Drone Attached To Bomber  
    “First Real Image” Of Chinese Supersonic Drone Attached To Bomber  

    Aviation observers have spotted a supersonic unmanned aerial vehicle under the fuselage of a People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) bomber, Defense Blog reports. The new drone can conduct strategic aerial reconnaissance across southeast Asia.

    Images of the WZ-8 reconnaissance drone attached to a Xian H-6 bomber surfaced on social media platform X last week. The rare sighting reminds us that PLAAF, the third largest air force in the world, is quickly modernizing its aircraft fleet to include drones as tensions with the US over Taiwan remain high.  

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    First revealed to the public in 2019, WZ-8 provides pre-strike targeting information and/or post-strike assessments. The drone can also conduct strategic aerial reconnaissance across southeast Asia, including Taiwan and South Korea. 

    In a separate Defense Blog report, citing classified papers obtained by The Washington Post, a fleet of WZ-8 drones are stationed in newly built hangars in the Lu’an airbase in eastern China. This base allows the supersonic drones to be easily deployed to Taiwan and South Korea for intelligence-gathering missions while flying at an altitude of 30 kilometers – untouchable to some of the world’s most advanced air defense systems. 

    As the world’s AI superpowers, China and the US, gear up for potential drone wars in the Indo-Pacific region, the rapid advancement of swarm technology will be critical for winning the next major conflict, along with hypersonic weapons. The deployment of these technologies comes as war rages on in Eastern Europe and flares up in the Middle East. Banker Jamie Dimon recently warned the world faces “risks that eclipse anything since World War II.” 

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 19:00

  • Lord Of The Lies: A Pediatrician's Take On The Latest Child Gender-Transition Research
    Lord Of The Lies: A Pediatrician’s Take On The Latest Child Gender-Transition Research

    Authored by J. Edward Les, MD, via The Epoch Times,

    Last week’s release of the Cass Review brought to memory the old jingle: “Liar, liar, pants on fire; your nose is longer than a telephone wire.” Commissioned four years ago to probe the practices of the Tavistock gender clinic in Britain, the report methodically assembles a damning indictment of the flimsy evidence used to “transition” children.

    Its author, retired pediatrician Dr. Hilary Cass, is polite and professional, but she pulls no punches in exposing the false foundation upon which the entire edifice of “gender-affirming care” is built.

    Drawing extensively on a series of systematic literature reviews and in-depth interviews with doctors, parents, and patients, she writes:

    “The reality is that we have no good evidence on the long-term outcomes of interventions to manage gender-related distress… for the majority of young people, a medical pathway may not be the best way to achieve this.”

    Even social transitioning alone, she concludes, risks grave psychological harm for children.

    And social transitioning is often a prelude to puberty blockers. Dr. Cass skewers the oft-cited narrative that blockers are harmless and reversible, pointing to evidence of permanent negative effects on bone density and neuropsychiatric functioning.

    The report advises a U-turn from the “gender-affirming” construct of drugs and surgery toward a model of careful psychological counselling. Critically, this is the very “watchful waiting” approach that got Canadian psychologist Dr. Kenneth Zucker fired more than eight years ago as head of Toronto’s Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

    Dr. Cass delivers a scathing indictment of the shaky evidence for guidelines used by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, The American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Endocrine Society; and she exposes their repeated practice of using non-evidence-based guidelines to justify other non-evidence-based guidelines.

    Not all lies are equal.

    White lies are the (mostly) harmless sort we tell to spare someone’s feelings. Black lies are the malicious untruths told to gain unfair advantage or to cause harm to others.

    But the “lord of the lies” is the “blue” lie: the sort of falsehood we tell each other and ourselves—often unknowingly—on behalf of our tribes.

    Such as in William Golding’s “The Lord of the Flies,” when a group of boys convinces themselves, without evidence, that there’s a beast in the forest—a delusion that turns deadly for Simon and Piggy.

    In my view, blue lies underpin the gospel of “gender-affirming care,” which has led thousands of otherwise erudite medical professionals to discard the truth of the gender binary in favour of blatant interference with normal pediatric physiology.

    It’s important to emphasize that blue lies typically aren’t told with intent to mislead, or from a place of malevolence; their proponents genuinely believe they are on the side of truth.

    Combatting blue lies, therefore, is extraordinarily difficult. But not impossible.

    Two strategies are key:

    First, we need powerful insiders – not just members of the tribe, but prominent figures within it to awake to their errors and begin to speak up.

    Such as when Finnish physician Riittakerttu Kaltiala, one of the architects of Finland’s youth gender transition program, stepped up last October to say:

    “Gender transition has gotten out of hand. When medical professionals start saying they have one answer that applies everywhere, or that they have a cure for all life’s pains, that should be a warning to all of us that something has gone very wrong.”

    Unfortunately, a common response to the Cass Review by gender-fluidity adherents has been to double down. Take Dr. Kristopher Wells, Canada Research Chair for the Public Understanding of Sexual & Gender Minority Youth:

    “The flawed UK Cass Report was issued today and is exactly what was expected from a country that is virulently anti-trans,” he said on social media.

    His is the sort of reaction that Washington Post columnist Megan McArdle, writing about the horrors of frontal lobotomies, describes as “The Oedipus Trap”: a situation where “it can be so psychologically devastating to discover you’ve made a mistake… that you will do everything in your power to avoid recognizing it.”

    Per Walter Scott: “Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!”

    Therefore, a second strategy – expertly employed by Dr. Cass – is crucial: the careful and patient exhibition of evidence, without hyperbole and without rancour.

    The Cass Review exposes a tangled web indeed.

    For her efforts, and for her courage, Hilary Cass deserves our deepest thanks.

    *  *  *

    Dr. J. Edward Les, MD, is a pediatrician in Calgary and a senior fellow at the Aristotle Foundation for Public Policy.

    Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 18:25

  • Shipping Industry Pleads With UN For "Enhanced Military Presence" As Maritime Choke-Point Chaos Spreads
    Shipping Industry Pleads With UN For “Enhanced Military Presence” As Maritime Choke-Point Chaos Spreads

    Exactly one week ago, Iranian commandos seized a container ship affiliated with Israel as it passed through the Strait of Hormuz. This action sparked new fears of another maritime chokepoint becoming disrupted as the crisis in the Middle East escalated. It also prompted a plea by the international shipping industry to the United Nations, urging an increase in military patrols along key shipping routes. 

    First reported by the maritime news website gGaptain, an open letter co-signed by 16 maritime industry associations and social partners, calls for urgent assistance and reminds countries about their responsibilities under international law.  

    “However, the incident this weekend, when the vessel MSC Aries was seized by Iranian forces at 06.37 UTC – 50 nautical miles north-east of Fujairah, United Arab Emirates on Saturday 13 April, has once again highlighted the intolerable situation where shipping has become a target. This is unacceptable,” the signatories of the letter stated. 

    “Given the continually evolving and severe threat profile within the area, we call on you for enhanced coordinated military presence, missions and patrols in the region, to protect our seafarers against any further possible aggression,” they said, adding, “The industry associations ask that all member states be formally reminded of their responsibilities under international law. And we ask that all efforts possible are brought to bear to release the seafarers and protect the safe transit of ships.” 

    After the MSC Aries seizure in the Strait of Hormuz, we published a note titled “Heading For Supply Shock? Four Maritime Chokepoints Flash Red As Escalating Conflict Looms,” outlining the maritime chokepoints, including the Suez Canal, Bab-El Mandeb Strait, and Strait of Hormuz, through which a quarter of all global trade flows, that are experiencing increased conflict. 

    In a recent note, MUFG provided a global snapshot of the world’s maritime chokepoints. 

    The team at ING Global Markets Research warned last week, “Global shipping routes are already heavily impacted from the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden because of ongoing geopolitical strife. If the Strait of Hormuz is in any way disrupted, the impact on oil and global trade could be huge.” 

    Disruptions along critical maritime chokepoints in the Middle East are a direct result of the failed foreign policy decisions pushed by the Biden administration and former President Obama. Furthermore, the inability of Western militaries to secure the southern Red Sea through Operation Prosperity Guardian is a sign of weakness as the world fractures into a multipolar state of chaos. 

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 17:50

  • St. Louis University Hosts Dylan Mulvaney, Denies College Republicans Request For Event With Former NCAA Swimmer A Day Later
    St. Louis University Hosts Dylan Mulvaney, Denies College Republicans Request For Event With Former NCAA Swimmer A Day Later

    By Adam Sabes of Campus Reform

    St. Louis University plans to host transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney to speak on campus next week and denied College Republicans’ request to host an event with a former NCAA swimmer a day later.

    The event will be hosted by the St. Louis University Great Issues Committee on Monday, which is part of the school’s Student Activities Board, according to the St. Louis Post.

    Mulvaney gained attention in April 2023 after a paid partnership with Bud Light, sparking heavy criticism from conservatives.

    According to the report, St. Louis University College Republicans President Alexandra Leung said that administrators at the institution denied their request to host Paula Scanlan, a women’s sports activist.

    Despite the event occurring a day after Mulvaney’s speech, the university said that its security couldn’t accommodate the event.

    “Mulvaney’s comments have been deemed disrespectful and derogatory towards women and to SLU’s central mission,” said Leung.

    While Leung says that Mulvaney’s message is at odds with the university’s catholic teachings, her College Republicans chapter has no plans to protest the event.

    While St. Louis University didn’t disclose how much the speech costs, in Summer 2023, there was an honorarium of $40,000 for organizations interested in hosting Mulvaney for an event, according to YAF.

    Just a few months prior, the University of Pittsburgh’s Rainbow Alliance secured $26,250 from its student government to host Mulvaney.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 17:15

  • Project Much? Hillary Clinton Claims Trump Wants To 'Kill, Imprison His Opposition'
    Project Much? Hillary Clinton Claims Trump Wants To ‘Kill, Imprison His Opposition’

    Hillary Clinton, who once suggested murdering Julian Assange and whose party is trying to imprison their chief political rival, suggested that Donald Trump wants to murder and imprison his political opponents.

    Appearing on a podcast with Marc Elias, the Democrat super-lawyer who laid the legal groundwork for vote-by-mail in 2020 & was involved in the “Steele Dossier” purchase, Clinton suggested that “Putin does what [Trump] would like to do. Kill his opposition.”

    [Maybe they just committed suicide like Vince Foster and all those other associates?]

    According to Hillary, who helped France murder Gaddafi (after he wanted a mere 5 billion euros / year to stop illegals from flooding into Europe), Trump “really” wants to “imprison his opposition, drive journalists into exile, rule without any check or balance.”

    “We have to be very conscious of how he sees the world because in that world, he only sees strong men leaders. He sees Putin. He sees Xi. He sees Kim Jong Un in North Korea,” the failed presidential candidate continued. “Those are the people he is modelling himself after and we’ve been down this road in our, you know, world history. We sure don’t want to go down that again.”

    According to Hillary, if Trump “ever gets back near the White House again, it will be like having a dictator. I don’t say that lightly. Go back and read Project 2025. They’re going to fire everybody. The person in the government who knows about the next pandemic? Get rid of him.”

    Project much?

    Watch (h/t Modernity.news):

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 16:40

  • What Are Mises' Six Lessons?
    What Are Mises’ Six Lessons?

    Authored by Jonathan Newman via The Mises Institute,

    Ludwig von Mises’s Economic Policy: Thoughts for Today and Tomorrow has become quite popular recently. The Mises Book Store has sold out of its physical copies, and the PDF, which is available online for free, has seen over 50,000 downloads in the past few days.

    This surge in interest in Mises’s ideas was started by UFC fighter Renato Moicano, who declared in a short post-fight victory speech, “I love America, I love the Constitution…I want to carry…guns. I love private property. Let me tell you something. If you care about your…country, read Ludwig von Mises and the six lessons of the Austrian economic school.”

    The “six lessons” he is referring to is Mises’s book, Economic Policy: Thoughts for Today and Tomorrow, which was republished by our friends in Brazil under the title “As Seis Lições” (“The Six Lessons”).

    If you are interested in what Mises has to say in this book, which is a transcription of lectures he gave in Argentina in 1959, here’s a brief preview, which I hope inspires you to read the short book in full. As a side note, if you are an undergraduate student who is interested in these ideas, the Mises Institute’s next Mises Book Club is on this text (pure coincidence!).

    Lecture One: Capitalism

    Mises begins his first lecture with an overview of the development of capitalism out of feudalism. Businesses began “mass production to satisfy the needs of the masses” instead of focusing on producing luxury goods for the elite. These big businesses succeeded because they served the needs of a larger group of people, and their success wholly depended on their ability to give this mass of consumers what they wanted.

    Despite the amazing and undeniable increases in standards of living, even for a growing population, capitalism had its detractors, including Karl Marx, who gave capitalism its name. Mises says that while Marx hated capitalism and that Marx dubbed it thusly as an attack on the system, the name is a good one 

    because it describes clearly the source of the great social improvements brought about by capitalism. Those improvements are the result of capital accumulation; they are based on the fact that people as a rule, do not consume everything they have produced, that they save—and invest—a part of it.

    Prosperity is the result of providing for the future—more precisely it is the result of setting aside consumption today by saving and investing resources in production. Mises says that this principle explains why some countries are more prosperous than others. When it comes to economic growth, “there are no miracles.” There is only “the application of the principles of the free market economy, of the methods of capitalism.”

    Lecture Two: Socialism

    In the second lecture, Mises takes a closer look at Marx’s proposed system: socialism. Economic freedom means that people can choose their own careers and use their resources to accomplish their own ends. Economic freedom is the basis for all other freedoms. For example, when the government seizes whole industries, like that of the printing press, it determines what will be published and what won’t and the “freedom of the press disappears.”

    Mises acknowledges that there is no such thing as “perfect freedom” in a metaphysical sense. We must obey the laws of nature, especially if we intend to use and transform nature according to our ends. And even economic freedom means that there is a fundamental interdependence among individuals: “Freedom in society means that a man depends as much on other people as other people depend upon him.” This is also true for big businesses and the entrepreneurs who lead them. The true “bosses” in the market economy are not those who shout orders to the workers, but the consumers.

    Socialists despise the idea of consumer sovereignty because it means allowing mistakes. In their mind, the state should play the paternalistic role of deciding what is good for everyone. Thus Mises sees no difference between socialism and a system of slavery: “The slave must do what his superior orders him to do, but the free citizen—and this is what freedom means—is in a position to choose his own way of life.” In capitalism, this freedom makes it possible for people to be born into poverty but then achieve great success as they provide for their fellow man. This kind of social mobility is impossible under systems like feudalism and socialism.

    Mises ends this lecture with a short explanation of the economic calculation critique of socialism. When the private ownership of the means of production is prohibited, then economic calculation is made impossible. Without market prices for factors, we cannot economize production and provide for the needs of the masses, no matter who oversees the socialist planning board. The result is mass deprivation and chaos.

    Lecture Three: Interventionism

    Interventionism describes a situation in which the government “wants to interfere with market phenomena.” Each intervention involves an abrogation of the consumer sovereignty Mises had explained in the two previous lectures.

    The government wants to interfere in order to force businessmen to conduct their affairs in a different way than they would have chosen if they had obeyed only the consumers. Thus, all the measures of interventionism by the government are directed toward restricting the supremacy of consumers.

    Mises gives an example of a price ceiling on milk. While those who enact such an intervention may intend to make milk more affordable for poorer families, there are many unintended consequences: increased demand, decreased supply, non-price rationing in the form of long queues at shops that sell milk, and, importantly, grounds for the government to intervene in new ways now that their initial intervention has not achieved its intended purpose. So, in Mises’s example, he traces through the new interventions, like government rationing, price controls for cattle food, price controls for luxury goods, and so on until the government has intervened in virtually every part of the economy, i.e., socialism.

    After providing some historical examples of this process, Mises gives the big picture. Interventionism, as a “middle-of-the-road policy,” is actually a road toward totalitarianism.

    Lecture Four: Inflation

    There can be no secret way to the solution of the financial problems of a government; if it needs money, it has to obtain the money by taxing its citizens (or, under special conditions, by borrowing it from people who have the money). But many governments, we can even say most governments, think there is another method for getting the needed money; simply to print it.

    If the government taxes citizens to build a new hospital, then the citizens are forced to reduce their spending and the government “replaces” their spending with its own. If, however, the government uses newly printed money to finance the construction of the hospital, then there is no replacement of spending, but an addition, and “prices will tend to go up.”

    Mises, per usual, explodes the idea of a “price level” that rises and falls, as if all prices change simultaneously and proportionally. Instead, prices rise “step by step.” The first receivers of new money increase their demands for goods, which provides new income to those who sell those goods. Those sellers may now increase their demands for goods. This explains the process by which some prices and some people’s incomes increase before others. The result is a “price revolution,” in which prices and incomes rise in a stepwise fashion, starting with the origin of the new money. In this way, new money alters the distribution of incomes and the arrangement of real resources throughout the economy, creating “winners” and “losers.”

    The gold standard offers a strict check against the inflationist tendencies of governments. In such a system, the government cannot create new units of money to finance its spending, so it must resort to taxation, which is notably unpopular. Fiat inflation, however, is subtle and its effects are complex and delayed, which makes it especially attractive to governments that can wield it.

    In this lecture Mises also executes a thorough smackdown of Keynes and Keynesianism, but I’ll leave that for readers to enjoy.

    Lecture Five: Foreign Investment

    Mises returns to a principle he introduced in the first lecture, that economic growth stems from capital accumulation. The differences in standards of living between countries is not attributable to technology, the qualities of the workers, or the skills of the entrepreneurs, but to the availability of capital.

    One way that capital may be accumulated within a country is through foreign investment. The British, for example, provided much of the capital that was required to develop the rail system in the United States and in Europe. This provided mutual benefit for both the British and the countries on the receiving end of this investment. The British earned profits through their ownership of the rail systems and the receiving countries, even with a temporary “unfavorable” balance of trade, obtained the benefits of the rail system including expanded productivity which, over time, allowed them to purchase stock in the rail companies from the British. 

    Foreign investment allows the capital accumulation in one country to speed up the development of other countries, all without a one-sided sacrifice on the part of the country providing the investment. Wars (especially world wars), protectionism, and domestic taxation destroy this mutually beneficial process. When countries impose tariffs or expropriate the capital that belongs to foreign investors, they “prevent or to slow down the accumulation of domestic capital and to put obstacles in the way of foreign capital.”

    Lecture Six: Politics and Ideas

    The classical liberal ideas of the philosophers of the eighteenth and early-nineteenth centuries helped create the constrained governments and economic freedom that led to the explosion of economic growth Mises discussed in the first lecture. But the emergence of minority “pressure groups,” what we would call “special interest groups” today, directed politicians away from classical liberal ideals and toward interventionism. The groups that would benefit from various interventions lobby the government to grant them favors like monopoly privileges, taxes on competition (including tariffs), and subsidies. And, as we have seen, this interventionist spiral tends toward socialism and totalitarianism. The “resurgence of the warlike spirit” in the twentieth century brought about world wars and exacerbated the totalitarian trends even in the once exemplary nations.

    The concomitant rise in government expenditures made fiat money and inflation too tempting. The wars and special projects advocated by the pressure groups were expensive, and so budget constraints were discarded in favor of debasement.

    This, Mises says, explains the downfall of civilization. He points to the Roman Empire as an example: 

    What had taken place? What was the problem? What was it that caused the disintegration of an empire which, in every regard, had attained the highest civilization ever achieved before the eighteenth century? The truth is that what destroyed this ancient civilization was something similar, almost identical to the dangers that threaten our civilization today: on the one hand it was interventionism, and on the other hand, inflation.

    Mises finds hope in the fact that the detractors of economic freedom, like Marx and Keynes, do not represent the masses or even a majority. Marx, for example, “was not a man from the proletariat. He was the son of a lawyer. … He was supported by his friend Friedrich Engels, who—being a manufacturer—was the worst type of ‘bourgeois,’ according to socialist ideas. In the language of Marxism, he was an exploiter.”

    This implies that the fate of civilization depends on a battle of ideas, and Mises thought that good ideas would win: 

    I consider it as a very good sign that, while fifty years ago, practically nobody in the world had the courage to say anything in favor of a free economy, we have now, at least in some of the advanced countries of the world, institutions that are centers for the propagation of a free economy.

    May we continue Mises’s project and fulfill his hope. What the world needs is “Menos Marx, Mais Mises.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 16:05

  • Elon Musk Says Tesla Will Fix "Incorrectly Low" Severance Packages For Laid Off Employees
    Elon Musk Says Tesla Will Fix “Incorrectly Low” Severance Packages For Laid Off Employees

    Elon Musk stated last week that the severance packages given to some ex-Tesla Inc. employees during the company’s largest workforce reduction were incorrectly too low. 

    Tesla announced on Monday that it is cutting over 10% of its 140,000-strong global workforce to prepare for a new phase of growth, according to CNBC.

    Details on the layoffs were sparse, but in a company memo, Elon Musk said the move was part of a strategic shift towards robotaxi development, stepping away from plans for a more affordable electric vehicle.

    Musk wrote in an email last week: “As we reorganize Tesla it has come to my attention that some severance packages are incorrectly low. My apologies for this mistake. It is being corrected immediately.”

    Nico Murillo, a former production supervisor, told Bloomberg: “Tried to badge in, and the security guard took my badge and told me I was laid off. Sat in my car in disbelief.”

    As we’ve noted, Tesla missed its Q1 delivery guidance and, so far in 2024, its stock has been decimated. For Q1 2024, Tesla produced over 433,000 vehicles and delivered 387,000. It marks the first annual Q1 delivery decline for the automaker since 2020. 

    Tesla’s exact delivery number for the quarter was 386,810 vehicles, far below Bloomberg estimates of 449.080.

    Tesla submitted a proxy statement for its June 13 shareholder meeting this week, requesting shareholders to approve relocating the company’s state of incorporation to Texas and to ratify CEO Elon Musk’s 2018 pay package, which was recently rescinded by a Delaware judge.

    In the statement, Tesla board chair Robyn Denholm supports the move to Texas, noting that the company has been headquartered there since December 2021., per Yahoo. 

    “2024 is the year that Tesla should move home to Texas. We are asking for your vote to approve Tesla’s move from Delaware, our current state of incorporation, to a new legal home in Texas. Texas is already our business home, and we are committed to it,”  Denholm said. 

    “In 2018, we asked for unbelievable growth and accomplishments. Elon delivered: Tesla’s stockholders have benefited from unprecedented growth under Elon’s leadership and Tesla has met every single one of the 2018 CEO pay package’s targets,” she continued. 

    Analyst Dan Ives of Wedbush added: “On the comp package which was already approved by shareholders at the time in 2018, this has been an area of contention among some investors but we would expect the 2018 package will be reapproved and the Delaware court ruling would be moot in essence as Tesla will now be moving to Texas.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 15:30

  • Not 'The Onion': New Guinea Academics Say Cannibals Would Be Offended By Biden's Tale Of Uncle Being Eaten
    Not ‘The Onion’: New Guinea Academics Say Cannibals Would Be Offended By Biden’s Tale Of Uncle Being Eaten

    Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

    Academics from Papua New Guinea say that the actual cannibals who live there would be extremely offended by Joe Biden’s made up story of his uncle being eaten by them during World War Two because they “wouldn’t just eat any white men that fell from the sky.”

    As we highlighted earlier this week, Biden twice told the completely made up story as a way of attacking Donald Trump.

    In reality his uncle wasn’t a reconnaissance pilot, wasn’t shot down over Papua New Guinea and definitely wasn’t eaten by cannibals.

    It didn’t prevent the White House Press Secretary from calling doing her best to avoid admitting it was all lies, and calling it a “very proud” moment for Biden, before repeating the lie about Trump calling dead US veterans ‘losers’.

    The story gets more ridiculous, however.

    The Guardian now reports that outraged Papua New Guinea academics have blasted Biden’s tale as “unacceptable” and “very offensive.”

    Michael Kabuni, a political science lecturer at the University of Papua New Guinea, explained that cannibalism was historically practiced by some communities only in very specific contexts, such as after the death of a revered community member.

    Kabuni noted that the native people only ever engaged in cannibalism as a sign of respect and that locals “wouldn’t just eat any white men that fell from the sky.”

    “Taking it out of context, and implying that your [uncle] jumps out of the plane and somehow we think it’s a good meal is unacceptable,” Kabuni urged.

    Allan Bird, governor of Papua New Guinea’s province of East Sepik, said he found Biden’s story “hilarious” and was “lost for words.”

    *  *  *

    Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 14:55

  • House Passes $95 Billion Aid Package For Ukraine, Israel And Taiwan – But Not US Border
    House Passes $95 Billion Aid Package For Ukraine, Israel And Taiwan – But Not US Border

    The House on Saturday passed a set of foreign aid bills that would send $61 billion to Ukraine, $26 billion to Israel, and $8 billion to the Indo-Pacific region.

    In total, the foreign assistance package totals $95 billion – which only passed after Speaker Mike Johnson cut a deal with Democrats in order to force it through by a vote of 311 to 112.

    The Senate is expected to pass the package, which was negotiated in conjunction with the White House, marking a victory against conservative lawmakers who insisted on protecting the US border before sending money abroad to protect those of other countries.

    “We cannot be afraid of our shadows. We must be strong. We have to do what’s right,” House Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican, said.

    Democrats and some Republicans waved Ukrainian flags during the vote, a rare moment of bipartisanship in a bitterly and narrowly divided House.

    “Traditional House Republicans led by Speaker Mike Johnson have risen to the occasion,” House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said. “We have a responsibility to push back against authoritarianism.” –Bloomberg

    Earlier in the day, the House passed an $8 billion aid package aimed at countering Chinese aggression towards Taiwan, as well as a bill that would force Chinese-controlled ByteDance Ltd to divest from TikTok or face a US ban. The bill also allows for the confiscation of Russian dollar assets in order to help fund more assistance to Ukraine.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Breaking down the Ukraine aid – of the $61 billion, $13 billion will replenish US stockpiles of weapons, and $14 billion will go towards US defense systems for Ukraine. $7 billion will go toward US military operations in the region. We assume the remainder will go directly to Ukrainian oligarchs.

    The Israel bill, which passed by a vote of 366 to 58, includes $4 billion for missile defense.

    Notably absent was so much as a dime for the US border…

    “Nothing is done to secure our border or reduce our debt,” said Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), whose outrage was shared with Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Paul Gosar of Arizona, who say they’re ready to boot Johnson from his Speakership.

    “Ukraine is not even a member of NATO,” Greene continued.

    Who would have known!

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 14:18

  • NPR Scandal Should Kill Taxpayer-Funded Broadcasting
    NPR Scandal Should Kill Taxpayer-Funded Broadcasting

    Authored by Charles Lipson via RealClearPolitics,

    “I don’t want any yes-men around me,” said Sam Goldwyn, the Hollywood producer famed for his movies and malapropisms. “I want everybody to tell me the truth even if it costs them their job.” The brass at National Public Radio must have heard Sam, but they add a slight amendment. We want only “yes-men” (they/them) and will boot anyone who dares to dissent.

    Lest there be any doubt, NPR just proved it by suspending, without pay, the staffer who exposed the pervasive problems there. He dared to write publicly that that National Public Radio was uniformly ideological, deeply committed to its strident left-wing views, and determined to exclude any alternatives. For saying that out loud, they cut off Uri Berliner’s paycheck for five days. It’s their way of saying, “Thank you for your feedback.” Q.E.D.

    Berliner, disgusted by NPR’s response, resigned Wednesday with a fiery statement: “I cannot work in a newsroom where I am disparaged.” Who could?

    There are really two problems here, not one, and they go well beyond one journalist’s resignation. The first is political bias, which is a problem at all “elite” networks and newspapers, where “hard news” is heavily slanted. The second is that some of these outlets, notably NPR, PBS (the Public Broadcasting System) and their local affiliates, receive taxpayer funding.

    Let’s take political bias first. It was once a cardinal rule of journalism that partisan or ideological viewpoints should be confined to editorials and opinion columns. The goal was to keep editorial views out of hard-news reporting, as much as possible. To do it, the editorial staff constantly fought with the business team, who wanted coverage to favor their advertisers.

    Those days are long gone and so is even the ideal of unbiased coverage. We have returned to an earlier era when American newspapers were closely affiliated with political parties and local political machines and covered the news to favor them. Today’s newsrooms have revived that stance. They are as ideologically driven as a gender-studies class at Smith College. If you depart from that ideology, you are out, like Bari Weiss at the New York Times.

    Because newsrooms now have so few dissenting voices, reporters and editors live inside the bubble and hardly notice their surroundings. If they do, they are determined to preserve that insularity.

    The fragmentation of today’s media landscape encourages these strong, partisan stances. Newspapers, magazines, cable networks, and podcasts know the market is finely sliced. They have strong incentives to choose a narrow slice for themselves and appeal to it by confirming their audience’s bias, not challenging it. That’s as true for right-wing talk radio as it is for left-wing public radio.

    Just as elite attitudes have moved further left, so have elite publications and broadcasts. Since the Democratic Party has trod that same path, even as Republicans have become more nationalist and populist, the bias in elite newsrooms has naturally moved further left. That includes outlets like NPR and PBS. Their audience drives EVs, not Ford F-150s.

    What makes this bias a policy issue is that NPR, PBS, and their local outlets receive taxpayer money. They shouldn’t. It was justifiable for educational programming. It cannot be justified for news or entertainment.

    Public funding for news programming is fundamentally wrong in a democracy when there are so many other ways to receive news and information. The problem is compounded when taxpayer money pays for coverage is partisan and biased. That’s not an issue for MSNBC or the New York Times. They are private businesses. They can do whatever they damn well please. Not so for NPR, PBS, and their local affiliates. They do receive taxpayer money.

    When NPR faced criticism this week, it shot back with deceptive statistics, claiming less than 1% of its money is from the government. That’s three-card-monte accounting.

    To understand why, we need to look at how Washington disburses taxpayer money for public TV and radio, some $500 million in the next fiscal year. That money doesn’t go directly to NPR. (Hence, the 1% claim.) They get it indirectly. First, the federal outlay goes to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, a private entity, as mandated in a 1967 law. The CPB sends nearly all that money to local public radio and TV stations as “community grants.” The stations then use part of that money to buy syndicated programs like NPR’s “Morning Edition” and “All Things Considered.”

    NPR last financial statement showed that about one-third of its revenue came from local stations’ purchasing NPR programs. A significant chunk of the money to make those purchases came from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. To hide that source of taxpayer funding for NPR was its three-card-monte trick.

    The larger problem here is not the deception or partisan bias, bad as they are. It’s not the scale of public funding, either. The fundamental problem is that taxpayers should not be underwriting any domestic news organizations, for any amount. Reporting should be completely independent of city, state, and federal government so journalists can report political issues without fear or favor.

    Government-funded broadcasting to foreign audiences is different. American taxpayers have legitimate reasons to fund the Voice of America and other channels, primarily to get honest news past the dictators’ censors. But the VOA is prohibited, by law, from broadcasting within the United States or creating programs for U.S. audiences. That’s entirely proper. The same logic should apply to news and news-interview programs from NPR and PBS and their local affiliates.

    What about “educational TV”? There were good reasons for a publicly funded network devoted to that mission in the 1950s and 1960s. There were only three major networks and, of course, a genuine need for educational content. That non-political service lasted from 1954 until 1970. It was succeeded by the Public Broadcasting Service, which quickly dropped any mention of “educational.” Member stations of the old National Educational Television were folded into PBS. Their schedules now include a mix of entertainment, educational programs, news, and news interviews.

    National Public Radio, by contrast, has never included much educational content. For years, it has been simply a left-wing alternative to right-wing talk radio. That would be fine only if all the funding were private. It’s not.

    The evidence shows that the best educational TV, such as “Sesame Street,” does help children learn. So there are good reasons to continue underwriting such programs. Ideally, they should be provided free to anyone who wishes to broadcast them, post them on the web, or use them in class.

    But there is no reason for federal, state, or city governments to own any broadcast channel, other than to broadcast public meetings and hearings. For everything else, including educational programs, there are countless channels on cable TV and YouTube.

    A good example of what the government can properly fund are the wonderful videos about scientific discoveries, presented in accessible language by Fermilab’s Dr. Don Lincoln. The lab is funded by the government, and Dr. Lincoln conveys its work to the public by posting brief lectures on the web. He is doing what “educational TV” did in the 1950s. In the 2020s, programs like Dr. Lincoln’s can be posted online for the public to use, free. We don’t need public TV or radio to do it, and we don’t need their publicly funded podcasts.

    If private institutions want to publish their own educational videos, either free or for sale, the world is open to them. Let “the Great Courses” do that by selling them online. Let “Prager University” do it. Let MIT broadcast its science courses. Let a million podcasts bloom. Privately.

    If the federal government wishes to fund genuinely educational content, fine. It’s also fine to provide public services like weather information, which taxpayers already fund. But if the federal government, cities, or states wish to fund news and news interview programs, that’s not fine. Let private entities do it. Exclusively.

    What should be done with existing public broadcasting frequencies on radio and television? Put them up for auction and put the money into the public treasury. If civic groups or philanthropies buy them, fine. If commercial enterprises buy them, that’s fine, too. The Department of Education can still fund education programs and make the content available to anyone who wishes to use it or broadcast on their channels. $500 million should buy a lot of new content each year.

    What the government should not fund, produce, or broadcast are news or news-interview programs. The issue is not just political bias. The issue is that the heavy hand of government should not control any broadcast news within the U.S. Let the president, Cabinet secretaries, senators, and representatives hold press conferences. Let the White House, Pentagon, or State Department hold briefings. That’s more than enough to get their message out.

    They don’t need to fund broadcast networks. That would be true even if their journalists and presentations were fair-minded. They aren’t, and that’s one more reason to end this public funding. But it is not the main reason. The main reason is that it is simply wrong for the government, with its deep pockets and coercive power, to control any broadcast network. Not in a free country.

    Charles Lipson is the Peter B. Ritzma Professor of Political Science Emeritus at the University of Chicago, where he founded the Program on International Politics, Economics, and Security. He can be reached at charles.lipson@gmail.com.

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 14:00

  • Israeli Security Chief Slams 'Lame' Attack On Iran, Deepening Division Among War Leaders
    Israeli Security Chief Slams ‘Lame’ Attack On Iran, Deepening Division Among War Leaders

    Days ago, The Wall Street Journal featured a headline that underscored Israel’s war leaders don’t trust one another. This comes as they are dealing simultaneously with the operation in Gaza, repelling Hezbollah daily drone and missile attacks in the north, and of course the new tit-for-tat crisis with Iran.

    “Long-simmering grudges and arguments over how best to fight Hamas have soured relations between Israel’s wartime decision makers—Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and the former head of the Israeli military, Benny Gantz,” the publication wrote. “The three men are at odds over the biggest decisions they need to make: how to launch a decisive military push, free Israel’s hostages and govern the postwar strip.”

    Via EPA

    Israel’s former national security adviser Giora Eiland said “The lack of trust between these three people is so clear and so significant.” But the deep mistrust goes beyond the three wartime leaders and deeper into the governing coalition and national security cabinet as well.

    The infighting is now on display even more in the wake of Israel’s retaliatory attack on Iran which took place in the early morning Friday hours. While there’s consensus that Israel aimed for a ‘limited’ attack, CNN and others have analyzed satellite images near Isfahan which ultimately show “no extensive damage on an Iranian airbase believed to be the main target.”

    Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir has thrown fresh fuel to the fire, mocking Netanyahu’s decision-making by calling it “lame”. Ben Gvir had previously wanted Israel to “go berserk” in retaliation.

    His words have once again resulted in intense controversy and infighting:

    Ben Gvir, who leads the ultranationalist Jewish Power party, made a one-word post on X following the Israeli attack. Written in Hebrew, the Telegraph explained that the post used a “slang word that literally translates as ‘scarecrow’ but also means ‘lame.’” Reuters translated the word to “feeble.”

    The post highlighted a public rift within the government in Tel Aviv. Ben Gvir is considered on the extreme end of Israel’s political spectrum and is popular among the right-wing settler movement. He lives in a West Bank settlement and has called for the resettlement of Gaza by Israelis.

    Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid subsequently blasted Ben Gvir over the comment, saying: “Never before has a minister in the security cabinet done such heavy damage to the country’s security, its image and its international status.”

    “In an unforgivable one-word tweet, Ben Gvir managed to mock and shame Israel from Tehran to Washington. Any other prime minister would have thrown him out of the cabinet this morning,” he added.

    Meanwhile, PM Netanyahu continues to face mounting calls for his removal, especially from hostage victims’ families who have been leading large protests. They are outraged that he has not prioritized getting the hostages back.

    WSJ wrote further that “Gantz, the general who led Israel’s last major war against Hamas a decade ago, has previously expressed a desire to oust Netanyahu as prime minister.” The defense chief had “called earlier this month for early elections in September after tens of thousands of people demonstrated against the prime minister’s handling of the war—a sign that Gantz’s base has grown frustrated with his role in a Netanyahu-led government.”

    Tyler Durden
    Sat, 04/20/2024 – 13:25

Digest powered by RSS Digest

Apr 20

Today’s News 20th April 2024

  • US Fentanyl Crisis Is A 'CCP-Run Operation', Says Peter Schweizer
    US Fentanyl Crisis Is A ‘CCP-Run Operation’, Says Peter Schweizer

    Authored by Terri Wu and Jan Jekielek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Three months after the U.S. Department of the Treasury sanctioned a Chinese mafia leader for fentanyl trafficking, he received an award in Beijing.

    Peter Schweizer in March 2022. (NTD)

    In March 2021, the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) Overseas United Working Committee recognized Wan Kuok Koi, also known as “Broken Tooth,” as a “patriotic businessman” and the “chief representative” of all international Hongmen associations. Hongmen is synonymous with triads, or Chinese transnational organized crime syndicates, to many Chinese.

    The awarding entity is a CCP United Front organization and a platform under the China Association for Science and Technology. It also pushes China’s flagship infrastructure program, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), worldwide. According to the Treasury Department notice, Mr. Wan has established a security company protecting BRI investments in Southeast Asia.

    In a recent interview with EpochTV’s American Thought Leaders (ATL), investigative writer Peter Schweizer cited Mr. Wan’s case as an example of the CCP’s take on the United States’ fentanyl crisis.

    “The notion that ‘oh, China’s trying very hard, but they can’t fix this’ is an absolute joke in my mind,” he said.

    In addition, the author of a new book titled “Blood Money: Why the Powerful Turn a Blind Eye While China Kills Americans” told ATL that the U.S. fentanyl crisis is a “CCP-run operation.”

    “The drug cartels are certainly involved, but they’re the junior partner,” Mr. Schweizer said, adding that the CCP is present at “every link of the chain.”

    The Chinese production of fentanyl precursors is widely known. However, Mr. Schweizer’s research also shows that China provides pill-pressing machines at cost for fentanyl-laced fake pill production, distributes the synthetic opioid in the United States, facilitates the Mexican drug cartels’ financial transactions, and provides secure communication systems to cartels so they can bypass detection by U.S. law enforcement.

    Currently, fentanyl overdose is the leading cause of death for Americans ages 18 to 45. The deadly drug was responsible for about 75,000 deaths, or 200 per day, in 2022. Compared with 3,105 deaths in 2013, the death toll increased 23-fold.

    Facing this crisis, which has been growing exponentially, the U.S. government has yet to come up with an effective solution. In Mr. Schweizer’s view, U.S. leaders’ inaction is a significant factor.

    He documented in his book how senior U.S. leaders, albeit initially voicing concerns about China’s involvement in fentanyl trafficking, have remained largely silent on the issue.

    One of those leaders is President Joe Biden.

    At a Senate hearing in 1992, the then-chair of the Judiciary Committee warned that “China is poised to become the lynchpin of the heroin trade.”

    Then-Sen. Biden also criticized the then-Bush administration’s lack of action on confronting China, saying that “the truth is that the cooperation between the United States and China in fighting drugs is limited, at best, and as is its course, the administration is turning a blind eye to China’s renegade behavior.”

    Yet, the Biden administration has been taking a similar approach: touting its counternarcotics cooperation with China, which relies on voluntary domestic control measures. CCP leader Xi Jinping didn’t keep similar past promises that he made to former Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump.

    Ambassador Robert Lighthizer (L); Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute (C); and Michael Pillsbury, senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation (R); at The Heritage Foundation’s Leadership Summit in National Harbor, Md., on April 20, 2023. (Terri Wu/The Epoch Times)

    Different than heroin or cocaine, fentanyl takes the lives of people who mostly take the drug unknowingly. A New York University study in 2023 showed that a majority of the people who took fentanyl didn’t intend to do so.

    Therefore, Mr. Schweizer thinks calling the fentanyl crisis a drug problem is missing the mark.

    To him, it’s “extremely convenient” for the Biden administration to treat fentanyl as a “drug addiction problem, rather than what it is—poisoning,” he said.

    “It absolves you of trying to confront the CCP on this because you’re essentially saying this is a human nature problem in the United States.”

    In Mr. Schweizer’s view, the first family’s financial ties to China prohibited them from confronting the communists to reign in the Chinese fentanyl actors—a move that could be effective “overnight” if CCP leader Xi Jinping wanted it to be, Mr. Schweizer said.

    The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment by press time.

    Mr. Schweizer’s findings don’t stop at the fentanyl crisis, which he sees as a part of the CCP’s broader approach of “disintegration warfare,” aimed at bringing down the United States by attacking its “soft underbelly” regarding Americans’ politics, economics, and psychology.

    In the ATL interview, he also talked about the CCP’s links to activities that sow social discord by inflaming racial and gender divisions in U.S. society and “dumbing down the West” with TikTok.

    The interview premieres on April 18.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 23:20

  • Major War Just Narrowly Averted & Biden Already Mulls $1BN+ In New Arms For Israel
    Major War Just Narrowly Averted & Biden Already Mulls $1BN+ In New Arms For Israel

    President Biden is mulling his first new major arms sales to Israel since the unprecedented Iranian missile and drone attack which targeted the country last Saturday.

    Though the world just narrowly avoided witnessing a major regional war explode with Thursday night’s Israeli ‘limited’ retaliation on the Islamic Republic, the White House apparently thinks the ‘answer’ is to pump Israel with yet more and more weapons and ammo, to the tune of $1+ billion.

    AFP via Getty Images

    “The Biden administration is considering more than $1 billion in new weapons deals for Israel including tank ammunition, military vehicles and mortar rounds, U.S. officials said, at a time of heightened scrutiny of the use of American-made weapons in the war in Gaza,” Wall Street Journal reports Friday.

    “The proposed weapons transfers—which would be in addition to those in a military aid deal currently before the Congress—would be among the largest to Israel since it invaded Gaza in response to Hamas’s attack that killed 1,200 people, mostly civilians, on Oct. 7,” the report continues.

    This also comes while the administration has been talking out of both sides of its mouth – on the one hand condemning the immense civilian death toll in Gaza, and on the other vowing to remain firm in its “ironclad commitment” to Israel’s defense.

    The US administration has time and again said it has been urging Israel against escalating with Iran. The White House has also said it did not “greenlight” Israel’s Thursday overnight attack, which reportedly targeted radar sites in Isfahan, which is home to a key Iranian nuclear facility.

    As for the Gaza operation, Biden has still sought to press Israel to hold off on a Rafah ground offensive. And yet, the IDF is more ensconced in the Gaza Strip than ever. There are new reports of an Israeli military base being established in the heart of Gaza.

    “Satellite images and photographs shared on social media show extensive development and construction at two outposts the Israel Defense Forces is building on the strategic road that divides the Gaza Strip into two,” reports Haaretz.

    “The army calls the construction of these outposts in what it calls the ‘Netzarim Corridor’ as a long-term achievement. The whole corridor is referred to as something that is here to stay,” the report indicates.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 23:00

  • NIH Refuses To Release Details Of COVID-19 Vaccine Royalty Agreement
    NIH Refuses To Release Details Of COVID-19 Vaccine Royalty Agreement

    Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) is refusing to release additional information about an agreement it reached over a COVID-19 vaccine that has earned it at least $400 million.

    Syringes of Moderna COVID-19 vaccines at a vaccination site in Los Angeles, on Feb. 16, 2021. (Apu Gomes/AFP via Getty Images)

    The NIH declined to provide any materials in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from The Epoch Times.

    “The NIH withholds the entirety of the records as they are protected from release,” Gorka Garcia-Malene, an NIH officer, told The Epoch Times in a letter.

    She cited an exemption outlined in the act that allows government agencies to partially or fully withhold information.

    “In this case, exemption 3 incorporates 35 U.S.C. 209 (f), which reads in relevant part, ‘No Federal agency shall grant any license under a patent or patent application on a federally owned invention unless the person requesting the license has supplied the agency with a plan for development or marketing of the invention, except that any such plan shall be treated by the Federal agency as commercial and financial information obtained from a person and privileged and confidential and not subject to disclosure under section 552 of title 5,’” Ms. Garcia-Malene wrote.

    “Exemption 4 protects from disclosure trade secrets and commercial or financial information that is privileged and confidential,” she added.

    In February 2023, Moderna announced that it had paid $400 million to the NIH and would make additional payments in the future as part of a licensing agreement for spike proteins used in the company’s COVID-19 vaccine. The Epoch Times obtained a copy of the contract, which confirmed the payment but redacted details of the future payments.

    The Epoch Times then lodged a new request, seeking more details about the future payments, which are said to be based on how many COVID-19 vaccines are sold.

    Ms. Garcia-Malene was responding to the new request.

    James Love, director of the nonprofit Knowledge Ecology International, said the information should be made public.

    “The NIH put out several press statements about the royalty dispute with Moderna, and they should not now claim it is some secret confidential information. And when hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake, the public interest in transparency is large too,” Mr. Love told The Epoch Times in an email.

    “There are a lot of NIH officials who resent transparency,” he added.

    Inquiries to NIH spokespersons received away messages. Another request for comment, sent to one of the addresses provided in the away messages, was not returned.

    The Epoch Times plans to appeal the NIH’s decision.

    The NIH is one of several government agencies that receive royalty payments. Officials there have fought against attempts to acquire information on these payments, but in 2023, they disclosed some $325 million in royalties received between 2009 and 2020 after being sued.

    Some experts say the payments, made to the agency and many of its top scientists, should be stopped.

    “Neither the government nor any government employee should have any financial interest in a product for which the government has any involvement in licensing or promoting,“ Aaron Siri, managing partner of Siri & Glimstad LLP, told The Epoch Times in an email. ”It creates a dangerous conflict of interest.”

    Move on BioNTech

    The NIH is trying to obtain more money from COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers, according to recent filings.

    BioNTech, Pfizer’s partner, said in the forms that the NIH served it with a notice of default because the NIH’s position is that BioNTech owes it money from COVID-19 vaccine sales.

    BioNTech said it does not think it owes the NIH money but that “the ultimate outcome of these matters is uncertain and we cannot guarantee that our interpretation of these license agreements will prevail, or that we will not ultimately need to pay some or all of the royalty and other related amounts in dispute.”

    The NIH did not return inquiries on the BioNTech filings.

    The NIH has said previously it licensed its spike protein technology to BioNTech for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

    The Epoch Times has submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for the notice of default and related documents. Another request seeks information on whether the NIH has threatened or served Pfizer with a similar notice.

    However much money the U.S. government receives in royalties will be much less than it has paid for the vaccines. The government has purchased hundreds of millions of shots, spending north of $30 billion.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 22:40

  • Housing Costs Are Crushing The American Middle Class, But How Can We Fix The Problem?
    Housing Costs Are Crushing The American Middle Class, But How Can We Fix The Problem?

    In a new poll conducted by the Financial Times and Michigan’s Ross School of Business, data shows there is a rare bipartisan agreement among Republicans and Democrats – Both sides believe that there are no housing advantages for the their political opponents and 70% of leftists, independents and conservatives alike rate affordability as one of their top three concerns.  In other words, Americans disagree on almost everything else, but they all recognize that most of them are in deep trouble when it comes to keeping a roof over their heads.

    It’s not just the math, it’s the daily drain on people’s pocketbooks that makes the problem so undeniable.

    While the Biden Administration has spent the better part of the past year claiming that “inflation is going down” the reality has been far more bleak.  Surveys also show that 62% of homeowners has struggled at least periodically in the past year to make their mortgage payments and half of all renters also reported difficulty keeping up with monthly payments.  Over 22% skipped meals, 20% worked extra hours and 20% sold belongings to pay their housing costs on time.  

    Disturbingly, 60% of poll respondents who make $100,000 or more per year also ranked housing costs at the top of their list of worries going into 2024.  Meaning, the crisis is spreading well beyond low income families and is dragging down the middle class. 

    Low income, fixed income and middle-income renters are all facing challenges.  The market has become so disjointed that middle-income earners are finding it nearly impossible in most states to find homes in their price range, either to buy or to rent.

    The average middle class income is $58,000 to $98,000 annually.  The average yearly cost of a family home rental is $25,000 ($2100 a month and nearly half of a single earner’s income on the low end of the middle class average).  This greatly supersedes the common 30% rent rule which suggests that housing should not eat more than 30% of a renter’s salary.  In 2019 the average monthly rent for a home was $1400; that’s a 50% increase in the span of only four years.   

    In order to safely afford the monthly median home rental price of $2100, a tenant must make over $6000 after taxes per month.  This cuts more than 50% of the population out of the market.  It’s not just the cost of housing, though, there’s also a major crisis in availability.    

    Across the US  there is a shortage of at least 7.2 million homes affordable and available to renters with extremely low incomes. Extremely low-income renters face a shortage in every state and major metropolitan area.  Middle-income housing is vanishing; known as the “missing middle”, this portion of the market has been bought out and inflated to the point that elasticity in prices has been crushed right along with home buyers and renters.  That is to say, if you make less than six figures then you are quietly and quickly being strangled out of housing access.  

    But how do we solve this ongoing problem?  Government rent controls won’t do anything other than create a larger shortage by scaring property owners out of the rental market.  The Federal Reserve’s (supposed) attempts to use higher interest rates to deflate the bubble without triggering consequences to the greater economy have utterly failed.  The conundrum is that the biggest property buyers in the country are supported by the central bank and thus they remain unaffected by higher rates.  

    These are massive corporate buyers like Blackstone and Black Rock which invest in companies that buy US houses.  Black Rock by extension owns a stake in nearly 7% of the nation’s total rental properties.  In 2023 corporate investors accounted for 27% of all family home purchases.  Even in the case of house flipping, corporate purchases on a large scale tend to drive up prices for everyone else.

    Then there’s the issue of illegal immigration which is adding millions of “asylum seekers” every year to the population; all of those people are looking for housing.  With government programs and subsidies helping them they eventually find that housing, allowing them to eat up another piece of the pie.  This leaves legal citizens in the lurch and struggling with low availability.  

    Finally, there’s general inflation.  Building costs for materials and labor have skyrocketed, meaning building new houses might help over many years to stabilize the market but it does not solve the immediate supply crisis and the inflation associated with it.  Americans don’t need more expensive houses, they need more affordable houses.  

    To alleviate the crippled market conditions today would most likely require state imposed moratoriums on corporate home purchases, a moratorium on foreign purchases, not to mention the direct removal of illegal migrants.  Taking action on all three would free up supply and at least give US citizens room to breath by cutting back on their top most expensive necessity.  At bottom things cannot continue the way they have been otherwise the system can and will break under the pressure, leading to even worse economic outcomes.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 22:20

  • Breakfast Cereals Scrutinized For Pesticide That May Harm Reproduction
    Breakfast Cereals Scrutinized For Pesticide That May Harm Reproduction

    Authored by Sina McCullough via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

    Imagine starting your day with a bowl of cereal that could be silently affecting your family’s health. Recent studies show that chlormequat, a pesticide linked to reproductive issues, has been found in popular breakfast cereals like Quaker Oats and Cheerios. As this substance infiltrates the American food supply, the potential risks to our health and future generations loom larger, raising urgent questions about the safety of our everyday food choices.

    In a study published in the Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology on Feb. 15, 2024, researchers revealed alarming findings regarding the prevalence of chlormequat.

    Chlormequat was detected in the urine of 4 out of 5 people or 80 percent of Americans tested. Additionally, 92 percent of oat-based foods tested contained chlormequat, including Quaker Oats and Cheerios.

    This study—the first to report urinary chlormequat measurements in adults living in the United States—highlights the possible widespread presence of chlormequat and the necessity for transparency and further investigation into potential health implications for consumers.

    (Anna Hoychuk/Shutterstock)

     What Is Chlormequat?

    Chlormequat, widely known in the salt form as chlormequat chloride, is an agricultural chemical first registered in the United States in 1962 as a plant growth regulator. Plant growth regulators are chemical substances employed to control and regulate plant growth, flowering, and fruit yield, according to a 2006 study in the International Journal of Andrology.

    Chlormequat application in grain crops results in reduced stem height, thereby minimizing the occurrence of lodging (bending over), which can reduce the efficiency of the harvesting process.

    Chlormequat is the world’s most common plant growth regulator according to a 2020 study published in Toxicology. “Chlormequat is often the most detected pesticide residue in grains and cereals, as documented by monitoring surveys spanning several years,” according to the 2024 study. It is approved for use in Europe and parts of North America.

    In the United States, chlormequat is permitted exclusively for use on ornamental plants and is prohibited for application on food crops grown within the country. Therefore, the presence of chlormequat in Cheerios and other oat-based foods sold in the United States raises questions regarding its introduction into the food supply chain.

    How Did Chlormequat Enter the US Food Supply?

    In April 2018 the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allowed chlormequat into the food supply by establishing acceptable food tolerance levels for chlormequat chloride in imported oats, wheat, barley, and select animal products. This action allowed for the importation and sale of those agricultural products even if treated with chlormequat.

    Consequently, U.S. consumers may unknowingly be ingesting tainted imported foods—potentially exposing themselves to chlormequat or its residues.

    In 2020, the allowable chlormequat levels were increased for oats. In April of 2023, the EPA proposed allowing the first-ever use of chlormequat on barley, oat, wheat, and triticale grown in the United States. If passed, exposure levels may increase, raising concerns about its implications on health and food safety.

    Heath Concerns Surrounding Chlormequat

    Chlormequat, while not as notorious as other pesticides, has long been linked to reproductive and developmental concerns in animal research.

    In the 1980s, Danish pig farmers observed reproductive declines in pigs consuming chlormequat-treated grains, according to a 2006 article in the International Journal of Andrology.

    The observation led to a controlled laboratory study, which confirmed impaired reproduction. Specifically, sows fed chlormequat-treated grain experienced impaired reproduction, primarily disruptions in oestrus cycling, and difficulty mating, as cited in the 2006 article.

    These findings prompted the Danish pig industry to recommend restricting the use of crops treated with chlormequat and other growth regulators (up to a maximum of 30 percent of diet energy) due to potential reproductive issues.

    Similar findings were observed in 1999 when male mice exposed to chlormequat through food or drinking water demonstrated “significantly diminished fertilization and cleavage rate” of sperm, indicating a decrease in sperm function, according to a study in Reproductive Toxicology.

    Of significance, the estimated intake of chlormequat in the abovementioned pig (0.0023 milligrams (mg)/kilograms (kg) body weight (bw) per day) and mouse (0.024 mg/kg bw/day) experiments fell below the reference dose published by the EPA (0.05 mg/kg bw per day) and the acceptable daily intake published by the European Food Safety Authority (0.04 mg/kg bw/day), according to the 2024 study. These findings raise concerns regarding the current established limits set by regulatory authorities.

    Recent studies further demonstrate chlormequat’s reproductive and developmental toxicity, including:

    • Delayed onset of puberty: According to a 2020 study in Toxicology Letters, male rats exposed to chlormequat from postnatal day 23 to 60 demonstrated reduced prostate weight and delayed onset of puberty.
    • Reduced sperm motility: Male rats exposed to chlormequat in utero demonstrated a delayed onset of puberty as well as decreased sperm motility, according to a 2021 study in Toxicology Letters.
    • Decreased testosterone: Male adult rats exposed to chlormequat by oral gavage (delivering substances directly to the stomach via a bulb-tipped needle) demonstrated lower testicular weight, decreased sperm motility, and decreased testicular testosterone, according to a 2018 study in Toxicology Letters.

    Moreover, developmental toxicity studies suggest that chlormequat exposure during pregnancy can disrupt fetal growth and metabolism postnatally, indicating a lasting impact on offspring development in rats. For instance, a 2020 study published in Toxicology reported maternal exposure to chlormequat in rats led to adverse effects on postnatal health, including hypoglycemia, hyperlipidemia, and hyperproteinemia seven days after birth compared with controls.

    A 2007 study in Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry reported detectable levels of chlormequat in blood, as well as its transfer into milk, in pigs exposed to chlormequat. While these markers have not been thoroughly investigated in humans, they raise concerns regarding potential implications for fetal exposure during pregnancy and infants’ exposure through breastfeeding.

    Some studies have failed to detect significant impacts of chlormequat on reproduction in female mice or male pigs, or the fertilization capacity in male mice exposed to chlormequat during development and postnatally. The equivocal findings in the toxicological literature concerning chlormequat could stem from variations in tested doses, outcome measures, and/or funding sources. According to a 2006 study in the International Journal of Andrology, “Reports from the industry do not show any effects at these low levels.”

    Aim of New Ground-Breaking Study

    Considering the health concerns underscored in the scientific literature, the goal of the 2024 study was to assess the impact of the EPA’s decision to permit chlormequat in the United States food supply.

    Study Design

    The 2024 study assessed chlormequat levels in the urine of individuals from three distinct geographic regions in the United States spanning from 2017 to 2023. Specifically, 21 urine samples were gathered in South Carolina in 2017, 25 samples were collected in Missouri from 2017 to 2022, and 50 samples were obtained in Florida in 2023.

    The study also examined chlormequat levels in oat and wheat-based products acquired in the United States during 2022 and 2023. Specifically, 25 conventional oat-based food items were analyzed during this period, along with eight organic oat-based products and nine conventional wheat-based food products.

    Study Results

    Urine Analysis

    Chlormequat was detected in 80 percent (77 out of 96) of urine samples.

    The authors noted a rising trend in chlormequat exposure over time, with detection frequencies notably elevated in 2023 samples compared to those from 2017 and the years 2018 to 2022. Specifically, in 2017, 69 percent of samples tested positive, while from 2018 to 2022, 74 percent were positive. In stark contrast, 90 percent of samples in 2023 were positive, representing a significant increase compared to all previous years examined.

    According to the researchers, “These data indicate likely continuous exposure given the short half-life of chlormequat [2–3 hours].”

    To assess whether the rising concentrations detected in the urine samples reflected potential dietary exposure to chlormequat, the researchers analyzed chlormequat levels in oat and wheat-based food products purchased in the United States.

    Food Exposure Analysis

    The results of the food analysis were equally concerning: a high percentage of conventional oat-based products tested positive for chlormequat, with popular brands like Quaker Oats and Cheerios among those affected.

    Specifically, 92 percent (23 out of 25) of conventional oat-based products tested positive for the presence of chlormequat, “indicating a high prevalence of chlormequat in oats,” according to the study. This highlights the potential risk posed to consumers, particularly children, who may consume these products regularly.

    Chlormequat was detected in 12.5 percent (one out of eight) of organic oat-based products tested. Additionally, 22 percent (two out of nine) of conventional wheat-based products tested positive for chlormequat.

    Collectively, the urinary and food exposure data “may reflect the likely recent introduction of chlormequat into the U.S. food supply due to EPA regulatory action changes involving chlormequat, including establishing a limit on chlormequat in food in 2018 and raising those limits for oats in 2020,” according to the study.

    Conclusion

    This groundbreaking study sheds light on the possible widespread prevalence of chlormequat in the United States food supply, as documented in both urinary and food exposure analyses. The findings reveal a concerning trend of increasing chlormequat exposure over time, with detection frequencies spiking notably in recent years.

    Chlormequat’s documented toxicological properties, particularly its association with reproductive and developmental issues, raise significant concerns about its long-term effects on human health. Moreover, there is currently no monitoring of chlormequat in food products in the United States, leaving consumers vulnerable to potential risks.

    With the EPA’s proposed expansion of chlormequat usage on domestically grown crops, the study’s findings serve as a crucial call to action for greater transparency in pesticide usage and monitoring, as well as consumer awareness so we can work toward a food supply that safeguards the well-being of the individual.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 22:00

  • "We Promise This Is Not A Person In A Bodysuit" 
    “We Promise This Is Not A Person In A Bodysuit” 

    Boston Dynamics unveiled Wednesday a new humanoid robot that creepily moves like no other robot has moved before. 

    The new fully electric Atlas robot represents a path to commercialization and a new generation of robots that will leave folks asking if this is the beginning of the ‘Skynet’ (Terminator) robot. 

    “This week we announced the retirement of our hydraulic Atlas and unveiled what comes next—a fully electric Atlas robot designed for real-world applications,” Boston Dynamics wrote in a press release. 

    Boston Dynamics posted a new video on X of the Atlas robot, jokingly saying, “We promise this is not a person in a bodysuit.” 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Musk tweeted an image from the horror movie “The Ring,” referring to the iconic scene in which the character Samara emerges from the television in a scary crab-like fashion, at Boston Dynamics. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Some X users compared Atlas to the “Terminator” robot. 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Others said humanity is “doomed.” 

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Maybe the White House needs one of these robots…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Demand for humanoids in factories will likely erupt by the mid-2030s. After that, the commercialization of these robots should drive down prices. This could unlock the potential for these robots infused with AI to work in the service industry or be adopted by households. This is all terrible news for low-skilled, low-wage workers (read: “AI Will Lead To 300 Million Layoffs In The US And Europe”). Before all of this, these robots will be adopted by militaries. 

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 21:40

  • Speaker Johnson's Ignominious Betrayal
    Speaker Johnson’s Ignominious Betrayal

    Authored by David Stockman via David Stockman’s Contra Corner,

    Speaker Johnson’s ignominious betrayal of fiscal sanity might well be the death knell for the GOP. He is apparently risking his speakership on behalf of $95 billion of foreign aid boondoggles that Uncle Sam cannot remotely afford, and which actually provide zero benefit to the homeland security of America. And we do mean zero, as in nothing, nichts, nada, nyet and nugatory, as we amplify below.

    What Johnson’s impending Waterloo means, therefore, is not merely the prospect of another wild and wooly succession battle, but actually that there is no point at all in the preservation of a Republican majority and GOP House Speaker. After all, the Washington GOP has become so infected with neocon warmongers and careerist pols who spend a lifetime basking in the imperial projects and pretensions of the world’s War Capital that apparently the best the House GOP caucus could do when it ejected the previous careerist deep stater from the Speaker’s chair was to tap the dim-witted nincompoop who currently occupies it.

    The Republican party is thus truly beyond redemption. As JFK once said about the CIA, its needs to be splintered into a thousand pieces and swept into the dustbin of history.

    Indeed, when you look at the calamitous fiscal trajectory embedded in the CBO’s latest 30-year fiscal outlook, you truly have to wonder about what miniature minds like Congressman Johnson’s are actually thinking. That is to say, the latest CBO report published in March presumes that there will never be another recession and no inflation flare-up, interest rate spike, global energy dislocation, prolonged Forever War or any other imaginable crisis ever again—just smooth economic sailing for the next 30 years.

    And yet, and then. Even by the math of this Rosy Scenario on steroids the public debt will reach $140 trillion at minimum by 2054. In turn, that would cause interest payments on the public debt with rates no higher than those which prevailed between 1986 and 1997 to reach $10 trillion per year.

    You simply don’t need paragraphs, pages and whole monographs worth of analysis and amplification to understand where that is going. The nation’s fisc is now on the cusp of descending into the maws of a doomsday machine. So how in the world do these elements of Johnson’s offering make even the remotest sense?

    Speaker Johnson’s Foreign Aid Boondoggle:

    • Indo-Pacific aid: $8.1 billion.
    • Israel: $26.4 billion.
    • Ukraine: $60.8 billion.
    • Total: $95.3 billion.

    Apparently, it’s because Johnson and a good share of the Washington GOP have succumbed wholesale to neocon paranoia, stupidity, lies and hollow excuses for warmongering. For crying out loud, Putin has no interest in molesting the Poles, to say nothing of storming the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin. He is certainly no Ghandi, but well more than smart enough to recognize that with Russia’s GDP of $2.2 trillion and war budget of $80 billion there would be no point in going to war with NATO’s $45 trillion of GDP and combined war budgets in excess of $1.2 trillion.

    Likewise, China’s $50 trillion debt-ridden Ponzi would collapse in months if its $3.5 trillion flow of export earnings were disrupted after attempting to land its single modern aircraft carrier on the California coast. And Iran has no nukes, no intercontinental range missiles and a GDP equal to 130 hours of US annual output.

    So, some Axis of evil!

    Yet that’s exactly what the Speaker said this morning after going to too many Deep State briefings and apparently having his own johnson yanked once too often. The Swamp creatures surely see the lad’s naivete and blithering ignorance as a gift that doesn’t stop giving. That is to say, a “mark” who knows nothing at all about the world from sources not stamped, “Top Secret (lies)”.

    Speaker Mike Johnson: “We’re going to stand for freedom and make sure that Putin doesn’t march through Europe… we’re the greatest Nation on the planet, and we have to act like it”,

    This is a critical time right now, a critical time on the world stage. I can make a selfish decision and do something that’s different but I’m doing here what I believe to be the right thing. “I think providing lethal aid to Ukraine right now is critically important. I really do. I really do believe the intel and the briefings that we’ve gotten.

    I believe Xi, Vladimir Putin and Iran really are an axis of evil. I think they’re in coordination on it. “So I think that Vladimir Putin would continue to march through Europe if he were allowed. I think he might go to the Balkans next. I think he might have a showdown with Poland or one of our NATO allies.

    To put it bluntly, I would rather send bullets to Ukraine than American boys. My son is going to begin in the Naval Academy this fall. This is a live-fire exercise for me as it is so many American families. This is not a game, this is not a joke.

    Needless to say, our dufus Speaker doesn’t know the “Baltics” from the “Balkans” where Serbia and other Russian friendlies are definitely not quaking in their boots about Putin.

    In point of fact, however, it is not hard to see that the civil war and territorial dispute between Kiev and Moscow over the Donbas and rim of the Black Sea from Mariupol to Odessa is a one-off of Russian and regional history and Washington’s mindless push of NATO eastward to Russia’s very doorstep.

    The light-yellow area of this 1897 map gave an unmistakable message: To wit, in the late Russian Empire there was no doubt as to the paternity of the Donbas and the lands adjacent to the Azov Sea and the Black Sea. Already then, they were part of the 125 years-old New Russia, which had been assembled by purchase and conquest during the reign of Catherine the Great.

    Indeed, it was only in 1922 that the yellow area—essentially demarcating the four provinces of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, which recently voted to rejoin Russia—was appended to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic by the great humanitarian and map-maker, V. Lenin.

    And yet Speaker Johnson now wants to crash the Republican Party on enforcing a map drawn by one of history’s bloodiest monsters. It’s come down to that.

    That is to say, the war in Ukraine would stop tomorrow without another dime of aid from the US taxpayers if Washington agreed to partition the wholly artificial polity assembled by Lenin, Stalin (parts of Poland) and Khruschev (Crimea). In every presidential election in “Ukraine” since 1991 the electorate has essentially voted for separation via 80/20 pluralities in Novorossiya and Crimea for the pro-Russian candidate and 80/20 pluralities in the center and west for the Ukrainian nationalist.

    That is, America’s national security would be undermined not one bit by a new map showing two countries and no war: That is, Novorossiya (New Russia) in the east and south, on the one hand, and the parts and pieces of Poland, Galicia-Austria and the Cossack Hetmanates in the center and west, on the other. Agree to keep NATO out of this rump state of Ukraine and it’s all over except the shouting.

    Nevertheless, the insanity of the Russophobia which keeps knuckleheads like Johnson from having an even rudimentary grasp of the matter reveals an even larger issue.

    Namely, it explains why Washington’s hegemonic foreign policy is a dysfunctional disaster, which unceasingly spawns madness like today’s $95 billion foreign aid boondoggle.

    To wit, it encourages the Empire’s client and allied states to take bellicose positions vis a vis Washington designated rivals and enemies because it brings aid to their treasuries, weapons to their militaries and prestige and self-importance to their politicians and diplomats.

    Thus, would Poland’s rightwing politicians always be barking at Russia, Russia, Russia in the absence of its NATO membership and US military and diplomatic shield? We sincerely doubt they would be poking the bear, but instead would be seeking friendly accommodation with a natural trading partner.

    Likewise with Germany. The latter was apparently so petrified by a rescendant Russia that as recently as 2019 it spent the grand sum of just $50 billion and 1.3% of GDP on defense, while quite logically fueling its booming industrial and export economy with cheap Russian gas.

    What has changed since then is not remotely Germany’s assessment of the Russian threat. What changed is client state politics. The Green Party entered the government coalition with the Social Democrats by beating the war-drums because they saw attacking Russia and Russian gas as a way to promote their hideous crusade against fossil fuel. And they did so with impunity, knowing that Washington’s military shield had their backs.

    As to Tiawan’s client state politics, it’s not even a close call. Announce that Washington’s archaic “strategic ambiguity” policy– left over from the time of two departed demons, Mao Zedong and Chaing Kai Chek—has now also departed into the “inoperative” realm of Nixon-speak and you wouldn’t need any “Indo-Pacific” aid boondoggles, either.

    To the contrary, Taiwan’s leaders would be scampering to Beijing for discussions of a “Hong Kong” transition in short order. America’s homeland security, of course, would be no worse for the wear—except for saving the cost of 100,000 servicemen in the Far East and the multi-trillion cost over time of patrolling the Pacific for the benefit of exactly what?

    Then, of course, we get to the $26.4 billion for Israel. That’s about 4.5% of its GDP and should come out of its own war taxes, not Uncle Sam’s credit card. Moreover, it’s proof positive of the baleful impact of the Empire’s military shield and checkbook on client state politics. As we recently showed, Israel’s defense spending has been steadily plunging to less than 5% of GDP, even as its voters have repeatedly elected bellicose governments consisting of rightwing warmongers and fanatical religious factions.

    These Netanyahu governments have consistently undermined a two-state solution to the Palestine problem, even going so far as to bless the transfer of billions of cash in suitcases to Hamas in order to undermine the Fatah-controlled Palestinian Authority.

    Likewise, Netanyahu has wantonly demonized Iran mainly for the purpose of domestic politics and as a means to assemble 60+ vote coalitions in the Knesset.

    Absent the US Navy and Air Force shield in the region, however, no Israeli government would have ever conducted unending assassination raids on that country or sabotaged on Capitol Hill Washington’s attempts at constructive arrangements with Iran like Obama’s nuke deal.

    Indeed, absent Uncle Sam’s $4 billion annual gift and even more valuable regional military shield, Netanyahu and his extremist coalitions would have needed to raise taxes massively in Israel in order to fund their Garrison State war policies. We doubt the Israeli electorate would have tolerated the true cost of Netanyahu’s madness for very long.

    At the end of the day, what Washington now needs is a break-up of the GOP and the formation of a Peace and Freedom party from the remnants of the conservative GOP and the dovish left. Both have been ejected from the UniParty by today’s Republican and Democrat denizens of the world’s War Capital.

    So perhaps Johnson’s hari-kari act will bear some fruit, after all. Not as he intended, but in the good way that American democracy desperately needs at this fraught juncture.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 21:20

  • Man Who Self-Immolated Near Trump Trial Was Anti-Fascist, Warned Of "World Coup" And Wanted To Start "F*cking Revolution"
    Man Who Self-Immolated Near Trump Trial Was Anti-Fascist, Warned Of “World Coup” And Wanted To Start “F*cking Revolution”

    Update (1710ET): 37-year-old Max Azzarello has been identified as the man who set himself on fire near the NYC courthouse where Donald Trump’s ‘hush money’ trial is taking place. He is in critical condition in a burn unit, police said Friday.

    Before setting himself on fire, Azzarello dropped a stack of pamphlets that led people to the “Ponzi Papers” substack – in which he writes: “My name is Max Azzarello, and I am an investigative researcher who has set himself on fire outside of the Trump trial in Manhattan.”

    Azzarello claims that a totalitarian conspiracy is in play, orchestrated by the U.S. government and its allies, aiming to impose a fascist world order.

    This extreme act of protest is to draw attention to an urgent and important discovery:

    We are victims of a totalitarian con, and our own government (along with many of their allies) is about to hit us with an apocalyptic fascist world coup.

    These claims sound like fantastical conspiracy theory, but they are not. They are proof of conspiracy. If you investigate this mountain of research, you will prove them too. If you learn a great deal about Ponzi schemes, you will discover that our life is a lie. If you follow this story and the links below, you will discover the rotten truth of ‘post-truth America’. You will learn the scariest and stupidest story in world history. And you will realize that we are all in a desperate state of emergency that requires your action.

    To my friends and family, witnesses and first responders, I deeply apologize for inflicting this pain upon you. But I assure you it is a drop in the bucket compared to what our government intends to inflict.

    Because these words are true, this is an act of revolution. -The Ponzi Papers

    Azzarello’s manifesto focuses on the financial sector – particularly around recent banking crises and the role of cryptocurrencies. He suggests that the Silicon Valley Bank run, which was linked to Peter Thiel’s actions and the subsequent collapse of Silvergate Bank, was no accident but part of a broader scheme involving cryptocurrencies as a global Ponzi scheme. He claims that cryptocurrencies were designed to destabilize the economy, implicating major corporations and elites in facilitating this financial upheaval. This scheme, he argues, has contributed to global inflation and is poised to cause even greater economic disruption.

    He then expands to politics, alleging that that U.S. government has devolved into a ‘secret kleptocracy,‘ pointing to bipartisan manipulation. According to Azzarello, the government perpetuates division and crisis to maintain control and distract from its exploitative operations. This, he asserts, leads inevitably towards a fascist state unless urgently addressed.

    Lastly, he suggests that pop culture such as The Simpsons was designed to normalize dysfunction and distract from critical issues – and that the media is used by the elites in order to manipulate public perception and maintain the status quo that suppresses collective action against systemic injustices.

    His solution? A revolution (and, of course, setting himself on fire):

    Azzarello was reportedly active in the Anarcho-Communist forum on Reddit,

    He also took a photograph with former President Bill Clinton.

    And went on a rant against Donald Trump, who he claims is “with Hillary” (and Biden) in the scheming department.

    More:

    *  *  *

    Update (1440ET):

    “Latest: A man lit himself on fire outside courthouse where Trump trial underway, NYPD officials brief within hour. CNN team on the ground observed one of the flyers – it said “NYU is a mob front” and had various allegations of wrongdoings against the school,” reports CNN’s Jim Sciutto. 

    *   *   * 

    A disturbing video has surfaced on X showing a man setting himself on fire outside the courthouse in Midtown Manhattan where former President Trump’s trial is taking place. 

    CNN is reporting:  

    The man walked into the park across the street from the courthouse, throwing flyers into the air, a senior law enforcement official told CNN. He then pulled something out of a backpack — it was not immediately clear what the item was — and lit himself on fire, the official said. 

    The media outlet continued: 

    Investigators are now fanning out to collect the flyers the unknown man threw into the air, another senior law enforcement official. A CNN team on the ground observed one of the flyers. It said “NYU is a mob front” and had various allegations of wrongdoings against the school.

    The video is shocking. 

    Why did a CNN reporter oddly declare that there was an active shooter? 

    On X, Elon Musk asked: “Was he protesting against the trial or for it?” 

    “It seems like Trump Derangement Syndrome is getting out of control,” X account Planet Of Memes said. 

    There is the possibility the man could be protesting the Israel-Hamas war as protests have flared up nationwide—still no official report on why the man decided to light himself on fire.  

    *Developing… 

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 21:10

  • North Carolina High School Student Suspended Over Use Of "Illegal Alien"
    North Carolina High School Student Suspended Over Use Of “Illegal Alien”

    A 16-year-old High School student in North Carolina was suspended for three days after using the term “illegal alien” – a legal term of art, during a vocabulary assignment in his English class.

    Leah McGhee, the boy’s mother, says her son was assigned vocabulary words during class last Tuesday, which included the word ‘alien,’ the Carolina Journal reports. When her son asked; “Like space aliens or illegal aliens without green cards?” – another student in the class took offense and threatened to kick his ass, prompting the teacher to call in the assistant principal.

    School administrators at Central Davidson High School in Lexington deemed his words ‘offensive and disrespectful to classmates who are hispanic,’ according to the report.

    “I didn’t make a statement directed towards anyone; I asked a question,” the suspended boy said in response to his suspension. “I wasn’t speaking of hispanics because everyone from other countries needs green cards, and the term “illegal alien” is an actual term that I hear on the news and can find in the dictionary.”

    According to the report, the boy’s record could now be damaged as he aims to secure an academic scholarship for collage. He currently participates in school clubs, track, and cross country.

    “Because of his question, our son was disciplined and given THREE days OUT of school suspension for ‘racism,’” his mother wrote in an email shared with the Journal. “He is devastated and concerned that the racism label on his school record will harm his future goal of receiving a track scholarship. We are concerned that he will fall behind in his classes due to being absent for three consecutive days.”

    Leah said the assistant principal has so far refused to remove the infraction from her son’s record. The family is working with an attorney to remedy the situation so it doesn’t harm his future, and they expect more developments in the days ahead.

    Meanwhile, State Senator Steve Jarvis, R-Davidson, said he contacted the school district’s superintendent to make him aware of the situation. Jarvis told the Carolina Journal that while he informed top officials of the issue and urged officials to look for the best outcome, he did not take a stance on what they should do because he wasn’t there to understand all sides of the story. -Carolina Journal

    “I do not see that that would be an offensive statement, just in getting clarification,” said Sen. Jarvis. “But there again, I don’t know. I don’t know the situation of this particular incident.”

    Seems fairly clear, no?

    In a statement to Newsweek, the high school said: “Please know that Davidson County Schools administrators take all discipline incidents seriously and investigate each one thoroughly,” adding “Any violation of the code of conduct is handled appropriately by administrators.”

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 21:00

  • FBI Warns Of Risk Of Chinese Hack Attack On Energy Infrastructure
    FBI Warns Of Risk Of Chinese Hack Attack On Energy Infrastructure

    Authored by Charles Kennedy via OilPrice.com,

    The director of the FBI has warned that the Chinese state has its sights set on U.S. critical infrastructure to compromise U.S. economic and national security.

    Speaking at the Vanderbilt Summit on Modern Conflict and Emerging Threats, Christopher Wray said:

    “The PRC [People’s Republic of China] has made it clear that it considers every sector that makes our society run as fair game in its bid to dominate on the world stage, and that its plan is to land low blows against civilian infrastructure to try to induce panic and break America’s will to resist.”

    The head of the FBI also explained that the Chinese state has taken a hybrid approach to its efforts to weaken the United States, involving cybersecurity, counterintelligence, and crime.

    The motivation for these efforts, according to Wray, was “driven by the CCP’s aspirations to wealth and power,” and the desire to “seize economic development in the areas most critical to tomorrow’s economy,” including through illegal means, such as theft.

    With regard to critical infrastructure specifically, Wren said “The fact is, the PRC’s targeting of our critical infrastructure is both broad and unrelenting.”

    “It’s using that mass, those numbers, to give itself the ability to physically wreak havoc on our critical infrastructure at a time of its choosing,” the head of the FBI also said.

    Wray referred to an ongoing hack attack dubbed Volt Typhoon which had opened up access for the hackers to a number of U.S. companies including pipeline operators. China, however, has denied any connection to Volt Typhoon, which Beijing said was a ransomware group, per a Reuters report.

    “Some in the US have been using origin-tracing of cyberattacks as a tool to hit and frame China, claiming the US to be the victim while it’s the other way round, and politicizing cybersecurity issues,” the Chinese embassy in Washington said, as quoted by Reuters.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 20:40

  • RFK Jr Nails Down First Battleground-State Ballot Spot: Who Will Benefit Most?
    RFK Jr Nails Down First Battleground-State Ballot Spot: Who Will Benefit Most?

    In a development that’s sure to cause shudders at Democratic National Party headquarters, the independent campaign of Robert F. Kennedy Jr on Thursday officially secured a place on the ballot in tightly-contested Michigan. However, some polls point to Kennedy being a bigger threat to Trump in the state that has 15 electoral votes. 

    Michigan is considered one of seven battleground states that will decide the 2024 presidential election — along with Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Polls generally show that the presence of independent and third-party candidates Kennedy, Cornel West and Jill Stein provide a small benefit to Donald Trump.

    With many Democratic electoral cornerstones wobbling — including blacks, Hispanics and young people — Blue Team is worried that Kennedy will peel off enough discontented Democrats to deliver victory to Trump. That’s why Democrats are launching a multi-pronged attack on Kennedy, from legal challenges to his state ballot applications to hosting more than 15 Biden-endorsing Kennedy family members at a Philadelphia event on Thursday. 

    Democratic worries about Michigan are compounded by what happened in the state’s February primary. In a protest of Biden’s handling of the Israel-Gaza war, more than 13% of Democrats voted “uncommitted.” The 100,000 who chose that option represented a block more than 9 times Donald Trump’s 2016 victory margin.  

    However, two recent polls suggest the Trump campaign should be uneasy about Kennedy’s Michigan ballot accomplishment.

    • Fox News shows Trump up 3 points in a head-to-head, but only up 2 points in a five-way contest. Kennedy scores 9%. 
    • Marketing Resource Group has Trump ahead by 6% vs Biden, but up 3% with Kennedy, Stein and West in the mix. Kennedy snags 13%. 

    With the uncertain Kennedy impact in mind, Trump’s Make America Great Again PAC on Monday launched a “Radical F***ing Kennedy” website, which spotlights various Kennedy stances that are anathema to conservatives.  

    A Trump-backing Super PAC launched this website Monday to turn conservatives away from voting for Kennedy

    With less than seven months to election day, Michigan is only the second state where Kennedy is officially on the ballot — along with Utah. However, Kennedy’s campaign and PAC say they’ve hit the signature requirements in many other states — including Arizona, Georgia, Nevada and North Carolina — and are awaiting the states’ validation. 

    Earlier this week, Kennedy announced that, after having considered the option, he wouldn’t pursue the Libertarian Party’s nomination as a way of instantly achieving 50-state ballot access. “We’re not gonna have any problems getting on the ballot ourselves so we won’t be running Libertarian,” Kennedy told ABC News. “We’re going to add probably two to three states a week.”

    Kennedy won’t officially be an independent in the Wolverine State: His name will appear on the ballot line of the obscure Natural Law Party, which was founded to solve political problems “through alignment with the ‘Unified Field’ of all the laws of nature through the use of the Transcendental Meditation.” Once a fledgling national organization, its last remnants are in Michigan; Ralph Nader ran on the state party’s line in 2008. “[Kennedy is] the most qualified candidate in the modern-day history of America,” said party chairman Doug Dern.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 20:20

  • Biden Education Secretary Threatens to Shut Down Largest Christian College In The US
    Biden Education Secretary Threatens to Shut Down Largest Christian College In The US

    Authored by Eric Lundrum via American Greatness,

    Joe Biden’s Secretary of Education, Miguel Cardona, threatened during a congressional hearing to weaponize the Department of Education to target and shut down the largest Christian university in the United States.

    As Fox News reports, Cardona made his threats during a hearing before the House Appropriations Committee, in response to a question by far-left Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.). DeLauro attacked Grand Canyon University (CGU), falsely declaring it “a predatory for-profit school,” to which Cardona said that “we are cracking down not only to shut them down, but to send a message to not prey on students.”

    “You have a shiny brochure and a great commercial,” Cardona said.

    “But the product is not worth the paper it’s written on. We have students graduating 60K to 70K dollars in debt, only eligible for jobs making under 30K. That to me is unacceptable.”

    GCU has been accused of misleading students about the true cost of some of its doctoral programs, for which Cardona’s Education Department fined the university $37.7 million; the school is currently appealing that fine, which was implemented in November.

    Past fines imposed by the Education Department on other schools were significantly smaller, with Penn State being fined just $2.4 million for its failure to deal with Jerry Sandusky’s sexual crimes; Michigan State was fined only $4.5 million for its similar failure to respond to the crimes of Larry Nassar.

    In October, the department claimed that an investigation by the office of Federal Student Aid (FSA) determined that GCU had “lied” about the true costs of its doctoral programs to over 7,500 students, while presenting no evidence.

    The department then gave GCU just 20 days to request a hearing with the department’s Office of Hearings and Appeals to object to the fine.

    “Our next recourse after that decision would be another appeal within the Department, this time directly to the Secretary of Education,” said a GCU spokesman.

    “Officials continue to make derogatory and inflammatory public statements that are legally and factually incorrect and not shared by any of the other 26 regulatory and accrediting bodies that oversee GCU,” the GCU spokesman continued.

    “The Secretary’s comments to the House Appropriations Committee were so reckless that GCU is demanding an immediate retraction, as they do not reflect the factual record in this case. He is either confused, misinformed or does not understand the actions taken by his own agency.”

    In response to Cardona’s threats, the American Principles Project (APP) has launched a petition to “protect Christian colleges.”

    The petition says, in part, that in “light of the Biden administration’s unprecedented attacks on our nation’s largest Christian colleges,” the AFP and all signatories to the petition demand that “the administration halt their crusade and let students choose the schools that fit their values.”

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 20:00

  • "Southwest Stop!": Near Runway Disaster At Washington-Reagan Recorded On Shocking Audio 
    “Southwest Stop!”: Near Runway Disaster At Washington-Reagan Recorded On Shocking Audio 

    Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is caught in one of the worst aviation crises in American history, as Boeing jets fall apart in mid-air and while on the runway. The latest near-disaster happened when a JetBlue flight nearly collided with a Southwest Airlines flight at Washington, DC’s Reagan National Airport on Thursday morning. 

    For any Zero Hedge readers who are aviators, you already know that as a pilot in command in airspace controlled by a tower, you’re putting complete trust in air traffic controllers to guide you on the most effective path possible without hitting other planes. 

    But that was almost not the case on Thursday morning when air traffic control instructed Southwest Airlines Flight 2937 to cross runway four at the airport while JetBlue Flight 1554 took off. 

    The audio is absolutely shocking. For any pilot, it sends shivers down your spine…

    DCA TOWER: JetBlue 1554, Stop!

    DCA GROUND: Southwest, Stop! Southwest 2937, Stop!

    Southwest Pilot: We stopped. We were cleared to cross runway 4.

    JetBlue Pilot: We’re stopping, JetBlue 1554

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    This is not the first operational error by towers across US airports. In February 2023, a landing FedEx cargo plane nearly collided with a Southwest passenger at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport in Texas. 

    On Friday, FAA Administrator Michael Whitaker directed controllers to take ten hours off between shifts and a minimum of 12 straight hours off before a midnight shift. 

    Every pilot should be concerned about the FAA’s latest DEI hiring spree of folks with “hearing, vision, missing extremities, partial paralysis, complete paralysis, epilepsy, severe intellectual disability, psychiatric disability, and dwarfism” problems.

    Sigh, Buttigieg. 

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 19:40

  • Soaring Russian Oil Imports Drag OPEC's Market Share In India To Record Low
    Soaring Russian Oil Imports Drag OPEC’s Market Share In India To Record Low

    Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via OilPrice.com,

    Russia was India’s single largest oil supplier for a second consecutive fiscal year, as surging imports of Russian crude dragged down the share of OPEC and Middle East supply to India to a record low, Reuters reported on Friday, citing data from tanker-tracking data obtained from industry sources.

    In the 2023/2024 fiscal year ended March 31, the share of Middle East oil supply of India’s oil imports slumped to as low as 46% — the lowest on record dating back to 2001-2002, according to the Reuters analysis. This compares with a 55% share of the Middle Eastern crude supply of Indian imports in the previous fiscal year 2022/2023.      

    The key driver of historically low Indian imports from the Middle East was the surge in Russian crude supply to the world’s third-largest oil importer.

    Russia alone accounted for around 35% of all Indian crude oil imports in 2023/2024, per the data compiled by Reuters.  

    For the first time ever, India – which depends on imports for around 87% of its oil consumption – imported roughly equal volumes of OPEC and non-OPEC crude, thanks to the 57% annual surge in imports from non-OPEC producer Russia. 

    Higher prices of Saudi crude and lower Kuwaiti supply as Kuwait limited exports of some grades to direct them to a new refinery also contributed to the low share of the OPEC and Middle Eastern crude of India’s imports. 

    India’s crude imports remained flat in the 2023/2024 fiscal year, but the import bill of the world’s third-largest oil importer fell by almost 16% due to lower oil prices and record-high imports of cheaper Russian crude.   

    While volumes were essentially unchanged, India’s spending on crude oil imports dropped by 16%, to $132.4 billion in 2023/2024, down from the $157.5 billion import bill for the 2022/2023 fiscal year, provisional data from the Indian Oil Ministry showed earlier this week.  

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 19:20

  • "Defund NPR Act" Introduced In House Over Bias, "Radical, Left-Wing Activist" CEO
    “Defund NPR Act” Introduced In House Over Bias, “Radical, Left-Wing Activist” CEO

    Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) has introduced the “Defund NPR Act” to pull federal funds from National Public Radio, after veteran journalist Uri Berliner – who resigned this week following a suspension for penning a scathing article which exposed the network’s far-left bias, including the fact that the outlet’s DC bureau employs 87 registered Democrats and no Republicans, the Daily Caller reports.

    What’s more, NPR CEO Katherine Maher – who once bragged about taking censorship orders from the feds as the head of Wikipedia, and said during a Ted Talk that “truth” is a “distraction” which is “getting in the way of getting things done,” was called out for years worth of woke diatribes on X (formerly Twitter), including calling herself “someone with cis white mobility privilege,” anger towards white men for flying business class, and defending looting.

    “NPR’s new CEO is a radical, left-wing activist who doesn’t believe in free speech or objective journalism. Hoosiers shouldn’t be writing her paychecks. Katherine Maher isn’t qualified to teach an introductory journalism class, much less capable of responsibly spending millions of American tax dollars,” Banks told the Daily Caller shortly before introducing the bill.

    “NPR was a liberal looney bin under the last CEO John Lansing, and it’s about to get even nuttier. It’s time to pull the plug on this national embarrassment. Congress must stop spending other people’s hard-earned money on low grade propaganda,” Banks added.

     

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 19:00

  • Huge Blast Rocks Iraq Base Used By Iran-Linked Militias
    Huge Blast Rocks Iraq Base Used By Iran-Linked Militias

    Reuters is reporting a “massive” blast at an Iraqi base used by Iran-linked militias south of Baghdad in the overnight hours (local). 

    “A huge blast rocked a military base used by Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) to the south of Baghdad late on Friday,” army sources said to Reuters.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Few other details have been given, but images are widely circulating online showing what indeed appears to be a very large-scale strike.

    A number of regional correspondents have been quick to identify it as an American military airstrike; however, given the events of the night prior (the ‘limited’ attack on Iran), others are speculating it was the Israelis behind it.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Both the Israelis and Americans have struck Iran-linked PMF bases before, mostly in Eastern Syria – but a strike on such a scale inside Iraq by Israel remains very rare or even unprecedented.

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Of course, since this again takes place when he market is closed the only way to trade it is via bitcoin, where the algos have decided to price in the end of the world for the third time in 5 days.

    * * *

    The Pentagon later denied US forces were behind the strike…

    https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 18:50

  • Is There More To This Current Bird Flu Panic Than Meets The Eye?
    Is There More To This Current Bird Flu Panic Than Meets The Eye?

    Authored by Michael Snyder via TheMostImportantNews.com,

    Why are global health officials issuing such ominous warnings about the bird flu?  Do they know something that the rest of us do not? 

    H5N1 has been circulating all over the planet for several years now, and it has been the worst outbreak that the world has ever seen.  Hundreds of millions of birds are already dead, and now H5N1 has been infecting mammals with alarming regularity.  The good news is that so far it has not been a serious threat to humans, but could that soon change? 

    According to the World Health Organization, the possibility that H5N1 could start spreading among humans is an “enormous concern”…

    The increasing spread of bird flu to humans is an ‘enormous concern’, the World Health Organization has warned.

    The virus, an extremely deadly H5N1 subtype, has caused devastating declines in bird populations following its emergence in Europe in 2020.

    It has since jumped to mammals such as cows, cats, seals and now people, raising the risk of the virus mutating to become more transmissible.

    The fact that so many different types of mammals are now being infected is definitely alarming.

    But perhaps cows would not be getting infected if we were not literally feeding them chicken crap…

    As epidemiologists scramble to figure out how dairy cows throughout the Midwest became infected with a strain of highly pathogenic avian flu — a disease that has decimated hundreds of millions of wild and farmed birds, as well as tens of thousands of mammals across the planet — they’re looking at a standard “recycling” practice employed by thousands of farmers across the country: The feeding of animal waste and parts to livestock raised for human consumption.

    “It seems ghoulish, but it is a perfectly legal and common practice for chicken litter — the material that accumulates on the floor of chicken growing facilities — to be fed to cattle,” said Michael Hansen, a senior scientist with Consumers Union.

    It is not known if eating chicken crap is why so many cows in so many different states are being infected with H5N1.

    But at a time when the bird flu is running rampant among chickens and turkeys, it seems very foolish to take chicken crap and feed it to our cows.

    In any event, now there is a lot of panic about the potential for an H5N1 outbreak among humans.

    Authorities at the WHO are warning that the death rate would be “extraordinarily high” if such an outbreak were to occur…

    Experts at the WHO said humans face an ‘extraordinarily high’ mortality rate if the strain were to take hold, currently killing more than half of those infected.

    I agree.

    The bird flu is very dangerous, and if it starts spreading among humans on a widespread basis a lot of people will die.

    So why are U.S. taxpayer dollars being used to fund experiments in China that are specifically designed to make bird flu viruses even more deadly?  The following comes from an extremely shocking Daily Mail article…

    Lawmakers are demanding answers after it was revealed the US is sending taxpayer dollars to a Chinese army lab to make bird flu viruses more dangerous to people.

    Eighteen members of Congress are demanding answers from the Department of Agriculture (USDA) about the project, which was first revealed by DailyMail.com.

    It is part of a $1million collaboration between the USDA and the CCP-run Chinese Academy of Sciences – the institution that oversees the Wuhan lab at the center of the Covid lab-leak theory.

    In a scathing letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack last week, the bipartisan group said: ‘This research, funded by American taxpayers, could potentially generate dangerous new lab-created virus strains that threaten our national security and public health.’

    As I warn in my latest book, mad scientists all over the globe are taking some of the most deadly bugs even known to humanity and are purposely trying to make them even more deadly.

    And way too often, your tax dollars are paying for it.

    Of course experiments on H5N1 are not new.

    Over a decade ago, gain of function experiments that were funded by Dr. Francis S. Collins and Dr. Anthony Fauci actually created a mutant version of H5N1 that “had gained the ability to spread through the air between ferrets”…

    And yet in late 2011 the world learned that two scientific teams – one in Wisconsin, led by virologist Yoshihiro Kawaoka, and another in the Netherlands, led by virologist Ron Fouchier – had potentially pushed the virus in that direction. Each of these labs had created H5N1 viruses that had gained the ability to spread through the air between ferrets, the animal model used to study how flu viruses might behave in humans.

    The ultimate goal of this work was to help protect the world from future pandemics, and the research was supported with words and funding by two of the most prominent scientists in the United States: Dr. Francis S. Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health, and Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

    Why would they purposely create such a thing?

    Ferrets were specifically chosen for that research because they have respiratory systems that are very similar to humans.

    Our ability to create deadly diseases far exceeds our ability to control them, and once something gets out it can spread around the globe in the blink of an eye.

    Right now, there is a lot of concern about a “mystery respiratory illness” that has suddenly appeared in Argentina…

    A mystery respiratory illness has hospitalised dozens of people in Argentina in an outbreak that shares eerie similarities with Covid’s arrival.

    Sixty patients have been sickened with ‘severe atypical pneumonia’ in the capital, Buenos Aires.

    An alert about the cluster of cases was last night circulated via an international public health surveillance system.

    Covid was brought to the attention of the world in late 2019 as a result of the same database, called ProMed.

    Hopefully this will turn out to be nothing.

    But it is just a matter of time before more great pestilences ravage our planet.

    Will H5N1 be one of them?

    I don’t know, but this is a story that I will definitely be watching closely.

    *  *  *

    Michael’s new book entitled “Chaos” is available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can check out his new Substack newsletter right here.

    Tyler Durden
    Fri, 04/19/2024 – 18:40

  • The World's Economic Myths Are Hitting Their Limits
    The World’s Economic Myths Are Hitting Their Limits

    Authored by Gail Tverberg via Our Finite World blog,

    There are many myths about energy and the economy. In this post I explore the situation surrounding some of these myths.

    My analysis strongly suggests that the transition to a new Green Economy is not progressing as well as hoped.

    Green energy planners have missed the point that our physics-based economy favors low-cost producers.

    In fact, the US and EU may not be far from an economic downturn because subsidized green approaches are not truly low-cost.

    [1] The Chinese people have long believed that the safest place to store savings is in empty condominium apartments, but this approach is no longer working.

    The focus on ownership of condominium homes is beginning to unwind, with huge repercussions for the Chinese economy. In March, new home prices in China declined by 2.2%, compared to a year earlier. Property sales fell by 20.5% in the first quarter of 2024 compared to the same period a year ago, and new construction starts measured by floor area fell by 27.8%. Overall property investment in China fell by 9.5% in the first quarter of 2024. No one is expecting a fast rebound. The Chinese seem to be shifting their workforce from construction to manufacturing, but this creates different issues for the world economy, which I describe in Section [6].

    [2] We have been told that Electric Vehicles (EVs) are the way of the future, but the rate of growth is slowing.

    In the US, the rate of growth was only 3.3% in the first quarter of 2024, compared to 47% one year ago. Tesla has made headlines, saying that it is laying off 10% of its staff. It also recently reported that it is delaying deliveries of its cybertruck. A big issue is the high prices of EVs; another is the lack of charging infrastructure. If EV sales are to truly expand, they will need both lower prices and much better charging infrastructure.

    [3] Many people have assumed that home solar panel sales would rise forever, but now US home solar panel sales are shrinking.

    A forecast made by the trade group Solar Energy Industries Association and consulting firm Wood Mackenzie indicates that US solar panel installations by homeowners are expected to fall by 13% in 2024. There are many issues involved: higher interest rates, less generous subsidies to homeowners, not enough grid capacity for new generation, and too much overproduction of electricity by solar panels in the spring and fall, when heating and air conditioning demand is low. The overproduction issue is particularly acute in California.

    For each individual 24-hour day, the timing of solar energy production does not match up well with when it is needed. With sufficient batteries, solar electricity produced in the morning can help run air conditioners in the evening. But storage from summer to winter is still not feasible, and batteries for short-term storage are expensive.

    [4] It is a myth that wind and solar truly add to electricity supplies for the US and the countries in the EU. Instead, their pricing seems to lead to tighter electricity supplies.

    Strangely enough, in the US and the EU, when wind and solar are added to the electric grid, electricity supplies seem to get tighter. For example, one article says, Most of US electric grid faces risk of resource shortfall through 2027, NERC [regulatory group] says.

    Charts of electricity supply per capita show an unusual trend when wind and solar are added. Figure 1 shows that, in the US, once wind and solar are added, total electricity generation per capita falls, rather than rises!

    Figure 1. US per capita electricity generation based on data of the US Energy Information Administration. (Data is through 2023, even though this is not easy to see from the labels.)

    The EU, using a somewhat shorter history period, shows a similar pattern of declining total electricity generation per capita, even when wind and solar are added (Figure 2).

    Figure 2. Electricity generation per capita for the European Union based on data of the 2023 Statistical Review of World Energy, prepared by the Energy Institute. Amounts are through 2022.

    I believe that the strange pricing systems used for wind and solar in the US and EU are driving out other electricity suppliers, especially nuclear. With this system, intermittent electricity enjoys the subsidy of going first at the regular wholesale market rate. Other providers find themselves with very low or negative wholesale rates in the spring and fall of the year and on weekends and holidays. As a result, their overall return falls too low. Nuclear is particularly affected because it requires a huge, fixed investment, and it cannot be ramped up and down easily.

    Besides the foregoing issues affecting the supply of electricity generated, there are also factors affecting the demand for electricity. Electricity generation using wind and solar tends to be high priced when all costs are included. The US and EU are already high-cost areas for businesses to operate. High electricity rates further add to the impetus to move manufacturing and other industry to lower-cost countries if businesses desire to be competitive in the world market.

      On a world basis, in 2022, wind and solar added about 13% to total world electricity generation (Figure 3).

      Figure 3. Electricity generation per capita for the World based on data of the 2023 Statistical Review of World Energy, prepared by the Energy Institute. Amounts are through 2022.

      Based on Figure 3, with the addition of wind and solar, the upward slope of the world per capita electricity generation has been able to remain pretty much constant from 1985 to 2022, at about 1.6% per year. But the US and the EU, as high-cost producers of goods and services, haven’t been able to participate in this per capita growth of electricity.

      Instead, China has been a major beneficiary of the shift of manufacturing overseas from the US and EU. It has been able to rapidly increase its electricity supply per capita, even with wind and solar. It has also been adding both nuclear and coal-fired electricity generation capacity.

      Figure 4. Electricity generation per capita for China based on data of the 2023 Statistical Review of World Energy, prepared by the Energy Institute. Amounts are through 2022.

      Thus, this analysis produces the result a person would expect if the physics of the world economy favors efficient (low-cost) producers.

      [5] It is a myth that the US and EU can greatly ramp up the use of EVs or greatly increase the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) without relying on fossil fuels.

      Both EV production and AI are heavy users of electricity supply. We have seen that the US and the EU no longer have growing per-capita electricity supplies. Ramping up electricity generation would require a long lead time (10 years or more), a major increase in fossil fuel consumption, and an increase in electricity transmission lines.

      The State of Georgia, in the United States, is already running into this issue, with planned data centers (related to AI) and EV manufacturing plants. The state plans to add new gas-fired electricity generation. It will also import more electricity from Mississippi Power, where the retirement of a coal-fired plant is being delayed to provide the necessary additional electricity. Eventually, more solar panels are planned, as well.

      [6] It is a myth that the world economy can continue as usual, whatever happens to energy supply and growing debt. China’s homebuilding problems could, in theory, lead to debt bubbles crashing around the world.

      The world economy depends upon a growing bubble of debt. It also depends on an ever-increasing supply of goods and services. In fact, the two are closely interrelated. As long as a growing supply of low-priced energy of the types used by built infrastructure is available, the economy tends to sail along.

      China, with problems in its property business, is an example of what can go wrong when energy supplies (coal in China) become expensive, as supply becomes increasingly constrained. Figure 5 shows that China’s per-capita coal supply became constrained in about 2013. China’s per capita coal extraction had been rising, but then it dipped. This made it more difficult for builders to construct the homes planned for would-be homeowners. This is part of what got home builders in China into financial difficulty.

      Figure 5. Per capita coal supply in China based on data of the 2023 Statistical Review of World Energy, prepared by the Energy Institute. Amounts are through 2022.

      Finally, in 2022, China was able to get coal production up. But the way this was done was through very high coal prices (Figure 6). (The prices shown are for Australian coal, but Chinese coal prices seem to be similar.)

      Figure 6. Newcastle Coal (Australia) prices in chart prepared by Trading Economics.

      Building concrete homes at such high coal prices would have resulted in new homes that were far too expensive for most Chinese citizens to afford. If builders were not already in difficulty from low supply, adding high coal prices, as well, would be a second blow. Furthermore, all the workers formerly engaged in home building needed new places to earn a living; the current approach seems to be to move many of these workers to manufacturing, so that the popping of the home building bubble will have less of an impact on the overall economy of China.

      There is now concern that China is ramping up its manufacturing, particularly for exports, at a time when China’s jobs in the property sector are disappearing. The problem, however, is that ramping up exports of manufactured goods creates a new bubble. This huge added supply of manufactured goods can only be sold at low prices. This new low-priced competition seems likely to lead to manufacturers, around the world, obtaining too-low prices for their manufactured products.

      If other economies around the world are forced to compete with even lower-cost goods from China, it could have an adverse impact on manufacturing around the world. With low prices, manufacturers are likely to lay off workers, or give them excessively low wages. If wages and prices are inadequate, debt bubbles in other parts of the world are likely to collapse. This will happen because many borrowers will become unable to repay their debt. This is the reason that we have been hearing a great deal recently about raising tariffs on Chinese exports.

      [7] The world’s biggest myth is that the world economy can continue to grow forever.

      I have pointed out previously that based on physics considerations, economies cannot be expected to be permanent structures. Economies and humans are both self-organizing systems that grow. Humans get their energy from food. Economies are powered by the types of energy products that our built infrastructure uses. Neither can grow forever. Neither can get along without energy products of the right types, in the right quantities.

      We become so accustomed to the narratives we hear that we tend to assume that what we are told must be right. These narratives could be based on wishful thinking, or on inadequate models, or on a sour grapes view that says, “We don’t want fossil fuels anyhow.” We know that humans need food, and that economies will continue to require fossil fuels. We can’t make wind turbines or solar panels without fossil fuels. What do we plan to do for energy without fossil fuels?

      In a finite world, economies cannot continue forever. We don’t know precisely what will go wrong or when it will go wrong, but we can get a hint from the recent failures of myths that our economy may change dramatically in the not-too-distant future.

      Tyler Durden
      Fri, 04/19/2024 – 18:00

    1. Rep. Greene: Congress Members Who Back Ukraine Aid Should Join Kiev's Military
      Rep. Greene: Congress Members Who Back Ukraine Aid Should Join Kiev’s Military

      Authored by Kyle Anzalone via The Libertarian Institute,

      Republican Rep. Majorie Taylor-Greene has proposed an amendment requiring lawmakers who vote in favor of the $60 billion Ukrainian aid bill to join Ukraine’s military. Taylor-Greene and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) have pledged to remove House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) from his post if he allows a floor vote on the aid package. 

      In a social media post, Axios Capitol Hill reporter Juliegrace Brufke shared the text of the new amendment to the $61 billion Ukraine aid bill that has been stalled for months in Washington. The measure states, “Any Member of Congress who votes in favor of this Act shall be required to conscript in the Ukrainian military.”

      Rep Taylor Greene with her staff.

      “If you want to fund the endless foreign wars, you should have to go fight them,” Taylor-Greene posted on X. “That’s why I’m introducing an amendment that would require any Member of Congress who votes for the multibillion [dollar] Ukraine supplemental to enlist in Ukraine’s military.”

      The Georgia Republican also introduced amendments that would direct funding from Ukraine to space lasers to defend the southwest border, or aid to Americans impacted by a major train derailment in Ohio and wildfires in Hawaii. 

      Taylor-Greene introduced the amendments in retaliation after House Speaker Johnson broke an earlier pledge to block additional funding for the Ukraine proxy war unless Congress authorized significant funding for US immigration enforcement and various border reforms. 

      Johnson plans to have the House vote on a series of four bills that will provide $61 billion to Ukraine, $26 billion to Israel, and $8 billion to Taiwan. The fourth bill is expected to be called a “national security” law that includes a TikTok ban and gives the president the power to sell off frozen Russian assets and transfer the money to Ukraine. 

      In addition to the amendment, Taylor-Greene has called to oust Johnson from the speakership over his broken promise. The congresswoman has been joined by Massie, which means Johnson would not survive a removal vote without support from Democrats. 

      Taylor-Greene’s effort to stymie the Ukraine aid package has drawn the ire of some of her colleagues. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) introduced two amendments smearing the lawmaker as an agent of Russia.

      The amendment says Taylor-Greene has “repeatedly attempted to block aid to Ukraine, empowering Vladimir Putin’s unlawful violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity.” The congresswoman has vocally embraced an ‘America First’ philosophy and has explained that continued funding for the war in Ukraine does nothing to benefit Americans. 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Taylor-Greene has also pointed to Kiev’s undemocratic policies and the sizable neo-Nazi presence within its military as other reasons for opposing the $61 billion aid bill. Moskowitz later attacked Taylor-Greene for highlighting the hardline elements in Ukraine’s armed forces. 

      “Stop bringing up Nazis and Hitler. The only people who know about Nazis and Hitler are the 10 million people and their families who lost their loved ones – generations of people who were wiped out,” Moskowitz said. “It is enough of this disgusting behavior, using Nazis as propaganda … You want to talk about Nazis? Get yourself over to the Holocaust Museum. You go see what Nazis did.”

      However, Moskowitz has repeatedly invoked the Nazi label to further his own political agenda, once declaring that X was “crawling with Nazi termites” and later claiming Hamas has similar goals to the Third Reich.

      Tyler Durden
      Fri, 04/19/2024 – 17:40

    Digest powered by RSS Digest

    Apr 19

    Today’s News 19th April 2024

    • Illegal UK Immigrant Who Protested With Sign Saying "Migrants Are Not Criminals" Pleads Guilty To Rape Of 15-Year-Old Girl
      Illegal UK Immigrant Who Protested With Sign Saying “Migrants Are Not Criminals” Pleads Guilty To Rape Of 15-Year-Old Girl

      Authored by Thomas Brooke via ReMix News,

      A Congolese migrant who had his deportation from the U.K. blocked by an airline’s cabin crew and previously campaigned outside a detention center with a sign that read, “Migrants are not criminals,” has pleaded guilty to raping a 15-year-old girl.

      Anicet Mayela entered his guilty plea at Oxford Crown Court last Friday for one count of rape of a former economics student.

      The court heard how there was a high level of “dangerousness” surrounding the attack, which is understood to have taken place between Dec. 1 and Dec. 31 last year.

      The Congolese national had been living in Britain since 2004 when he paid smugglers to help him escape his country of origin where he claimed he was being persecuted.

      Several attempts by the U.K. Home Office to deport him were thwarted by feigned injuries and legal challenges, including an incident back in May 2005 when a planned deportation flight was prevented from taking off by Air France cabin crew who claimed public officials had broken Mayela’s hand after handcuffing him.

      With the aid of left-wing charities, including the Institute of Race Relations, and immigration lawyers, the Congolese national won leave to remain in Britain later that year after successfully arguing a return to his homeland would be a violation of his human rights.

      Mayela used the opportunity to actively campaign against the deportation of illegal migrants, participating in a demonstration near his detention center in Oxford where he spoke to the BBC and hung a sign around his neck that read, “Migrants are not criminals.”

      “I am here to support my friends. I have been inside here, and at Colnbrook,” he told the U.K.’s public broadcaster from outside the detention center.

      On Friday, Mayela was ordered to remain in custody while a pre-sentencing report was prepared.

      He is scheduled to return for sentencing on May 10.

      Read more here…

      Tyler Durden
      Fri, 04/19/2024 – 02:45

    • BRICS – The Project Of The Century
      BRICS – The Project Of The Century

      Authored by Peter Hanseler via VoiceOfRussia.com,

      The Western media are prioritizing the Ukraine conflict, the green revolution and the woke revolution. In the shadow of this media coverage, BRICS is changing the world.

      We bring you the latest figures and place them in the current geopolitical environment. – An analysis.

       

      Introduction

      One of the main topics of this blog is BRICS. We have written numerous articles, followed and analyzed the development of this organization. Significantly, the first independent post on this blog was dedicated to BRICS on November 18, 2022 “The unstoppable rise of the East“.

      Our last dedicated BRICS-only article from 24 September 2023 “BRICS will change the world – slowly” gave an overview of the development and summarized the results of the BRICS summit in South Africa in August 2023. This article was published by ZeroHedge, the GloomBoomDoom report by Dr. Marc Faber and Weltwoche (print and online).

      From the density of our coverage, it is clear that we ascribe paramount importance to BRICS for the geopolitical and geo-economic development of the world. Based on the facts, we have come to the conclusion that BRICS will change the world more than all other developments of the last 100 years put together. The developments around BRICS have already triggered a tectonic shift in the geopolitical balance of power; the Ukraine conflict and the accelerating crisis in the Middle East are merely pieces of the mosaic by comparison.

      The Western media are setting their priorities differently and focusing on topics that we believe are of lesser importance: Mortal enemy Russia, wokeness and green ideology.

      Reporting on BRICS in the West, if it takes place at all, is limited to portraying BRICS either as an instrument of China to achieve world power – as the Financial Times put it,

      «How the BRICS nations risk becoming satellites of China»

      FINANCIAL TIMES – 26 JULY 2023

      or to trivialize the success of BRICS – according to the NZZ,

      “We explain in the video why this extension only promises limited success.”

      NZZ, 14 DECEMBER 2023

      Preliminary remarks on the figures

      We proceed as we always do and develop a fact-based foundation for a discussion.

      Membership doubled as of January 1

      Since January 1, Saudi Arabia, Iran, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Ethiopia have joined the existing members (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) as new members.

      Argentina not participating

      In August 2023, Argentina was invited to become the sixth member. However, the new president of Argentina, Javier Milei, decided not to accept this invitation and to rely on the USA and Donald Trump to rescue his economy.

      It is impossible to judge at this point whether this decision will prove to be the right one. For the second largest country in South America, which was once one of the richest countries in the world, it is to be hoped that Milei can pull the cart out of the deep mire. Milei is fighting against the establishment in Argentina, which has driven the country economically to the wall. These former rulers are serious opponents who are fighting for sinecures that Milei must wrest from them if he wants to save Argentina. We hope that Javier Milei can prevail and wish him every success and good luck. The first signs of success appear to be emerging: The country was able to report a positive budget for the first time last month. It seems to be heading in the right direction.

      Saudi Arabia

      According to Western media reports, Saudi Arabia is not yet fully on board. South African Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor is reported to have told Reuters that “Saudi Arabia has not yet responded to the invitation to join BRICS. It is still being considered”.

      Saudi Arabia, or rather the ruling Saud family, has been an ally of the USA since the end of the Second World War, and this relationship has been further strengthened since the agreement of the ” Petrodollar” in 1974.

      Since President Biden has been in power, the relationship with the USA has suffered massively, while at the same time cooperation with China and Russia has strengthened to an unprecedented level.

      The problem that Saudi Arabia now has is the gigantic investments that the state and private individuals have made, particularly in the USA and the UK. Government investments in the USA alone amount to over USD 35 billion and investments in the UK are said to be around USD 75 billion. Due to the geopolitical situation in the world and the West’s aggressive sanctions policy, the concerns of Saudi Arabia that these investments could be confiscated in the event of a BRICS accession are definitely justified. As Saudi Arabia is important to BRICS and China has overtaken the US as Saudi Arabia’s largest trading partner, we expect Saudi Arabia to join BRICS as soon as China might make commitments to the Saudis in the event of Western expropriation.

      BRICS-10 in numbers

      Map

      Dark green BRICS until August 2023 – light green – the new BRICS members – Source: VoicefromRussia

      Numbers

      In our figures, we compare the BRICS-10 with the G7 and the world as a whole to give you a feel for the ratios. The parameters we use are population, GDP (adjusted for purchasing power), oil production, gas production and gold production.

      We show the gross national product adjusted for purchasing power. If you use the US dollar as a measure of GDP, the economic power of a country is distorted: if you want to measure financial strength realistically, it makes a big difference whether, for example, a Big Mac in US dollars costs twice as much in one place as elsewhere. The so-called Big Mac Index is reason enough to use purchasing power-adjusted figures when comparing GDP figures. The reason why Western media use the unadjusted figures is pure marketing to disguise the devaluation of the US dollar and make it appear stronger than it is.

      Charts

      Graphical representation of the figures – Source: VoicefromRussia.

      Interim result

      All factors show that the BRICS 10 far outstrip the G7 and it seems incomprehensible that the West is simply suppressing this fact. A look beneath the surface reveals facts that reinforce the impression of the bare figures.

      Assessment of these figures

      Oil production

      The following additional facts should be taken into consideration when evaluating the oil production figures:

      Firstly, although the USA is still the largest oil producer in the world, accounting for around 18% of global production, it also consumes the most oil, with a share of over 20%. This means that the USA is currently not even able to cover its own consumption. This fact alone is a compelling reason for the US to pressure Saudi Arabia not to join BRICS.

      Secondly, the major oil-producing members of BRICS have a great deal of influence or even control over OPEC. As BRICS thus also controls OPEC and therefore controls the price and distribution of a large proportion of oil, BRICS can be said to have an (indirect) monopoly position.

      Thirdly, the production costs for US oil are around 2.5 times higher than the production costs for Saudi oil.

      These factors therefore further strengthen the BRICS’ position of power with regard to oil.

      Natural gas

      With regard to natural gas, it should be noted that with Iran’s accession to BRICS, the two largest natural gas producers in the world are joint members of BRICS: Russia and Iran.

      The largest non-BRICS gas producer is Qatar, which is (still) allied with the USA. BRICS is therefore also a real center of power when it comes to natural gas.

      Gold

      With regard to gold, it should be briefly mentioned that China and Russia are number 1 and 2 in global gold production respectively. I mention gold here because there is a good chance that gold will again play an important role in future monetary systems at some point – more on this below.

      Russia holds the BRICS chairmanship in 2024

      Over 220 BRICS conferences will be held in Russia over the course of 2024. The topics are diverse: science, high technology, healthcare, environmental protection, culture, sport, youth exchange and civil society.

      President Putin’s statements at the beginning of the year at the opening event of BRICS 2024 in Moscow were interesting. He mentioned several times the closer cooperation between the members on security issues. It seems that BRICS will therefore not only focus on economic aspects, but also on security-related aspects more and more. The apparent coordination of the BRICS states in connection with the Middle East conflict at the UN in New York clearly indicates close cooperation on non-economic issues.

      Various non-official sources have reported that the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) is moving closer to BRICS and may even merge with it. In addition to China, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, Iran has also been a member of the SCO since July 2023.

      This is extremely important due to the heightened geopolitical tensions and the two major conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East. If these two organizations were to merge, there would be a new counterweight to NATO. NATO is already increasingly being characterized by experts as a mere chattering club, particularly due to its performance in the Ukraine conflict, which was not a success. As a result, NATO has almost lost its threatening potential. If the BRICS-SCO merger becomes a reality, NATO would finally degenerate into an empty shell.

      Formal applications for admission – BRICS+

      Candidates

      Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Kazakhstan, Cuba, Kuwait, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palestine, Senegal, Thailand, Venezuela, Vietnam and Belarus have formally applied for membership.

      Green: BRICS 10 (light green Saudi Arabia) – Yellow: formal membership applications

      Figures

      Charts

      Assessment

      It should be noted in this list that the formal applicants will probably not all be admitted in 2024. This illustration shows the maximum and the broad formal interest in this organization. The applications for admission from some countries harbor great potential for conflict with the USA.

      In my opinion, the greatest potential for conflict from an American perspective is the possible accession of Mexico, Cuba and Venezuela. Mexico’s membership would be seen by the USA in the same way as the Soviet stationing of nuclear missiles in Cuba in 1962 – “enemy on the doorstep of the USA”. This is probably also the reason why it was reported on March 3 that Mexico had not submitted a formal application for membership. Fear is breathing down the necks of the Mexicans and the USA is exerting pressure in the background.

      In Venezuela, the country with the world’s largest oil reserves, the US has been trying for years to overthrow President Maduro and install a puppet.
      Last August, it was not enough to gain admission and the USA will do everything in its power to prevent this oil giant from joining. However, the USA has a losing hand with the Venezuelan population, as it is imposing sanctions on the beleaguered country to bring about a collapse and accepting that the Venezuelan people are suffering from hunger.

      The list of formal applications for admission could therefore change considerably between now and October, when the decisions on who will be invited to Kazan are made. What is certain, however, is that the G7 – especially the United States – is devoting huge energies to slowing down the development of BRICS. In my opinion, however, this organization is already too powerful to be weakened by the West.

      BRICS turns its back on the US dollar

      The petrodollar – US dollar as a reserve currency

      The greatest danger of this ever stronger community is to the USA. We have discussed many times that the Petrodollar is the real foundation of American supremacy and not the American armed forces.

      It is of existential importance for the USA that international trade, especially commodity trade, is conducted in US dollars. We explain why.

      The US dollar as a global trading currency means that practically all countries have to hold US dollars in reserve in order to be able to settle their trade invoices. This makes the US dollar a reserve currency.

      However, central banks do not hold the US dollar in cash, but in US government securities in order to earn interest. This makes the world’s central banks the biggest buyers of US government securities, regardless of whether they think they are a good investment. As a result, the US can refinance its debt on terms that are not based on the strength of the US economy, but on these systemic purchases. French President Giscard d’Estaing rightly described the petrodollar in the 1970s as an “exorbitant privilege”, as it leads to the automatic refinancing of the USA.

      Abuse of this exorbitant privilege

      However, the USA has been abusing this privilege for decades. Whenever a country implements something that the US does not like, it is cut off from the US dollar. The US can implement this without any problems, as all US dollar transactions go through the US. The consequences for the country concerned are catastrophic, as it is effectively banned from the commodities trade.

      Theft of Russian central bank reserves

      However, by blocking the foreign currency reserves of the Russian central bank in March 2023, the US has overstepped the mark, because now the entire Global South is afraid to hold US dollars, as they may suffer the same fate. Although every legal expert declares that the freeze was already carried out without an international legal basis, the West is about to go one step further and prepare the confiscation. This is the unequivocal statement made by Janet Yellen on February 27:

      “I also believe it is necessary and urgent for our coalition to find a way to unlock the value of these immobilized assets to support Ukraine’s continued resistance and long-term reconstruction.”

      JANET YELLEN AT THE PRESS CONFERENCE BEFORE THE G20 ON FEBRUARY 27, 2024

       

      The EU under Ms. von der Leyen and even exponents in Switzerland are preparing to put this planned raid into practice and thus not only continue to block these funds, but to steal them.

      De-dollarization is already here

      Until 2022, Russia conducted 80% of its trade in USD and EUR, 50% in US dollars. Today it is only 13%.

      In the same period, Russia’s trade activity in roubles and yuan rose from 3% to 34% for both currencies.

      These figures are clearly the result of the sanctions against Russia. However, it is a declared goal of all BRICS countries to no longer trade with each other in US dollars, but in the respective local currencies.

      If you look at the current size of BRICS – 36% of global GDP – this will herald a tectonic development away from the US dollar; if you add the formal applicants, this figure rises to 42% of global GDP.

      According to Bloomberg, the use of the US dollar as a reserve currency is collapsing.

      Source: Bloomberg

      Consequences for the US

      De-dollarization poses an existential threat to the USA, as it will result in the loss of buyers of US government bonds and thus the USA’s ability to refinance its highly deficit-ridden national budget. As US government bonds are a product like any other, whose price is determined by supply and demand, a collapse in demand also leads to a collapse in the price of US government bonds. As the interest rate on bonds moves inversely to the price, the interest rate on bonds and therefore inflation will rise.

      Debt in the USA is currently accelerating at an unprecedented rate. Debt currently amounts to over USD 34 trillion. It will soon take just one month to accumulate the next trillion in debt – apocalyptic. When President Reagan was in power, the total US debt amounted to less than one trillion. It therefore took just under 200 years to build up the first trillion in debt; soon this amount of debt will be a reality within a month.

      One of the reasons for this is that the USA will already have to pay one trillion US dollars (1,000,000,000,000) in interest payments on its own debt this year alone. This is more than the USA spends on its entire military expenditure, which is gigantic in itself, as the USA spends more money on its military than the next 13 countries combined.

      Source: Wikipedia

      If the willingness of the countries of the Global South, and in particular the BRICS members, to buy decreases, the USA will sooner or later find itself in an existentially dangerous situation.

      BRICS’ own currency

      Trading currency

      There is a lot of talk about a new currency that would serve as a payment and financing instrument for the BRICS. There were voices – including James Rickards – who were convinced last August that a BRICS single currency would be created as early as 2023. We were skeptical about this timing and took the view that it would take longer, and we were right. However, this does not mean that James Rickards was wrong, he was just a little early.

      We have seen above that the BRICS countries are in fact hardly using the US dollar among themselves any more, instead using their local currencies.

      Use of local currencies

      The consequence of this is that the BRICS members accumulate currencies of their trading partners over the course of a trading year if they sell more goods than they buy. Example: Russia and India use Roubles and Rupees in their trade. Since Russia sells more to India (especially raw materials) than India sells to Russia, the Russians are sitting on large amounts of Rupees at the end of the year. This problem arises regularly throughout the BRICS region among the various members in bilateral trade when deficits or surpluses build up.

      Settlement with gold

      I believe that the bilateral use of national currencies will continue for the time being, but that the first step will be to look for a mechanism to balance these surpluses or deficits at the end of a trading year.

      Gold is an obvious choice here, not gold calculated in US dollars, Rupees or Roubles, but gold in units of weight. The trade differences at the end of a year or month would be settled in gold (kg or tons). Whether in this case the gold is actually physically delivered or merely recorded in a ledger depends on the trust between the parties. I also assume that in such a case, gold warehouses would be opened in various locations in the BRICS region, where the member countries would store their gold and their holdings would be confirmed by a BRICS auditing company.

      A final issue would then be to determine the exchange rate of the local currencies. This seems to be one of the major sticking points so far.

      Indications that the trend is towards gold

      Evidence always comes from the facts. The world produces around 3,000 tons of gold per year.

      According to the World Gold Council, central banks have been net buyers of gold since 2010 and the trend in gold purchases has increased steadily in recent years.

      The Chinese bought the most gold (225 tons).

      Caution is advised with regard to the official reported gold reserves.

      It is very possible – and in my opinion probable – that the gold reserves of China and Russia are much larger than officially reported.

      It is clear that central banks are buying more gold than they have since the 1960s. This is an indication that they are not only arming themselves against inflation, but also for the settlement of commodities.

      It will be interesting to see what exactly will happen this year, but I assume that at the next BRICS summit, which will take place in Kazan in October, announcements will be made that will surprise the West. In addition to new members, I believe that a trade clearing system as described above or even more is within the realm of possibility.

      Future of BRICS – many new members

      Preliminary remarks

      Looking to the future, BRICS has the potential to unite many countries of the Global South and completely eclipse the Collective West.

      We have compiled the data of those countries that are interested in joining. This is for the future, but in times of geopolitical tensions and military conflicts, history teaches us that a lot can happen in a short time, especially after decades, without major changes. For this reason, we are merely providing a framework below and are not making any predictions regarding the timeline, but rather letting the figures speak for themselves and refraining from commenting at this stage.

      Map

      Green: BRICS 10 – Yellow: formal requests for membership – Blue: countries that show interest

      Numbers

      Charts

      Conclusion

      After BRICS became BRICS-10 last August by doubling its membership and thus far outstripping the previous economic colossus G7, the current year is set to continue in giant strides. The gap to the G7 will definitely widen further at the BRICS summit in Kazan. It is still uncertain which of the formal applicants will actually be invited and thus become new members on January 1, 2025.

      In my opinion, however, one thing is already a fact: the hegemony of the USA will come to an end as a result of de-dollarization. The combination of astronomical debts, rampant new borrowing and the fact that more and more countries in the Global South are turning away from the US dollar is accelerating the demise of the hegemon that ascended to the throne in 1945 and is increasingly harming itself through its aggressive geopolitics.

      No world power has ever left voluntarily and peacefully. The aggressive stance of the USA towards Russia and China and its adherence to the alliance with Israel are de facto proof of the aggressive behavior of the sick hegemon.

      This attitude could lead to a war between Russia and NATO in Ukraine, where a local conflict is still taking place, all the more so as the Americans have so far been on the way to inciting France, Great Britain and Germany to wage war against the giant empire.

      In the Middle East, the attitude is downright perverse. In order not to alienate the Jewish lobbies in the USA, which traditionally have a major influence on presidential elections, the USA is supporting a genocide that has been clearly designated as such by the International Court of Justice. In addition to purely electoral considerations in the USA, the USA also supports Israel in order not to lose its last power base in the Middle East. These two ends obviously justify the means – and the means is genocide. The Israeli attack on Hezbollah in Lebanon has already begun and so there is ever less in the way of a burning Middle East.

      Finally, they are also trying to provoke a conflict over Taiwan – a conflict that would be fought between Chinese and would therefore be a civil war. China’s intention to reach a diplomatic agreement with Taiwan in the next 20 to 30 years – that was the plan – is in jeopardy due to Washington’s aggressive stance.

      The behavior of the US is unfortunately typical – the downfall is predetermined, the facts and figures in this article prove it. Whether the smouldering fires already blazing in American society will bring about a change and whether they will be aggressive or more balanced cannot yet be guessed. We will have to wait for the presidential elections in the USA, but a lot can still happen between now and November.

      For a geopolitician, the world could hardly be more exciting – but for humanity, a little less tension and pressure would be a blessing. After all, people under pressure, especially politicians, have a tendency to make big mistakes.

      Tyler Durden
      Fri, 04/19/2024 – 02:00

    • N.Y. Gives Trump The Anne Boleyn Treatment
      N.Y. Gives Trump The Anne Boleyn Treatment

      Authored by Richard Porter via RealClear Politics,

      Jury selection is underway now complete in the case of The People of the State of New York vs. Donald J. Trump, which alleges that the defendant lied to his own check register, and lied to the general ledger of his own company, when the invoice given to him by his lawyer was paid and recorded by someone else, and that the misstatement he made to himself in his own records was done “with the intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof.”

      It is often noted that this is the first time that a former U.S. president is being tried for a crime, although Ulysses S. Grant may (or may not) have been cited for speeding in his carriage. The federal government chose not to prosecute Bill Clinton, who lied under oath during a sexual harassment lawsuit and then dissembled again about sex before a grand jury. Clinton lost his law license, settled the case on unfavorable terms, and was sanctioned by both federal and Arkansas state courts.

      So, this is a first. And let’s be honest about who is doing what to whom and why.

      The prosecutor elected in New York County of New York state indicted Trump, after Trump announced his 2024 run for president, for allegedly violating New York Penal Laws 175.05 and 175.10 seven years ago.

      That local prosecutor, Alvin Bragg, is a member of the Democratic Party – and the voters who elected Bragg and from whom the jury will be chosen support the Democratic Party. In 2016, the people of New York County voted 87% for Hillary Clinton and 10% for Donald Trump, and in 2020, 87% for Joe Biden and 12% for Donald Trump. In other words, the jury pool is chosen from one of the most partisan jurisdictions in the country – a place where almost all the judges are Democrats as well.

      So the Democratic prosecutor elected in the second most Democratic county in the United States will try the former Republican president and current putative Republican Party presidential nominee before a Democrat-appointed judge and a jury drawn from a pool 87% of whom voted against him (and who are being asked if they watch Fox News or listen to talk radio in the screening process).

      One wonders if the law even matters. But let’s review the two statutes at issue to highlight what the law requires the prosecution to prove. First, the prosecutor must prove that Trump violated the relevant statute, which requires a finding that he falsified business records with intent to defraud – that he “makes or causes a false entry in the business records of an enterprise.”

      By the way, falsifying business records in the second degree is a misdemeanor, not a felony. Moreover, New York’s statute of limitations requires that misdemeanor prosecutions be commenced within two years of the commission of the act, meaning that under the last provision, this case should never have been filed.

      Bragg elevated this misdemeanor into a felony by including New York  Penal Law 175.10 in the indictment – falsifying business records in the first degree. That statute reads this way:

      “A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.”

      There are other obvious difficulties with this case beyond the credibility of the witnesses (a porn star who denied any affair numerous times and a disbarred lawyer convicted of perjury).

      For example, why does the entry in the check register or the general ledger matter at all? When would those entries, as opposed to the allegedly false invoices, be shown to anyone for any nefarious purpose? And were the entries even false? Was there any intent to fool someone to obtain something in making the entries – who was the target of the allegedly false entry in private books and records? If there’s no mark, no victim, then how could there be an “intent to defraud”? Defraud whom? And what is the other crime that the person making the book entry intended to commit or hide? If the other crime is not a New York crime but a federal crime, does every county prosecutor in the United States, including Alvin Bragg, have the jurisdiction to enforce an alleged federal crime indirectly through a state crime?

      We shall see.

      The political nature of this trial is obvious, and unprecedented in the United States. Even with irrefutable DNA evidence that Bill Clinton committed perjury, the special prosecutor declined to press criminal charges against him. In America’s recent past, prosecutors tended to exhibit a modicum of restraint. Those days are apparently gone.

      I reviewed an interesting law review article of political show trials down through history, from the trial of Socrates in Athens to the famous show trials in the 1930s Stalinist Soviet Union, curious to see if I could find historical precedent for this trial.

      The closest precedent is probably Anne Boleyn’s trial for adultery in 1536. It was about sex, the trial was in a hostile jurisdiction controlled by her accuser, and the whole point of the exercise was to lop off the head of someone who stood in the way of the regime’s continuity. But that’s what Democrats have lusted for since Donald Trump first arrived on the scene, isn’t it? They made no secret of it.

      Richard Porter is a lawyer in Chicago and National Committeeman to the RNC from Illinois.

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 23:40

    • FBI Repatriates Revolutionary War-Era Firearms At Philadelphia's Museum Of The American Revolution
      FBI Repatriates Revolutionary War-Era Firearms At Philadelphia’s Museum Of The American Revolution

      The FBI announced the return of several Revolutionary War-era firearms during a repatriation ceremony at Philadelphia’s Museum of the American Revolution last week, according to CBS.

      These guns, stolen in the 1960s and 1970s from around Valley Forge Park, were recovered following a lengthy investigation involving the FBI’s Art Crime Team, the Department of Justice, and the Upper Merion Township Police Department. The agency is now seeking public assistance to locate more missing artifacts.

      Special Agent Jake Archer, a member of the FBI’s Art Crime Team said: “We were all committed to seeing justice — not just bringing the objects back home, but seeking a proper prosecution of those who perpetrated these crimes.”

      CBS reported that in 2009, an investigation was triggered when a tipster informed Upper Merion Township police about a gun, suspected of being stolen, seen at a local antique show. Although it turned out not to belong to the Valley Forge collection, this tip led detectives to probe the thefts more deeply.

      They collaborated with the Museum of the American Revolution, which now holds the collections previously managed by the dissolved Valley Forge Historical Society, and obtained a list of missing items.

      As the investigation unfolded, Michael Corbett, Scott Corbett, and Thomas Gavin admitted to stealing items from Valley Forge Park and the Valley Forge Historical Society, according to the FBI. They assisted investigators in locating some of the stolen artifacts.

      The collaborative effort expanded to include the FBI’s Art Crime Team, and together, they pursued leads on the thieves and the artifacts. Currently, the search continues for ten items: four firearms stolen on October 24, 1968, from Valley Forge and six other items taken from different locations.

      The museum is actively working to refine the descriptions of the missing objects to include more distinctive details that may jog public memory, hoping that some artifacts might have been inherited unknowingly by individuals. The FBI and other involved agencies are still seeking public assistance to recover these pieces.

      Scott Stephenson, president and CEO of the Museum of the American Revolution, concluded: “The fact is, the vast majority of people want to do the right thing.”

      You can see photos and descriptions of the missing items on the FBI website.

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 23:10

    • "This Is Too Stupid For It Not To Be The Plan" Holter Hammers Globalist Agenda 'Driving America Into A Brick Wall'
      “This Is Too Stupid For It Not To Be The Plan” Holter Hammers Globalist Agenda ‘Driving America Into A Brick Wall’

      Via Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com,

      Back in February, when everyone was predicting a Fed rate cut, precious metals expert and financial writer Bill Holter said rates would be going up and not down.  Since that call, the 10-Year Treasury is up more than 30 basis points.  It closed today at 4.67%.  Now, Holter is still calling for higher interest rates that will coincide with higher gold and silver prices. 

      Why?  It’s called inflation, and it’s not temporary. 

      Holter explains, “Foreigners are backing away from buying Treasuries…”

      “That is the only thing that has kept the doors open, so to speak, is the fact we are able to borrow an unlimited amount of money because we are the world reserve currency. 

      Foreigners backing away from our debt is going to lead the Federal Reserve to be the buyer of last, and then, only resort.  So, you will have direct monetization between the Fed and the Treasury. 

      What that will cause is a currency that declines in purchasing power.  It will decline in a big way, and it will decline rapidly. 

      So, what I am describing is inflation that turns into hyperinflation.”

      But that is not the end of our problems.  Holter points out, “I do think it is going to get worse, and that means interest rates will go higher, and that will put on much more pressure…”

      ”  We are at 4.65% on the 10-Year Treasury now.  We went from 3.75% to 4.65% (in a short amount of time).  We run through 5% on the 10-year Treasury, and everything blows up. . . . The bottom line here is we are at the end game of a fiat currency.  Young people have never experienced high inflation. . . . Where we are this time around, Paul Volker (Fed Head in 1979) was able to raise rates to 16% or 17% and crush inflation.  He was able to do that because there was not a ton of debt.  The U.S. debt back in 1980 was 35% of GDP.  Now, it is 125% plus debt to GDP.  If you raise rates to 6% to 8%, you will blow up the entire system because much of this debt was put on during the 1% to 3% interest rate time. . . . The inflation is going to push rates higher no matter what the Fed says.”

      Gold is hitting one new record high after another.  It’s not greed, but fear, and Holter says:

      “Big money is buying gold because they are looking for protection.”  

      The other wild card is war, and Holter says, “War is a way to keep the system propped up.”

      In closing, Holter contends, what you are seeing is not a series of mistakes by incompetent people.  Holter says,

      “This is too stupid for it not to be the plan. . . .This is not a Republican or Democrat thing.  We are being steered directly into a brick wall because the globalists can’t take over the world with the US standing. 

      They have to take the US down, and if they take the US down, so will the western financial system fall.  If that happens, the globalists can have their way.”

      Bill also added that according to his former business partner, Jim Sinclair (who died in October of 2023) said at some point gold will start a rally that you never sell. 

      Holter thinks the rally in gold and silver going on now is the rally Sinclair was talking about years ago.

      There is much more in the 46-minute interview.

      Join Greg Hunter as he goes One-on-One with financial writer and precious metals expert Bill Holter for 4.16.24.

      *  *  *

      To Donate to USAWatchdog.com Click Here.

      Bill Holter’s new website is still growing, and it is totally free.  It’s called BillHolter.com.

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 22:40

    • Moar Power: White House Considers Invoking "Unprecedented" Climate Emergency
      Moar Power: White House Considers Invoking “Unprecedented” Climate Emergency

      How best to grab power when there’s no convenient emergency to use as excuse? Invent one!

      That’s right: if you had ‘climate emergency’ on your ‘list of disasters to prompt mail-in balloting’ bingo card, you may soon be able to cross that square off. That’s because the Biden administration is reportedly renewing discussions “about potentially declaring a national climate emergency,” according to Bloomberg. 

      Such an “unprecedented” declaration could “unlock federal powers to stifle oil development”, among other things, the report says. 

      Bloomberg reports, according to sources who requested anonymity as a final decision has not been reached, top advisers to President Joe Biden are reconsidering the possibility of declaring the emergency.

      This action could lead to restrictions on crude exports, a suspension of offshore drilling, and a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, sources say.

      Within the White House, opinions are split on this issue. Some advisers believe that declaring a climate emergency wouldn’t grant Biden sufficient new powers to enact significant changes. Others, however, contend that it could energize voters who prioritize climate issues.

      “President Biden has treated the climate crisis as an emergency since day one and will continue to build a clean energy future that lowers utility bills, creates good-paying union jobs, makes our economy the envy of the world and prioritizes communities that for too long have been left behind,” said White House spokesperson Angelo Fernandez Hernandez.

      Historically, U.S. presidents, including former President Donald Trump, have declared national emergencies for various reasons. A climate emergency declaration would be unprecedented and likely face legal challenges.

      The Biden administration considered this in 2022 amidst a deadlock on clean-energy legislation, but shelved the idea after the Inflation Reduction Act passed. Last year, President Biden said he had effectively used his authority for climate action by imposing conservation and clean-energy measures, and this year he halted new natural gas export licenses.

      Environmental groups, however, are pushing for more aggressive actions. Emergency declarations could allow the president to halt crude exports, suspend offshore drilling, and restrict oil and gas transportation.

      Youth environmental organizations like the Sunrise Movement, Fridays For Future USA, and the Campus Climate Network are planning Earth Day protests to demand that Biden declare a national climate emergency.

      Aru Shiney-Ajay, the Sunrise Movement’s executive director, said Biden must “use every tool at his disposal to tackle the climate crisis and prepare our communities to weather the storm” of “another summer of floods, fires, hurricanes and extreme heat”. 

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 22:10

    • Conservatives Call For House Hearing On Google Gemini Ahead Of 2024 Election
      Conservatives Call For House Hearing On Google Gemini Ahead Of 2024 Election

      Authored by Eric Lundrum via American Greatness,

      Conservative activists have been calling for the House GOP to hold congressional hearings regarding the threat of Google Gemini, Google’s artificial intelligence (AI) program, and its left-wing biases ahead of the 2024 election.

      As reported by Just The News, a letter signed by multiple conservative groups was sent to Congressman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, this week demanding that Congress take action to investigate possible collusion between Big Tech platforms such as Google and the Biden White House.

      “With President Trump the decisive favorite to win in November, it’s clear that Big Tech giants will try to pull the same tricks as last time to throw the election to the Democrats,” the letter reads in part.

      “Unfortunately, as tech giants ramp up their crusade against Trump ahead of the 2024 election, 15 new technologies like generative AI will give them even more powerful tools to boost Democrats’ electoral prospects than four years prior,” the letter continues.

      “[I]t’s more important than ever for Republicans in Congress to scrutinize Google’s monopolistic AI efforts, particularly given the threat it could pose to election integrity in 2024 and beyond.”

      The letter was signed by the leaders of six conservative groups: The New York Young Republican Club, the Bull Moose Project, the American Principles Project, Citizens for Renewing America, American Accountability Foundation Action, and the National Constitutional Law Union.

      Jordan has previously ordered Big Tech companies to hand over documents regarding their communication with the Biden Administration, as well as any influence the White House may have had over Google’s development of Gemini.

      In addition, the Biden Administration has been hit with multiple lawsuits over its efforts to coerce social media companies into censoring conservative viewpoints, particularly regarding the Chinese Coronavirus and widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 21:40

    • Markets Dump Then Rebound As Israel Retaliates To Iran In Oddly Toothless, Performative Response
      Markets Dump Then Rebound As Israel Retaliates To Iran In Oddly Toothless, Performative Response

      SUMMARY: 

      • Iran says its nuclear facilities remain unharmed: Reuters
      • Situation in Iran’s Isfahan is normal, no explosion taken place on ground: PressTV
      • CNN: Two US oficials say Israel indicated they would not attack nuclear targets. US didn’t “green light” this attack.
      • Unconfirmed: IRGC states that Iran will target Israeli nuclear sites with counterattack.
      • Iran Space Agency: “all that happened is a failed and humiliating attempt by Israel aviation” – via Sky News
      • Iranian officials and outlets are claiming that all explosions heard tonight are due to interceptions and that no explosions have occurred “on the ground”
      • Bloomberg: Israeli officials notified the US earlier today they planned to retaliate in the next 24-48 hours.
      • Tehran’s Imam Khomeini International Airport (IKA) tells passengers that all flights have been canceled and they should exit the airport.
      • Fox News: Israeli strikes in Iran came from unmanned aircraft
      • US claims IDF attacks in Iran were limited.
      • Three large explosions heard in Isfahan south of Tehran, US officials confirm.
      • The Natanz nuclear facility is located in Isfahan.
      • Unconfirmed simultaneous explosions have also been reported in Syria and Iraq (Baghdad and Babil/Babylon province).
      • Iran has established a no-fly-zone over its western region.
      • Market reaction: initial panic selling, but gradually as it becomes clear that this is just a token “scripted” response to the token “scripted” initial attack by Iran – which achieved absolutely nothing – markets are rebounding.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Israel – having once again ignored Biden’s pleadings not to escalate the already tense situation – is retaliating against Iran’s weekend strike, which was itself a retaliation against Israel bombing Iran’s embassy in Syria on April 1.

      Moments ago futures dumped, oil prices spiked, and treasury yields slumped amid social media reports and Reuters headlines that there have been three “huge explosions” near the central Iran cities of Natanz (location of an Iranian nuclear power plant) and Isfahan (location of the Iranian Nuclear Technology Center which is suspected of being the center of Iran’s nuclear weapons program), as well as simultaneous explosions in Iraq and Syria, where the Israel air force appears to be targeting pro-Iranian militias.

      • IRANIAN MEDIA CONFIRMS AN ISRAELI ATTACK ON IRANIAN TERRITORY

      • IRANIAN STATE MEDIA IS REPORTING THAT TONIGHT’S AIRSTRIKE BY THE ISRAEL AIR FORCE MAY HAVE TARGETED THE 8TH TACTICAL AIRBASE OF THE IRANIAN AIR FORCE, WITHIN ISFAHAN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, WHICH CONTAINS MULTIPLE SQUADRONS OF F-14 “TOMCAT” FIGHTER AIRCRAFT.

      • ABC NEWS REPORTS THAT ISRAELI MISSILES HIT A SITE IN IRAN

      • IRAN STATE MEDIA SAYS ‘NO FLY ZONE’ ESTABLISHED OVER WESTERN REGION

      • IRANIAN MEDIA: 3 HUGE EXPLOSIONS WERE HEARD IN ISFAHAN, SOUTH OF TEHRAN

      • JERUSALEM POST: SIMULTANEOUS EXPLOSIONS REPORTED IN IRAN, SYRIA, AND IRAQ ACCORDING TO INITIAL REPORTS

      • IRAN’S FARS NEWS AGENCY SAYS EXPLOSIONS HEARD IN CENTRAL ISFAHAN AIRPORT, REASON UNKNOWN

      • ISRAELI MISSILES HIT IRAN SITE, US OFFICIAL SAYS: ABC

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Some more reports:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Here is Marco Rubio telling us more or less what happened:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      A video of the explosions in Iran:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      There have also been reports of drone activity over Iraq:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Flights above central Iran are diverting from their designations:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      … as the airspace over the region is rapidly clearing:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Unconfirmed reports suggest that the Israeli airstrikes are targeting a building where a high level meeting was being held among groups supported by Iran and the IRGC:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      The market reaction has been immediate, with S&P futures dumping initially but then, as speculation grows that this is another measured, scripted response to the measured, scripted initial attack by Iran, the market is starting to normalize fast.

      … with oil initially surging, then dropping.

       

      … and gold also first surged above $2400, only to slide right back…

       

      … with Silver fading all the gains…

      …and Treasuries are aggressively bid but they too are now fading.

      Even as the Bitcoin algos reprice WW3… for the second time in 5 days.

      And as traders brace for the worst, because even if Israel hopes to present a “measured” retaliation now it’s a question of what Iran will do next, it once again appears that this was just the latest episode in the carefully scripted middle-eastern “war” soap opera.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      More as we get it, until then, fear not: he is watching everything… closely.

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 21:25

    • Democrats Believe This Is Their Winning Strategy In 2024 Election
      Democrats Believe This Is Their Winning Strategy In 2024 Election

      Authored by Lawrence Wilson and Jacob Burg via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

      The Florida Supreme Court issued a long-awaited ruling on April 1, upholding a 15-week abortion ban that was signed into law in 2022. The ruling paved the way for a six-week abortion ban to take effect on May 1.

      (Illustration by The Epoch Times, Shutterstock)

      A second ruling on the same day allowed an initiative to amend the state constitution to guarantee abortion access to be placed before voters. An abortion advocacy group had already secured the required signatures, so a constitutional question on abortion will be on the Florida ballot in November.

      Barely a week later, the Arizona Supreme Court upheld an 1864 law banning nearly all abortions in the state. Three days later, the Biden campaign initiated a seven-figure ad buy in the Grand Canyon State, including a billboard that reads, “Abortion is banned in Arizona thanks to Donald Trump. He won’t stop until it’s banned nationwide. #TrumpsAbortionBan.”

      Democrats are leveraging abortion as a central issue in the 2024 election, and they are waging that campaign through ballot initiatives in key battleground states.

      The theory is simple, according to political analyst Keith Nahigian. “Ballot questions help to get more independent expenditures for ‘get out the vote’ campaigns,” he told The Epoch Times.

      In Arizona, a campaign is underway for a ballot measure amending the state constitution to provide the “fundamental right” to abortion up to the point a baby could survive outside the womb, typically around 24 weeks. It also would allow later abortions to save the mother’s life or to protect her physical or mental health.

      In Nevada, a petition drive is in the works to include an amendment on abortion access. In Colorado and Maryland, voters will decide on abortion-related  amendments in November.

      “The Democrats’ strategy heading into this election cycle was to put these measures on the ballot in every big swing state,” Phoenix-based Republican strategist Marcus Dell’Artino told The Epoch Times.

      Republicans are using the same tactic with election integrity—placing related measures on the ballot in nine states, including in Arizona, Florida, and Wisconsin.

      Both sides appear to believe their efforts will aid them in the fall and ballot measures themselves are a successful way to further a cause.

      In the 2022 election, voters in 38 states decided on 140 statewide ballot measures, according to Ballotpedia. Voters approved 69 percent of the measures and rejected 31 percent.

      The movement to amend state constitutions to guarantee abortion access is a calculated strategy by the Democratic Party to rally voters to the November election.

      The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee laid out the strategy in an April 5 memo.

      The committee attributed a ballot measure to add abortion to the state constitution in Ohio for the “historic” turnout during an off-year election in November 2023. Voters in the state passed the measure 57 percent to 43 percent—a margin of 14 percent. President Trump won Ohio by 8 percentage points in both 2016 and 2020.

      (L–R) Arizona Supreme Court Justices William G. Montgomery, John R. Lopez IV, Ann A. Scott Timmer, Chief Justice Robert M. Brutinel, Clint Bolick, and James Beene listen to oral arguments in Phoenix on April 20, 2021. (Matt York/AP Photo, File)

      “When abortion is on the ballot, voters turn out to defend their rights,” the memo states. “Seven battleground states are on track to have abortion measures on the ballot in 2024 … this further guarantees that reproductive freedom will remain a driving issue for voters this November.”

      Capitalizing on Momentum

      Momentum around the issue of access to abortion has been building since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade, the seminal decision that, for decades, limited restrictions states can impose on the procedure.

      Within 18 months of the Dobbs decision, seven states put abortion-related ballot questions before the public. In red and blue states alike, voters came down on the side of access to abortion.

      Voters in Kansas voted to stick with the status quo, which provides the right to abortion in the state constitution, while Kentucky voted to reject an amendment that said there was no constitutional right to an abortion.

      Montana voters rejected a measure that would have declared a child born alive at any stage of pregnancy to be a legal person and required medical care for that child. The measure also included criminal penalties for health care providers who violated the “born alive” portion of the law, by establishing a maximum of a $50,000 fine and/or 20 years in prison.

      Meanwhile, voters in California, Michigan, Vermont, and Ohio amended their state constitutions to include a right to “reproductive freedom,” defined to include abortion and contraception.

      Democrats have hammered the issue for over two years while Republicans have been slow to admit that many of their own voters don’t favor a near-complete abortion ban.

      In Virginia, Democrats took advantage of Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s interest in a 15-week abortion ban to campaign on abortion access in 2023. They retook control of the state’s General Assembly, prompting prominent Democrats to make abortion a centerpiece of the 2024 campaign.

      “The prospect of a national abortion ban is real,” Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer said in December 2023.

      Ms. Whitmer launched the Fight Like Hell PAC in June 2023 to raise campaign funds for Democratic candidates who are “unapologetic in their fight for working people and their basic freedoms.”

      The Biden campaign released an emotionally charged ad on April 8 featuring a Texas woman who was denied an abortion after being told her baby would not survive birth. Over the woman’s tearful sobs, text appears on the screen:“Donald Trump did this.”

      Read more here…

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 21:00

    • 'China Is Xenophobic & Cheating': Biden Ramps Up Anti-Beijing Rhetoric On Campaign Trail
      ‘China Is Xenophobic & Cheating’: Biden Ramps Up Anti-Beijing Rhetoric On Campaign Trail

      President Biden has ramped up his anti-China rhetoric on the campaign trail ahead of November, looking to grab headlines away from Trump while touring northern industrial states, and he has just called for major increases to some tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum products.

      “These are strategic and targeted actions that are going to protect American workers and ensure fair competition,” Biden told a small crowd of members at the United Steelworkers. “Meanwhile, my predecessor and the MAGA Republicans want across-the-board tariffs on all imports, from all countries, that could badly hurt American consumers.”

      Getty Images

      According to more from Biden’s speech via the NY Times, he said he would tell US trade representative Katherine Tai to increase tariffs “to what White House officials said would be 25 percent on certain Chinese products that now face tariffs of 7.5 percent, or none at all, pending the outcome of an administration review of the China tariffs initially imposed under Mr. Trump.”

      But as fully expected, Biden’s words once again inflamed tensions with Beijing, given that in the remarks he slammed China as “xenophobic” while commenting on the Asian powerhouse’s current economic struggles. 

      “They’ve got a population that is more people in retirement than working. They’re not importing anything. They’re xenophobic—nobody else coming in. They’ve got real problems” Biden said further on Wednesday.

      He had also accused China of cheating and policies that do harm against fair competition. The president said according to the White House readout:

      Because Chinese steel companies produce a lot more steel than China needs, it ends up dumping the extra steel into the global markets at unfairly low prices.  And the prices are unfairly low because Chinese steel companies don’t need to worry about making a profit, because the Chinese government is subsidizing them so heavily. 

      They’re not competing. They’re cheating. They’re cheating. And we’ve seen the damage here in America.

      You know, back in the early 2000s, the Chinese steel began floating the mar- — flooding the market wi- — in steel towns all across Pennsylvania and Ohio, who were hit very hard.

      The accusation of xenophobia and cheating marks the most aggressive rebuke of China thus far on the campaign. 

      China’s foreign ministry was quick to respond Thursday by once again highlighting US ‘hypocrisy’ – with spokesman Lin Jian lashing out sarcastically, “China wants to ask the U.S. whether it is referring to China, or the U.S. itself.”

      Biden on his Pennsylvania tour also pledged to continue seeking to deny China advanced technology like computer chips. “They can’t be sent to China because it would undermine our national security,” Biden said. “When I spoke with Xi Jinping he said ‘Why?’ And I said, ‘Because you’d use it for all the wrong reasons, so you’re not gonna get those advanced computer chips.’“

      US-China relations have someone stabilized of late, also amid the Biden-Xi phone call of two weeks ago. Also, this week Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin spoke to his Chinese counterpart for the first time in two years, as the two sides work to restore regular military-to-military communications.

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 20:40

    • Top Military Official Lied About Jan. 6: Whistleblowers
      Top Military Official Lied About Jan. 6: Whistleblowers

      Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

      The secretary of the Army on Jan. 6, 2021, lied about multiple details regarding what unfolded as the U.S. Capitol was breached, National Guard whistleblowers said during a congressional hearing on April 17.

      Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy testifies to the Senate Armed Services Committee on Capitol Hill on Dec. 3, 2019. (Joshua Roberts/Reuters)

      Then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy made multiple false claims, including that he spoke to the commanding general of the District of Columbia National Guard on two separate occasions after officials requested that the Guard be deployed to the Capitol, the whistleblowers said.

      After Maj. Gen. William Walker conveyed a request from the U.S. Capitol Police for Guard personnel, Mr. McCarthy called Maj. Gen. Walker at 2:14 p.m. and instructed the Guard to stand by, according to a Guard timeline of Jan. 6, 2021. But that call and others that Mr. McCarthy or one of his top advisers were said to have made later authorizing the Guard for mobilization and deployment did not happen, according to the Guard officials.

      “At no time did Gen. Walker take any calls, nor did we ever hear from the secretary on any of the ongoing conference calls or the secure video teleconferencing throughout the day,” Capt. Timothy Nick, who served as Maj. Gen. Walker’s personal assistant on Jan. 6, 2021, said during the hearing. “This I know because I was with the command general the entire time recording the events.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Capt. Nick has not previously discussed publicly what transpired on Jan. 6, 2021, and neither has Brig. Gen. Aaron Dean, who was the National Guard’s adjutant general on the day that the Capitol was breached.

      The Department of Defense (DOD) inspector general report on Jan. 6, 2021, which relied heavily on Mr. McCarthy and other military officials, was rife with “inaccuracies,” Brig. Gen. Dean said. “I believe it is my duty and moral obligation to stand before you today and illuminate the truth,” he told the hearing, which was held by the House Administration Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight.

      Despite Mr. Walker conveying the request for assistance at about 1:50 p.m., the Guard was not deployed to the Capitol until about 5:10 p.m.

      “This was a dereliction of duty by the secretary of the Army,” Rep. Greg Murphy (R-N.C.), one of the members of the committee, said.

      Mr. McCarthy refused to appear before the panel, Dr. Murphy said.

      Christopher Miller, the acting secretary of defense at the time, authorized Guard deployment at 3:11 p.m., but Mr. McCarthy took the order and decided to draw up a plan before ordering the deployment, according to military timelines and testimony from Mr. McCarthy and others.

      “You never would employ our personnel, whether it’s on an American street or a foreign street, without putting together a [plan],” Mr. McCarthy told the now-disbanded House Jan. 6 committee.

      Mr. McCarthy could not be reached for comment. The Army declined to comment.

      “We stand by our January 6th Report and have no further comment at this time,” a DOD inspector general spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email.

      From left to right, Command Sgt. Maj. Michael Brooks, Col. Earl Matthews, Brig. Gen. Aaron Dean, and Capt. Timothy Nick, all of the District of Columbia National Guard, are sworn in during a hearing in Washington on April 17, 2024. (House Administration Committee via The Epoch Times)

      Other Leaders

      The whistleblowers also testified that Army officials Lt. Gen. Walter Piatt and Gen. Charles Flynn, during a 2:30 p.m. conference call on Jan. 6, 2021, expressed concern about the optics of having the Guard at the Capitol.

      “I did hear the word optics. And they did use it. Specifically, Gen. Piatt said ‘optics.’ And his concern was that he did not want soldiers or airmen on Capitol grounds, with the Capitol in the background,” Brig. Gen. Dean said. “They were giving every other reason why we should be around the Capitol, away from the Capitol, and not responding to the Capitol.”

      The officials lacked familiarity with the Guard and the Guard’s capabilities, Brig. Gen. Dean said.

      Lt. Gen. Piatt has been quoted by Maj. Gen. Walker and others as saying during the call: “I don’t like the visual of the National Guard standing a line with the Capitol in the background. I would much rather relieve USCP [U.S. Capitol Police] officers from other posts so they can handle the protestors.”

      Lt. Gen. Piatt has told lawmakers that he did not recall using the words optics, visuals, or image during the call or in any other conversations on Jan. 6, 2021. But he later said, “I may have said that,” citing people who took notes during the call.

      Gen. Flynn told the House Oversight Committee in 2021 that he “never expressed a concern about the visuals, image, or public perception of sending the D.C. National Guard to the U.S. Capitol.”

      Col. Earl Matthews, a lawyer who was with Maj. Gen. Walker on Jan. 6, 2021, and who has challenged the Pentagon Jan. 6 narrative, and District of Columbia National Guard Command Sgt. Michael Brooks, a senior officer with the Guard until he retired in 2022, also testified during the hearing in Washington.

      None of the Guard officials who testified were formally interviewed by the House Jan. 6 committee, which was primarily run by Democrats and disbanded at the end of the previous Congress.

      The officials said the Guard was ready to act and could have made a difference if not for the delay.

      “I know if we were able to deploy immediately when Gen. Walker made the request, the National Guard could have helped end civil disturbance and restore order quickly,” Capt. Nick said.

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 20:20

    • Watch: Chasing Trump
      Watch: Chasing Trump

      With an ominous soundtrack throughout, Chasing Trump is the very first documentary produced by American Greatness.

      The documentary does a deep dive into the backgrounds of the four prosecutors handling former President Trump’s various legal cases, making the case that they are all “politically corrupt”, and accusing them of trying to “get Trump” because they fear he will win the November 2024 US presidential elections.

      With the former President facing increasingly restrictive gag orders, Donald Trump Jr said “‘Chasing Trump’ is an important documentary that exposes the leftwing prosecutors weaponizing the government to target my father,” adding that:

      “It’s the first documentary to do a deep dive into the backgrounds of the prosecutors behind the four cases against him and is a must watch for anyone who cares about preserving the rule of law and protecting our constitutional rights.“

      “Four corrupt, politically motivated prosecutors. One target: Donald Trump,” the narrator begins…

      “They say they’re upholding the law. But a close examination reveals politics of the very worst kind meant to influence the 2024 election.”

      Specifically, the mini-documentary makes the case that Trump is being punished for taking on the status quo and reinforces the narrative that he is subject to a witch hunt.

      Curt Mercadenta, managing editor of American Greatness, said it would shock anyone who believed the legal system was free from partisan political considerations.

      “With the 2024 election starting to heat up, it’s imperative that Americans have the opportunity to learn more about the truth behind the prosecutions targeting President Trump, along with the partisan prosecutors behind the cases.”

      Mike Davis, founder of the Article III Project, which was set up to press for conservative judicial nominees and now campaigns against what it sees as liberal activism in the courts, said:

      “These four prosecutions against President Trump are nothing more than partisan political activism masquerading as the rule of law.”

      “‘Chasing Trump’ exposes the leftwing prosecutors behind these cases as nothing more than puppets for Joe Biden and his political machine.”

      Watch the full documentary free here…

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

       

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 20:00

    • Watch: Biden Falsely Claims That WWII Uncle Eaten By Cannibals, Twice
      Watch: Biden Falsely Claims That WWII Uncle Eaten By Cannibals, Twice

      Joe Biden has always been a prolific liar and plagiarist, but on Wednesday he took things to another level.

      While attempting to disparage former President Donald Trump for ‘skipping out’ on a 2018 visit to a military cemetery outside Paris (when in fact the Navy made a ‘bad-weather‘ call), Biden claimed that his uncle, 2nd Lt. Ambrose J. “Bozey” Finnegan Jr., was shot down in World War II and eaten by cannibals.

      “He was a hell of an athlete, they tell me, when he was a kid. He flew those single-engine planes as reconnaissance over war zones, and he got shot down in New Guinea. They never found the body because there used to be, there were a lot of cannibals, for real, in that part of New Guinea,” Biden said during a Wednesday stop in Pittsburgh – an account which appears in the official transcript of his remarks.

      “They never recovered his body, but the government went back when I went down there and they checked and found some parts of the plane,” Biden continued.

      Except that’s total bullshit of course

      As Jonathan Turley points out, there was a survivor who gave a detailed account of how Finnegan and another man remained in the plane as it sank. What’s more, Bozey’s plane was not shot down – it was a Douglas A-20 Havoc with two Pratt & Whitney R-985 Wasp Junior 9-cylinder radial engines. The plane had mechanical problems when it crashed near New Guinea and simply sank into the ocean.

      “On May 14, 1944, an A-20 havoc (serial number 42-86768), with a crew of three and one passenger, departed Momote Airfield, Los Negros Island, for a courier flight to Nadzab Airfield, New Guinea. For unknown reasons, this plane was forced to ditch in the ocean off the north coast of New Guinea. Both engines failed at low altitude, and the aircraft’s nose hit the water hard. Three men failed to emerge from the sinking wreck and were lost in the crash. One crew member survived and was rescued by a passing barge. An aerial search the next day found no trace of the missing aircraft or the lost crew members.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      What’s more, Biden repeated it more than once! Watch:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      So for those keeping track:

      – Not shot down

      – Not a single engine plane

      – Not eaten by cannibals

      All of which was has been in the public domain for decades. And not one reporter following him around pushed back on what could have been googled within seconds.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      And according to AP – Biden was simply “off on details.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Meanwhile, Biden has falsely claimed at least 13 times that his uncle Frank won the Purple Heart, and said that he (Biden) was picked twice to attend the Naval Academy, when no supporting evidence exists.

      In 2021, Biden told Jewish leaders that he remembered “spending time at” and “going to” Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life synagogue in 2018 after 11 people were murdered in a mass shooting – which also never happened. The White House covered by later claiming he was thinking about a 2019 phone call with the synagogue’s rabbi.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 19:55

    • Biden Wins Endorsement Of Kennedy Family Members
      Biden Wins Endorsement Of Kennedy Family Members

      Authored by Emel Akan and Jeff Louderback via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

      President Joe Biden on April 18 traveled to Philadelphia, the final stop of his three-day tour of the crucial battleground state, where he received the Kennedy family’s endorsement for his reelection campaign.

      President Joe Biden speaks during a campaign event at Martin Luther King Recreation Center in Philadelphia, Penn., on April 18, 2024. (Drew Hallowell/Getty Images)

      More than 15 members of the Kennedy family, who had previously criticized Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s independent bid for the White House, endorsed President Biden at a campaign event in Philadelphia.

      Speaking at the event, Kerry Kennedy, the sister of RFK Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy’s seventh child, praised President Biden, stating that reelecting him is the best way forward for the country.

      “President has been a champion for all the rights and freedoms that my father and uncle stood for. That’s why nearly every single grandchild of Joe and Rose Kennedy supports Joe Biden,” Ms. Kennedy said.

      “In 2024, there are only two candidates with any chance of winning the presidency,” she added.

      Speaking at the event, President Biden thanked the family members for the endorsement.

      Six of RFK Jr.’s siblings stood alongside President Biden on stage at the Martin Luther King Recreation Center in Philadelphia.

      “I don’t want to become emotional. What an incredible honor to have the support of the Kennedy family,“ President Biden said. ”Most meaningful introduction I’ve ever gotten in my life.”

      RFK, Jr. entered the presidential race in April last year, challenging President Biden for the Democratic Party nomination.

      After encountering multiple hurdles by the DNC and accusing the organization of “rigging the primary” and not allowing any candidate to compete against President Biden, Mr. Kennedy announced he would run as an independent in October 2023.

      Many believe Mr. Kennedy’s third-party challenge threatens President Biden more than former President Trump.

      In the RealClearPolitics average of polls as of April 17, President Trump leads with 41 percent, followed by President Biden (35.7 percent), and Mr. Kennedy (11.7 percent).

      Multiple times on the campaign trail, Mr. Kennedy has pointed out that he has more than 100 family members and said that many of them are working on his campaign.

      Amaryllis Fox Kennedy, his daughter-in-law, is his campaign manager.

      RFK Jr. responded in a social media post to his family members’ endorsement of President Biden.

      “I hear some of my family will be endorsing President Biden today. I am pleased they are politically active—it’s a family tradition,” Mr. Kennedy wrote on X on April 18. “We are divided in our opinions but united in our love for each other.”

      During a recent interview with CNN, Mr. Kennedy criticized President Biden, saying he is a bigger threat to democracy than President Trump.

      “I can make the argument that President Biden is the much worse threat to democracy, and the reason for that is President Biden is the first candidate in history—the first president in history that has used the federal agencies to censor political speech, so to censor his opponent,” Mr. Kennedy said.

      In March, the DNC announced the creation of a team to counter third-party and independent presidential candidates.

      It hired Lis Smith, a veteran Democrat strategist who managed Pete Buttigieg’s unsuccessful 2020 presidential campaign, to spearhead an aggressive communication plan to combat Mr. Kennedy, independent Cornel West, and Green Party nominee Jill Stein.

      In October 2023, Mr. Kennedy’s sister, Rory Kennedy, called her brother’s campaign “dangerous” in a post on X.

      “I feel strongly that this is the most important election of our lifetime, and there’s so much at stake. And I do think it’s going to come down to a handful of votes in a handful of states.

      “And I do worry that Bobby just taking some percentage of votes from Biden could shift the election and lead to Trump’s election,” she told CNN in March when asked about her comment.

      Campaign Events in Pennsylvania

      President Biden traveled to Pennsylvania this week for a three-day tour of the battleground state, starting with a campaign event in his hometown of Scranton on April 16.

      In Scranton, the president highlighted a contrast between his economic agenda and that of his 2024 presidential rival and predecessor, former President Trump.

      He also reiterated his push to raise taxes on the rich and big corporations.

      “Folks, where we come from matters. When I look at the economy, I don’t see it through the eyes of Mar-a-Lago; I see through the eyes of Scranton,” President Biden said.

      On April 17, President Biden traveled to Pittsburgh, where he announced dramatically higher tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from China, a move likely aimed at pleasing blue-collar voters in the battleground state.

      With 19 crucial electoral votes, the state is a key focus for the Biden campaign.

      The campaign says it believes it has a clear advantage in Pennsylvania for the 2024 election, and is making significant investments in key voter groups, including black and Latino communities in the state.

      Last month, for example, the campaign opened 14 offices in a single week, enlisted 1,700 volunteers, and formed key coalitions around the state to reach out to various demographics.

      The campaign has seven offices in Philadelphia to mobilize voters and ensure a high turnout in November.

      “In contrast, the Trump campaign still has no public presence—and across Pennsylvania, local media have reported there are no signs of the Trump campaign.

      “The RNC was even forced to scrap plans to open a minority outreach office in Allentown, Pennsylvania,” the Biden campaign said in a statement.

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 19:40

    • America's Confused Commander-In-Chief Warns Israel Against Attacking Israel
      America’s Confused Commander-In-Chief Warns Israel Against Attacking Israel

      While Democratic strategists have long tried to downplay and dismiss President Biden’s obvious age and cognitive issues—which have been on continual display of late—he has just made fresh comments which illustrate the dangers of these persistent issues for the Commander-in-Chief and for the nation at a moment the Middle East stands on the brink of major war.

      The 81-year-old president said in an interview with Nexstar Media’s Reshad Hudson that he is urgently trying to de-escalate tensions centering on Gaza and Iran, following Iran’s Saturday night unprecedented attack on the Jewish state. That’s when he explained that he urged Israel to exercise restraint, and in his words he “made it clear to the Israelis: don’t move on Haifa.” Watch below:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      He then began immediately mumbling: “It’s Just Not, I Mean, Anyway…” – and trailed off, apparently losing his train of thought before moving on to speak about the Saturday Iranian ballistic missile and drone attack on Israel.

      Biden was apparently intending to refer to Rafah in the comments, which is the Palestinian city in the far southern Gaza Strip, and not the third largest city in Israel. The Netanyahu government has for weeks said it is preparing to move militarily on the refugee-packed enclave. 

      The US is worried that an IDF ground offensive will trigger further regional escalation, including the potential for attacks on American bases from Iran-backed militias in Iraq and Syria.

      But the obvious question is: will Israeli leaders really taking Washington’s stance seriously when they hear the American president, or “leader of the free world,” warning Israel not to attack a city in Israel?

      If Biden can’t distinguish Gaza’s Rafah from Israel’s Haifa, then certainly we can expect to see many more of these consequential gaffes if he gets into office another four years.

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 19:20

    • Soros Nonprofit Gives 8-Figure Sum To Far-Left Super PAC
      Soros Nonprofit Gives 8-Figure Sum To Far-Left Super PAC

      Authored by Eric Lundrum via American Greatness,

      One of the many nonprofits run by far-left billionaire George Soros donated tens of millions of dollars to a major super PAC that funds multiple left-wing groups.

      According to Fox News, Federal Elections Commission (FEC) records posted Monday reveal that the Fund for Policy Reform gave $60 million to the Democracy PAC in the first quarter of 2024; the Democracy PAC subsequently sent $21 million to Democratic committees in support of various congressional candidates in both the House and the Senate.

      The $21 million was dispersed among a dozen left-wing groups, with $8 million being split two ways between top outside groups in support of House and Senate Democrats.

      Additionally, $2.5 million was donated to Planned Parenthood, as well as another $2.5 million to BlackPAC, and $1.8 million to American Bridge, a Democratic opposition research firm.

      Other donations included $1 million to the ColorOfChange PAC and $500,000 to Americans for Contraception Victory.

      ColorOfChange is one of the most radical groups when it comes to the far-left “defund the police” agenda.

      “We know that policing doesn’t keep us safe, communities do,” the group said in a petition demanding that supporters harass politicians to get them to support the defunding movement.

      “Policing doesn’t lead to thriving communities, investment does.”

      The massive $60 million dump was the second-largest donation in the 2024 election cycle thus far, only surpassed by the $82.6 million that was donated by a state super PAC to Never Back Down, the super PAC that backed the doomed presidential campaign of Governor Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.).

      The 93-year-old George Soros recently handed full control of his political empire to his son, Alex, and Alex’s subsequent moves have been watched closely.

      The younger Soros shows no signs of slowing down his family’s influence over left-wing politics both in America and globally, continuing to pour millions into far-left causes that undermine the security of the United States of America, including pro-amnesty and pro-open borders groups, as well as backing progressive district attorneys who refuse to enforce basic laws.

      In response, Musk is gathering signatures…

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 19:00

    • Biden Pushing Pipe-Dream Of Israel-Saudi Mega Deal Based On Palestinian State Recognition
      Biden Pushing Pipe-Dream Of Israel-Saudi Mega Deal Based On Palestinian State Recognition

      The Biden administration is keeping its dream of seeing Saudi-Israeli diplomatic normalization achieved (or rather, what is in fact originally Trump’s dream set in motion via the Abraham Accords).

      But Biden is dangling something before Netanyahu that the Israeli leader is unlikely to be very attracted by. “The Biden administration is pushing for a long-shot diplomatic deal in coming months that presses Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to accept a new commitment to Palestinian statehood in exchange for diplomatic recognition by Riyadh, U.S. and Saudi officials said,” writes The Wall Street Journal Thursday.

      This is not the first time the plan has been floated or was leaked to the media. Last year, for example, Saudi Arabia asked the US for help with developing a “civilian nuclear program” and for fewer restrictions on arms purchases in exchange for normalizing ties with Israel, as the New York Times previously reported.

      The only thing that has changed is there are even bigger hurdles at this moment of a post-Oct.7 Middle East, including a still impending Israeli ground offensive on Rafah, and the specter of a major Iran-Israel war in the wake of the Saturday Iranian drone and ballistic missile attack on Israel.

      “As inducements to recognize Israel, the White House is offering Riyadh a more formal defense relationship with Washington, assistance in acquiring civil nuclear power and a renewed push for a Palestinian state—a package that U.S. officials say they are in the final stages of negotiating,” continues the WSJ.

      Admin officials speaking to the Journal also claimed that the major weekend attack out of Iran could hasten broader Arab Gulf and Israeli rapprochement:

      U.S. officials say the successful multicountry effort to shoot down Iranian missiles and drones on Saturday should make it clear to Israel that its security against threats from Tehran can be enhanced through closer integration with Saudi Arabia.

      However, as we underscored in featuring this Wednesday analysis: US Push For A ‘Middle East NATO’ Failed To Emerge During Iran Strikes, the reality is that in the end, the oil-rich Gulf states downplayed any involvement and left the heavy lifting of fighting off Iran’s attack to the US and its western allies and Jordan, the resource-poor Hashemite Kingdom dependent on US financial assistance.

      On Friday the UN Security Council is expected to vote on an Algerian-proposed draft resolution to recognize a Palestinian state, which would give the Palestinian representatives full membership status at the United Nations.

      The US position has long been that a Palestinian state must be born out direct negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians, and not accomplished superficially within an external forum like the UN. The US has already said, via a State Department statement, that it will vote down the measure.

      Israel for its part has clearly rejected that it will allow for a Palestinian state so long as Hamas still exists, and PM Netanyahu has even linked the more secular-leaning Palestinian Authority in the West Bank to ‘terrorism’. He has also rejected a prior US call to allow the PA to take over and administer the Gaza Strip. The reality is that the current Gaza war makes the prospect of achieving a Palestinian state more distant than ever.

      And the prospect of Palestinian statehood resulting from some kind of Israel-Saudi normalization agreement – which US media reports previously dubbed the ‘deal of the century’ – also seems a pipe dream at this point.

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 18:40

    • World Bank Report Highlights Advantage Of Central Bank Gold Revaluation Accounts
      World Bank Report Highlights Advantage Of Central Bank Gold Revaluation Accounts

      By Jan Nieuwenhuijs of Gainesville Coins

      Recently the World Bank released a handbook for asset managers on why to invest in gold. At Gainesville Coins I have written numerous articles on gold revaluation accounts and how these can be deployed by central banks to absorb losses in case of emergency. The World Bank has taken notice of my research as they allude to this practice in a chapter on reserve accounting and reference to my work.

      The World Bank publication underlines the fact that gold is the only financial asset without counterparty risk, and due to its scarcity relative to fiat currencies its price in the long run always increases. Central banks that own gold for an extended period can reap the benefits of their gold revaluation account without having to sell any gold.

      Introduction

      The Gold Investing Handbook for Asset Managers document published earlier this year by the World Bank Treasury is an interesting read for investors. It covers the gold market structure, optimal portfolio assessments, geopolitical aspects, a trading and liquidity guide, and a discussion on gold accounting, among other subjects.

      The World Bank Treasury is tasked to manage the World Bank’s finances and contribute to the Bank’s twin goals of “ending extreme poverty and promoting shared prosperity.” As such it acts as a trusted advisor to its member countries to support financial stability and provide “thought leadership in the broader treasury and financial management arena.” With this mission in mind the Bank’s Treasury writes that:

      Throughout history, gold has played a vital role as a financial asset in the global financial system. … In the modern era, gold continues to play a critical role in the global financial system, serving as a hedge against inflation, a safe haven asset, and a reserve asset for central banks. … The role of gold in the global financial system has evolved over time, with changes in monetary policy, economic conditions, and technological advancements influencing demand and supply dynamics. Despite these changes, gold remains a crucial component of the global financial system and is likely to continue to play an essential role in the future. … The market disruptions brought about by the 2008 Global Financial Crisis (GFC), the US and China trade war, Brexit, and the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as a prolonged period of negative real interest rates and geopolitical uncertainties caused by financial sanctions imposed on Russia to freeze its foreign reserves, reinforced the strategic importance of gold as a buffer against financial instability.

      Central Bank Gold Revaluation Accounts

      After the central banks of advanced economies such as the Netherlands and Germany stated their gold revaluation accounts (GRAs) guarantee their solvency in 2013, the World Bank now joins the discussion on GRAs. On page 57 of its report there is a summary of my article on how the central bank of Curaçao and Saint Martin utilized its GRA to cover losses in 2021.

      Courtesy of the World Bank. On page 67 of the document a reference is made to my research regarding the central bank of Curaçao and Saint Martin in 2021. The one thing blocking central banks from using their GRAs are their self-imposed rules.

      Simplified, a GRA is an accounting entry on the liability side of a central bank’s balance sheet that records unrealized gains in gold. Because central banks are the root of the modern money tree, they can use these entries to pay for expenses. A GRA, if sufficient, can prevent a central bank from going into negative capital in times of financial stress without having to sell gold (for more details read my article here).

      Stylized balance sheet of central bank X.

      All in all, the World Bank’s reporting of GRAs is bullish for gold as it once again confirms gold’s position front and center in the monetary system. Gold—as per International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank’s sister institute—is the only universally accepted financial asset that is not someone else’s liability. From the IMF (BPM6):

      Financial assets are economic assets that are financial instruments. Financial assets include financial claims and, by convention, monetary gold held in the form of gold bullion … A financial claim is a financial instrument that has a counterpart liability. Gold bullion is not a claim and does not have a corresponding liability. It is treated as a financial asset, however, because of its special role as a means of financial exchange in international payments by monetary authorities and as a reserve asset held by monetary authorities.

      Gold has no counterparty risk and can’t be arbitrarily devalued. Hence, the IMF lists gold at the very top of reserve assets, which makes gold the hardest asset for central banks to own and creates significant unrealized gains over time through the debasement of the currency they issue. And as I have explained previously these unrealized gains can be turned into realized gains to pay for expenses.

      Source: Balance of Payments Manual 6.

      Conclusion

      In the past years more and more central banks from both the global South and North—and international financial institutions like the World Bank—are pitching gold as an imperative asset with multiple functions. Gold is a safe haven asset, inflation hedge, backup currency, its revaluation accounts can be used, etcetera.

      If one looks at the order of the IMF’s list of reserve assets the similarities with Exter’s inverse pyramid is easily seen. Gold truly underpins the global financial system. In my view, though, the value of all financial assets resting on gold has grown too large in the past decades. For stabilizing the pyramid (financial system), the value of the gold needs to increase accordingly.

      But we will explore these imbalances more in depth in my next article.

      Further Reading

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 18:20

    • Russia, Russia, Russia!: Watch As Democrats Go Full Russia-Tard During Hearing Over China's "Political Warfare"
      Russia, Russia, Russia!: Watch As Democrats Go Full Russia-Tard During Hearing Over China’s “Political Warfare”

      While China has spent decades conducting deep espionage throughout US institutions – mostly in the form of plucky PhD candidates handling sensitive projects at American universities, and places like Los Alamos National Laboratory, Congressional Democrats simply can’t shake their fixation with Russia.

      Point in case, during a Wednesday House Oversight hearing on defending America from China’s political warfare, Democrats – who take tons of money from China (and bang their spies on occasion), couldn’t seem to remain on topic.

      Watch:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-MS) got into it at one point:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Quick, send money to Ukraine!

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 18:00

    Digest powered by RSS Digest

    Apr 18

    Today’s News 18th April 2024

    • UN Security Council To Hold Contentious Vote On Palestinian Statehood
      UN Security Council To Hold Contentious Vote On Palestinian Statehood

      Friday will witness another Gaza-related showdown in a very divided United Nations Security Council, as council member Algeria has prepared a draft resolution for the body recognize a Palestinian state.

      It would require nine votes and no vetoes on the part of the US, Britain, France, Russia or China in order to pass – which means it won’t happen, given the US as a close ally of Israel is expected to surely block it. The plan ultimately seeks to bestow on Palestine full UN membership status.

      Getty Images

      Looking ahead to the vote, US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield said Wednesday: “We do not see that doing a resolution in the Security Council will necessarily get us to a place where we can find … a two-state solution moving forward.”

      The US position has long been that a Palestinian state must be born out direct negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians, and not accomplished superficially within an external forum like the UN.

      Israel has clearly rejected that it will allow for a Palestinian state so long as Hamas still exists, and PM Netanyahu has even linked the more secular-leaning Palestinian Authority in the West Bank to ‘terrorism’. He has also rejected a prior US call to allow the PA to take over and administer the Gaza Strip. The reality is that the current Gaza war makes the prospect of achieving a Palestinian state more distant than ever.

      According to some background via Reuters:

      The Palestinians are currently a non-member observer state, a de facto recognition of statehood that was granted by the 193-member UN General Assembly in 2012. But an application to become a full UN member needs to be approved by the Security Council and then at least two-thirds of the General Assembly.

      The UN Security Council has long endorsed a vision of two states living side by side within secure and recognized borders. Palestinians want a state in the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza Strip, all territory captured by Israel in 1967.

      The UK too has long said it will not recognize Palestine outside of a broader deal for a two-state solution that involves Israeli assent.

      Spain was the most recent country to unilaterally recognize Palestine as a state, which was announced earlier this month. Those EU states to have previously done so include Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria. Ireland and Malta have also recently said they are on board and plan to do so.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      The current war in Gaza and soaring civilian death toll among Palestinians as Israel continues its operation seeking to eradicate Hamas and free the hostages has given extra impetus to those officials in Europe who have wanted to see Palestinian recognition. 

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 02:45

    • The Polish President Revealed That Foreign Companies Own Most Of Ukraine's Industrial Agriculture
      The Polish President Revealed That Foreign Companies Own Most Of Ukraine’s Industrial Agriculture

      Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

      The Oakland Institute published a detailed report in February 2023 titled “War and Theft: The Takeover of Ukraine’s Agricultural Land”, which exposed how foreign firms have clandestinely taken control of a significant share of Ukrainian farmland by exploiting a liberal law in collusion with local oligarchs. Their findings made waves around the world at the time but eventually receded from the public’s attention over half a year later once Western outlets like the USA Today misleadingly “fact-checked” it.

      They took advantage of social media users conflating indirect ownership through stakes with direct control to discredit the institution’s report, after which it largely faded from the general discourse. Few could have expected that it would be none other than Polish President Andrzej Duda who just breathed new life into it during his interview with Lithuanian National Radio and Television. He was explaining Poland’s problem with Ukrainian agricultural imports when he dropped the following bombshell:

      “I would like to draw particular attention to industrial agriculture, which is not really run by Ukrainians, it is run by big companies from Western Europe, from the USA. If we look today at the owners of most of the land, they are not Ukrainian companies. This is a paradoxical situation, and no wonder that farmers are defending themselves, because they have invested in their farms in Poland […] and cheap agricultural produce coming from Ukraine is dramatically destructive to them.”

      Duda represents what’s widely considered to be one of the most pro-American and anti-Russian governments at any time in history so he can’t credibly be accused of “pushing Kremlin propaganda”.

      He therefore wouldn’t have confirmed the dramatic claim of majority-foreign ownership of Ukraine’s industrial agriculture, albeit indirectly through stakes in national companies that exploit a liberal law in collusion with local oligarchs, if he didn’t have the facts provided to him by Polish experts to back it up.

      This development should prompt a resurgence of interest in prior reports on this subject such as USAID’s about how “Private Sector on the Frontlines of Land Reform to Unlock Ukraine’s Investment Potential”. Thomas Fazi’s detailed report for UnHeard back in July 2023 about how “The capitalists are circling over Ukraine: The war is creating massive profit opportunities” is also insightful. Most relevant, however, is what Zelensky told the World Economic Forum in Davos in May 2022. In his words:

      “We offer a special – historically significant – model of reconstruction. When each of the partner countries or partner cities or partner companies will have the opportunity – historical one – to take patronage over a particular region of Ukraine, city, community or industry. Britain, Denmark, the European Union and other leading international actors have already chosen a specific direction for patronage in reconstruction.”

      One year later, he hosted BlackRock’s management in Kiev, during which time they discussed the creation of an investment and reconstruction fund. According to Zelensky, “Today is a historic moment because, since the very first days of independence, we have not had such huge investment cases in Ukraine. We are proud that we can initiate such a process…We will be able to offer interesting projects to invest in energy, security, agriculture, logistics, infrastructure, medicine, IT, and many other areas.”

      Putting the pieces together, the Ukrainian leader made good on his May 2022 Davos proposal by offering companies “patronage” over Ukraine’s industrial agriculture, which was already in the process of unfolding prior to then but was greatly accelerated by last May’s meeting with BlackRock’s management. This took the tangible form of these indirectly foreign-controlled farms outcompeting Poland’s by far, thus leading to the Polish farmers’ protests across the country and the latest troubles in bilateral ties.

      The sequence of events detailed thus far places into context mid-February’s report about the G7’s alleged plans to appoint an envoy to Ukraine, who’d obviously be tasked with implementing the Davos agenda if this comes to pass, particularly entrenching foreign control over Ukrainian farmland. It also suggests that Ukraine’s informal focus on ramping up agricultural exports to the EU isn’t just opportunistic, but partially driven by these foreign firms’ preference for speedy and reliable profits.

      Ukraine had hitherto been an agricultural powerhouse in the Global South but ceded its market share to Russia on the false pretext that Moscow was blockading the Black Sea, which in turn prompted the EU to temporarily eliminate prior trade barriers for the official purpose of facilitating exports via its territory. In reality, Russia never blockaded the Black Sea, and almost all of the Ukrainian grain that entered the EU remained there instead of traveling through the bloc en route to Kiev’s traditional Global South markets.

      It’s much quicker for Ukraine to sell its agricultural products in the neighboring EU than to wait however long it takes to export them to Africa, not to mention more reliable as well since it’s unimaginable that these developed economies would ever have the same possible payment problems as developing ones. These self-evident calculations work against Poland’s interests, ergo how much of a struggle it’ll be for that country to defend its domestic market from this influx considering the powerful forces at play.

      It’s not just the Ukrainian agricultural lobby that wants tariff-free access for these products into the EU market, but also the lobbies of those foreign firms that indirectly control its industrial agriculture. The latter will likely fight tooth and nail to prevent any compromise being reached on Ukraine’s hoped-for EU membership whereby that former Soviet Republic’s agricultural sector would be excluded from any deal. Poland therefore has every reason to continue drawing global attention to these shadowy relationships.

      It’s only by raising maximum awareness of the fact that “most of the land” within Ukraine’s industrial agriculture sector “is run by big companies from Western Europe, from the USA” that Poland stands any chance of the aforesaid compromise entering into force. That’ll make the country some very powerful enemies who could then meddle in Polish domestic affairs out of vengeance, but Duda’s latest interview suggests that he’s prepared to face their wrath in order to protect Poland’s objective national interests.

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 02:00

    • Food Is Now An Investment – Here's Why Inflation Isn't Going Away Anytime Soon
      Food Is Now An Investment – Here’s Why Inflation Isn’t Going Away Anytime Soon

      Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

      One of the more difficult aspects of working in economic analysis is the problem of rampant disinformation that you have to dig through in order to get to the truth of any particular issue.  In this regard, economics is very similar to politics.  The propaganda is endless and debunking it sometimes feels like moving a mountain with a teaspoon.

      Establishment media sources lie incessantly about our financial conditions, and when they are finally cornered and forced to admit how bad things are, they then lie about the causes.  That said, I find that these lies are usually designed to do one of two things:  Over-complicate the problem so that people give up thinking about it, or, distract from the problem so that people blame a scapegoat.

      As for inflation, here is the bottom line:

      Central Banks And The Fiat Flood

      Rising prices are caused by two main drivers.  The first is money creation, or too many dollars chasing too few goods.  Central banks around the world have been FLOODING the system with fiat currency ever since the debt crisis of 2008 and the Federal Reserve within the US is the worst violator by far.  We are talking about tens of trillions (or more) in money creation, all supposedly as a means to stall or prevent a deflationary crash.

      By the time the pandemic lockdowns were initiated and the Fed dropped $8 trillion+ onto the economy through stimulus measures like covid checks and PPP loans, the total US money supply was already at destructive levels.  The covid stimulus was simply the straw that broke the camel’s back.  So, if you want to know who is directly to blame for your daily expenses rising 30% or more in the span of three years, the first set of criminals are the central bankers.

      Governments and certain corporate partners are also to blame, but the central banks are the root mechanism for all inflationary movements.  It’s my belief (according to the evidence) that central banks have deliberately triggered a stagflationary crisis with the intent to forcefully replace cash based economies with a new digital and cashless global economy.  However, that’s a discussion for another article…

      Shortages And Core Resources

      The other primary cause of rising prices is shortages or disruptions in key resources including oil and energy.  Keep in mind that the war in Ukraine has led to the west being cut off from large portions of the resource rich Russian market.  And, the war in Gaza has led to groups in the Middle East like the Houthis denying a multitude of cargo ships and oil tankers from traversing the Red Sea.

      By themselves, each one of these events seems like a small threat to the global supply chain, but when they pile up together the effects become detrimental.  For now, the biggest factor is rising energy prices because this is the key resource that allows all agriculture and manufacturing to function.  Every time oil prices rise you’re going to see prices in everything else rise.

      This is the exact reason why the Biden Administration continued to dump the US Strategic Oil Reserves on the market for the past couple years.  This was their way of manipulating oil prices down in order to mitigate or hide the greater effects of inflation.  Now that they’re being pressured to refill those reserves and start buying (at a much higher price) global oil prices and US prices in particular are spiking again.

      Media Disinformation And Crushing Food Costs

      Food costs have risen by 30% or more depending on the product since the beginning of 2020, and even though CPI reports several months ago showed a “slowdown” in overall inflation, this does not mean prices are going to go down anytime soon.  In fact, they will only keep rising with each passing year.

      CPI is a tool for measuring the AVERAGE price increases of over 80,000 products and services across a wide spectrum.  Many of these items are not necessities and so they dilute the actual inflation we are seeing in everyday expenditures.  If we were to look at an average of daily necessities like housing, energy, food, etc. then CPI would read far higher.

      When the media touts a lower CPI print as a sign that the economy is improving, what they usually don’t mention is that the stat only represents how much higher prices are going to go.  A lower CPI does not mean costs on the shelf are going to go down.  Inflation is cumulative.

      Meaning, that 30%+ increase in food that Americans have been dealing with – That’s not going away, it’s just not climbing as fast as it was.  And, as we’ve seen in the past couple months, inflation has the ability to return just as quickly to add even more gasoline to the fire.

      Not long ago I was reading through an article from CBS that claimed they could explain why there’s been no respite in food prices lately.  In reality the entire piece was disinformation, blaming every possible scapegoat while ignoring the real causes.

      Their main explanation is “Greedflation,” or the claim that companies are overcharging on food items.  In other words, blame businesses, don’t blame the Federal Reserve and don’t blame the government.  They’re “innocent” in all of this.

      So far there’s no concrete evidence to support the Greedflation theory.  Every business has unique expenses, unique overhead, unique industrial costs, unique quality control and unique resource costs.  One cookie company’s bottom line will be different from another cookie company’s bottom line.  That said, there are universal costs that directly correlate to higher prices regardless of the company, and that includes energy, labor, and core commodities.

      For those that track the markets it’s obvious that commodities are climbing.  The Industrial Commodity Index is far higher today than it was in 2020, along with oil and gas prices.  Every base resource that companies use to make products is increasing in value and thus it costs them more to manufacture.  Agriculture in particular is heavily affected by oil prices as well as prices in fertilizer and farming equipment, not to mention higher costs in labor.

      From 2020 to 2023 the total costs paid by farmers to raise crops and care for livestock increased by more than $100 billion, or 28%, to an all-time high of $460 billion in 2023.  Funny how that number tracks very close to the 30% increase in overall food prices since 2020. 

      The establishment media wants you to believe that high food prices are going to go away soon, and in order to trick you they need to convince you that the cause is something that can be “controlled” or “regulated”.

      There is no indication that agricultural costs are going to stop increasing in the near future, so, that means each year food is going to cost you more than the year before. 

      It might even cost you MUCH more than the year before.

      In conclusion, this is why people need to start looking at food as an investment similar to the way they might look at their 401K or any retirement plan.  If you want to mitigate costs in the future in terms of food you will need to purchase foods with a long shelf life now.  If you think that inflation is a passing phase and that things will go back to the way they were before 2020 then you probably won’t take this concern seriously.  But, consider this:

      Well before 2020 I was warning regularly about an impending stagflation crisis.  The food storage I bought in 2020 now costs at least 30%-50% more to buy in 2024.  Meanwhile, some of the top mainstream economists in the country were denying such a thing would ever happen.  When it did happen, they claimed it was “transitory.”  This was also proven false.  Now they claim food will drop after companies are forced through regulation to cut prices.

      Whether government intervenes or the market continues to react to poor fiscal policies, it is quickly becoming a necessity to invest in food security as soon as possible.  Government enforced price controls have never actually proven effective in stopping inflation.  Once you remove all profit incentives many businesses will close up shop.  This causes the supply of goods to go down and prices then spike anyway due to shortages.

      Do you want to bet your future on establishment economists being right for once, or, do you want to just store some food today in the knowledge that prices are only going exponentially higher?

      *  *  *

      One survival food company, Prepper All-Naturals, has proactively dropped prices to allow Americans to stock up ahead of projected hikes in beef prices. Their 25-year shelf life steaks currently come at a 25% discount with promo code “invest25”.

      Tyler Durden
      Thu, 04/18/2024 – 00:00

    • The Top 10 Most Cost-Effective Countries To Get A High-Priced Higher Education
      The Top 10 Most Cost-Effective Countries To Get A High-Priced Higher Education

      A new study by Online Gaming Groups has evaluated over 30 countries to determine the most cost-effective higher education systems, focusing on the percentage of average annual income spent on educational expenses.

      This analysis included countries with the highest university fees, and additional costs such as living and rent were considered to accurately assess the full financial commitment needed for education.

      By examining the ratio of costs to salary, the study ranked these nations. Belgium emerged as the leader, offering the most cost-effective higher education. In contrast, Israel was noted for having the highest educational expenses on the list, despite having the fewest universities and the lowest quality of higher education.

      Belgium tops the list of countries offering the most cost-effective higher education, with annual expenses, including tuition fees, averaging $28,574. The average annual salary in Belgium is $53,890, with 53.02% of this salary spent on living and university expenses. This balance between earning and learning costs underscores the country’s commitment to making education accessible.

      Switzerland ranks second, with average annual expenses of $51,013 and an average salary of $95,490, dedicating 53.42% of salary to education and living costs. Despite having the highest living costs in the ranking, Switzerland’s substantial average salary helps mitigate these expenses, making its education system remarkably cost-effective.

      In third place, South Korea presents a contrast with more affordable living conditions and a lower average salary of $36,190. Here, 61.01% of the salary goes towards education and living expenses, with the country having the highest education costs among the top three.

      The Netherlands, fourth on the list, has annual expenses of $37,697 against an average salary of $60,230, spending 62.59% of it on education and living costs. The country ensures broad accessibility to higher education with relatively moderate educational costs.

      France is fifth, balancing university and living costs against an average yearly salary of $45,290. With 63.50% of the salary allocated to these costs, France maintains a balance between accessible education and high educational quality.

      Ireland follows as the sixth most cost-effective country for higher education, with average expenses of $55,129 and a salary of $79,730, dedicating 69.14% of it to education and living. Despite not having the highest costs, the cumulative annual expenses are considerable.

      Japan ranks seventh, where 70.14% of the average annual salary of $42,440 is spent on higher education, indicating a premium level of education, as evidenced by the high number of universities and education costs.

      Italy, eighth, spends 70.51% of an average salary of $38,200 on education, reflecting the country’s rich educational heritage and the high quality of its education system, ranked 14th worldwide.

      Australia is ninth, requiring families and students to invest significantly in education, with 72.97% of the $60,840 average salary going toward educational and living expenses, indicative of the country’s high standards of living and educational quality.

      Lastly, Israel, despite having the highest education costs on the list and ranking lowest in the number of universities and education quality, spends 78.97% of the average salary of $55,140 on education, rounding off the list of the top ten countries with cost-effective higher education.

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 23:20

    • The Teachers' Unions Are More Political than Ever
      The Teachers’ Unions Are More Political than Ever

      Authored by Larry Sand via American Greatness,

      In the past, teachers’ unions concentrated on fighting to keep all teachers employed—competent or otherwise—laying off teachers by seniority when necessary and soaking taxpayers every chance they could. While those activities are still part of their mission, they have, over time, increasingly delved into the political/social realm, promoting Black Lives Matter, Critical Race Theory, DEI, class warfare, gender-bending, etc. And their current level of engagement is staggering.

      Americans for Fair Treatment, a national nonprofit organization that educates public employees about their rights in a unionized workplace, recently released a report detailing the National Education Association’s (NEA) financial filings from Sept. 1, 2022, through Aug. 31, 2023.

      The NEA declared that its political spending totaled $50.1 million during the fiscal year, though the true number is much higher. During the most recent reporting period, the union disclosed that it spent “$126.3 million on ‘contributions, gifts, and grants,’ which is where most unions detail their charitable giving.”

      However, a closer look at the union’s “contributions, gifts, and grants” shows that the NEA is directing more money towards political causes than it reports. For example, the union contributed $4.1 million to the State Engagement Fund, a progressive advocacy group, and $3.5 million to For Our Future, a Democratic super PAC. Another $500,000 was donated to the Color of Change Education Fund, which has ties to progressive billionaire George Soros.

      The disclosure also reveals that the union spent $10 million more on politics and lobbying than it did representing its members. While NEA’s representational spending increased by about $2 million compared to the previous reporting period, spending on politics and lobbying increased by $8.5 million.

      It’s worth noting that as a 501(c)(5), the NEA and, in fact, all unions have a special tax-exempt status with the IRS, which is accorded to “Labor, Agricultural, and Horticultural Organizations.”

      Local teachers’ unions are also involved in political spending. In Chicago, where just 15% of Chicago’s 8th-grade students are proficient in math and 21% are proficient in reading, the Chicago Teachers Union is focused on other things. As the Illinois Policy Institute documents, the union spent nearly three times more on politics in 2023 than the year before, and just 17% of its spending was on representing teachers.

      A 142-page leaked document contains hundreds of Chicago Teachers Union contract demands, including 100% abortion coverage to pay for surrogates and housing students in old schools.

      The CTU is also demanding a 100% electric bus fleet and fuel-efficient drivers’ education vehicles, installation of solar panels and other facility upgrades, compensation, and medical benefits for absences related to “verbal assault,” etc.

      In preparing for CTU’s collective bargaining talks with the city, the union’s president, Stacy Davis Gates, asserted the new contract would cost taxpayers $50 billion.

      Importantly, the teachers’ unions’ political involvement does not stop with spending. They now routinely make policy statements and demands, most notably on the recent strife in the Middle East.

      In November, the United Educators of San Francisco contended that Israel’s military campaign violated the United Nations Universal Declaration on Human Rights but made no mention of the brutal Oct. 7 attacks or the captivity of over 200 hostages.

      In December, a pro-Palestinian “teach-in” was organized by the Oakland Education Association, and members developed special lesson plans in defiance of the local school board. The same month, Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association, demanded a permanent truce in the Middle East on Twitter—a position that was later reaffirmed by the organization’s board of directors.

      In late January, the American Federation of Teachers officially called for a cessation of hostilities.

      Additionally, Heritage Foundation scholar Jay Greene reports that a measure adopted by the NEA-affiliated Massachusetts Teachers Association board in December declared, “The MTA president and vice president will urge the president of the NEA to pressure President Biden to stop funding and sending weapons in support of the Netanyahu government’s genocidal war on the Palestinian people in Gaza.”

      Greene also notes that the executive committee of the Minneapolis Federation of Teachers passed a resolution condemning “the system of Israeli occupation and apartheid.” However, backlash from teachers and the community led the union to issue an apology.

      What can be done about the onslaught of union political activity?

      The big-picture solution is for teachers’ unions to be banned. Period.

      “All government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management.”

      Progressive icon Franklin Delano Roosevelt issued the above caveat about government unions. Additionally, George Meany, president of the AFL-CIO for 24 years, once stated, “It is impossible to bargain collectively with the government.”

      Both men understood that the very nature of government makes it wrong for its leaders to negotiate with any union. When government unions bargain, they often sit across the table from people they helped put in office with generous campaign contributions. And when these unions go on strike, they walk out on the taxpayer.

      However, getting rid of these established unions is highly unlikely, primarily because political spending by government unions inevitably favors union-friendly candidates.

      Prohibiting collective bargaining would reduce union power, but only five states currently prohibit that activity for public employees: Texas, Arkansas, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia.

      Ultimately, teachers hold the key. If they stopped paying dues, the unions would cease to exist. Legally, they can now do so courtesy of the Supreme Court’s 2018 Janus decision, which asserted that no teacher or any public employee has to pay a penny to a union as a condition of employment.

      The good news is that since the SCOTUS ruling, 20% of workers in non-right-to-work states have dropped out of their unions, according to a report from the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. The bad news is that 70% of teachers nationwide still willingly pay union dues.

      As a teacher, if your politics are on the right, centrist, or maybe you are apolitical, do you really want hundreds of your dues dollars going to the leftist causes that the state and national unions regularly support?

      It is with no sense of irony that NEA boss Becky Pringle asserts that politics’ “creeping influence” in classrooms threatens education. “All of the politicians and pundits who are trying to politicize our school demonize teachers, which is new, who are not focused on what our kids need or what our parents say they want for their kids.”

      Pringle has it backward. Clearly, the number one educational “influence creeps” are the teachers’ unions.

      *  *  *

      Larry Sand, a retired 28-year classroom teacher, is the president of the non-profit California Teachers Empowerment Network – a non-partisan, non-political group dedicated to providing teachers and the general public with reliable and balanced information about professional affiliations and positions on educational issues. The views presented here are strictly his own.

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 23:00

    • Forget Cocoa, Coffee. There's A "Squeeze Risk" Building In The Tin Market
      Forget Cocoa, Coffee. There’s A “Squeeze Risk” Building In The Tin Market

      Tin prices on the London Metal Exchange have surged 27% this year, landing on the radars of some institutional desks. Other commodities closely monitored by hedge funds include cocoa, coffee, Brent crude, copper, and gold.

      Bloomberg notes that LME data for the tin market shows the aggregate net-long position held by financial investors surged to the highest level ever, with data going back to 2018. 

      These bullish bets have pushed tin prices well into the $32,000 handle in recent trading sessions. 

      Bloomberg notes that the “big bull” positioning by institutional investors comes as major supply disruptions hit top producers across Indonesia, Myanmar, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Also, the metal, a critical component of modern technology and used primarily as solder to connect electrical components and semiconductor chips, is the latest AI trade investors have been piling into. 

      “Every data byte and every electron travels through hundreds of solder joints that connect it all together,” Jeremy Pearce, head of market intelligence and communications at the International Tin Association, said in an email interview with the media outlet. He pointed out that tin’s trade thesis is that demand will rise in tandem with AI computing demand at data centers. Recall our note, “The Next AI Trade.” 

      Like Nickel and other commodities, tin is prone to mega short squeezes. Traders discovered this in 2022 after a once-in-a-generation squeeze broke the nickel trading on LME. 

      “Some market participants feel there could be a risk of a squeeze,” Ding Wenqiang, senior analyst at one of China’s largest metal researchers, Mysteel.com, told Bloomberg. He added, “They are paying close attention to the movements of the big bull in the May contract.”

      Tightening supplies come as tin inventories plunged 47% so far this year to 4,045 tons. The metal’s spot price trades at a premium versus the three-month futures contract, producing a structure known as backwardation. 

      Nickel prices are rising as commodity prices have likely based and entered a ‘weak bull’ market, according to new research from HSBC Bank.

      Rising commodity prices are more bad news for Fed chair Powell’s fight against the inflation monster.

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 22:40

    • It's Not Rate Hikes That Are "Sparking An Economic Boom", It's The Fiscal Stimulus
      It’s Not Rate Hikes That Are “Sparking An Economic Boom”, It’s The Fiscal Stimulus

      By Michael Every of Rabobank

      The Polybius Crisis

      Take a step back (in time), and see that our neoliberal, debt-addled, was-lower-for-longer global system is not just in a Polycrisis but a Polybius Crisis – referring to the ancient Greek historian.

      Polybius

      Methodology: Polybius was first to argue ‘consider your source’: today, media and markets still spout and swallow propaganda. He argues we can’t look at history in just one area, as what happens everywhere effects what is going on everywhere else: but modern markets have monomanias for one asset class, geography, and ideology: markets-first neoliberalism.

      Yet while 2024 opened with talk of 7 Fed cuts, then 6, 5, 4, 3, and 2, it just saw calls that US rate cuts are needed to lower inflation (because of the slump in housing supply that recent US data won’t help); chatter of 2 rate hikes; and now Bloomberg asks, ‘What if the Fed’s Hikes Are Actually Sparking an Economic Boom?’ Is neoliberalism in crisis, or is this a new copium given Fed Chair Powell just said he’s prepared to keep rates steady “as long as needed”?

      Bloomberg notes that high rates = stimulus is an MMT heresy, but huge budget deficits mean high rates put more cash into people’s pockets (as they take it from others’). Yet it’s fiscal deficits, not rate hikes, that do that trick, another neoliberal shibboleth. (And an MMT one: Stephanie Kelton argues rate hikes contribute to the deficit, so cutting them would lower it… as if supply-side inflation and speculation with new liquidity aren’t connected to rates.)

      Meanwhile, trade and FX are next. Perhaps-future US Treasury Secretary Lighthizer mocks the argument the US saves too little because Americans are profligate; (correctly) says low savings / large US trade deficits are caused by foreign industrial policy; forcing the trade deficit to narrow means savings would rise; and wants low corporate taxes, low regulation, subsidies, tariffs, and a “sensible” trade policy to fight mercantilism. If you don’t understand that throws global markets into a tailspin, like the economists Lighthizer mocks, you don’t understand that system.

      On security: Polybius would not be surprised that today we have a failing global security architecture because US National Security Advisor Sullivan doesn’t say ‘Si vis pacem, para bellum’, but ‘Quaeso, sume prandium meum argentum!’ (“Please, take my lunch money!”) That approach was always going to lead to a Ukraine-Russia war, or similar; an Israel-Iran clash; and, in parallel and conflating with both, Taiwan-China tensions.

      There is now frenetic activity to try to moderate any Israeli counterstrike on Iran to prevent a regional conflagration; Daniela Gabor tweets from the IMF/World Bank spring meeting, “geopolitical conflict is paralyzing everything… including on climate finance.”; and ECB President Lagarde says rate cuts are coming provided there are no inflation shocks(!) As I asked yesterday, ‘who leads and who is led?’ It’s no longer central banks.

      On politics: Polybius argues societies start as ochlocracy (mob rule); a strong leader starts monarchy (rule by one: the ‘spare’ gets a Netflix deal); power turns this to tyranny (‘democracy’, says the Ivy League); an elite revolution sets up aristocracy (rule by the best); they also lose virtue, and we get oligarchy (‘neoliberalism’ to everyone but economists); they get overthrown by the people for democracy (rule by the majority: ‘tyranny’ says the Ivy League); but people lack virtue, so this turns to ochlocracy; and the cycle restarts. Polybius argues it’s best to combine monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy.

      However, as we loom closer to the EU and US elections, and what populism may emerge, he’d probably repeat: “…enticing and corrupting the common people in every possible way… they have made the populace ready and greedy to receive bribes, the virtue of democracy is destroyed, and it is transformed into a government of violence and the strong hand. For the mob, habituated to feed at the expense of others, and to have its hopes of a livelihood in the property of its neighbours, as soon as it has got a leader sufficiently ambitious and daring… produces a reign of mere violence. Then come tumultuous assemblies, massacres, banishments, redivisions of land; until, after losing all trace of civilisation, it has once more found a master and a despot.” (Or ‘decolonisation’ as they call it at US Ivy League schools and on social media.)

      On Great Power struggles: Polybius notes in less than a lifetime Rome went from city-state to the master of the world by winning the Punic Wars vs. Carthage. History can sometimes move fast:

      • He speaks of the importance of fate – big things can ‘just happen’: today, we price out term premia from yield curves, and think they won’t.
      • Rome defeated Carthage after humiliating defeats to Hannibal due to its strategic depth and the superiority of the Roman constitution.
      • Its checks and balances prevented any one part of the state from dominating others; and “when we see good customs and good laws prevailing among certain people, we confidently assume that, in consequence of them, the men and their civil constitution will be good also, so when we see private life full of covetousness, and public policy of injustice, plainly we have reason for asserting their laws, particular customs, and general constitution to be bad.”
      • In Carthage, “nothing is disgraceful that makes for gain”; in Rome, “nothing is more disgraceful than to receive bribes and to make profit by improper means… The Carthaginians obtain office by open bribery, but among the Romans the penalty for it is death.”
      • “The most important difference for the better which the Roman commonwealth appears to me to display is in their religious beliefs.”
      • Carthage employed foreign mercenaries; the Romans didn’t (at first). “The result is that even if the Romans have suffered a defeat at first, they renew the war with undiminished forces, which the Carthaginians cannot do. For, as the Romans are fighting for country and children, it is impossible for them to relax the fury of their struggle; but they persist with obstinate resolution until they have overcome their enemies.”
      • Rome’s focus on “Carthago delenda est” (Carthage must be destroyed) proved the rallying point for their society in the end.
      • Polybius argues Carthage’s constitution couldn’t overcome that “There is in every body, or polity, or business a natural stage of growth, zenith, and decay… so far as the strength and prosperity of Carthage preceded that of Rome in point of time, by so much was Carthage then past its prime, while Rome was exactly at its zenith, as far as its political constitution was concerned. In Carthage therefore the influence of the people in the policy of the state had already risen to be supreme, while at Rome the Senate was at the height of its power: and so, as in the one measures were deliberated upon by the many, in the other by the best men, the policy of the Romans in all public undertakings proved the stronger; on which account, though they met with capital disasters, by force of prudent counsels they finally conquered the Carthaginians in the war.”

      A glance at Polybius underlines our Western neoliberal crisis. Consider his comments on good laws and customs in an election year where the leading US presidential candidate is in a New York courtroom charged with a crime some legal experts say is a misdemeanour, but with a stack of serious cases elsewhere, as allegations of double standards are thrown; and as Belgium tried to ban a political meeting involving former UK PM Truss and Nigel Farage for being dangerously ‘far right’: dangerously far out, maybe. Or look to Polybius’s views on corruption, as it spreads; religion, as religiosity falls; and on mercenaries, as the West’s willingness to fight for their own country evaporates, according to survey data, just as the need to fight grows more urgent.

      Yet while Rome and the US both rose to power within a lifetime, the former went on for a great many more, becoming an empire that took more than 650 years to fall in the West, and another millennium in the East. Time may be on the West’s side yet. Could Western checks and balances help it find a new rallying cry like “something construenda est”? And as importantly, what is ‘Team Carthage’ doing? There are two sides to every Great Power struggle.

      To summarize, however, reading biased reports not objective analysis; monomaniacal reports not broader thinking; ignoring the Classical world’s lessons on realpolitik; that how we run societies has been an issue for thousands of years, not since 2016; and that Great Power struggles are always with us, ensures you will swept away in a Polybius Crisis. Ancient wisdom isn’t perfect; but it’s arguably a lot better than relying on a contemporary world’s decided lack of wisdom.

      “NEOLIBERALISM DELENDA EST”

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 22:20

    • Alleged Illegal Immigrant Who Couldn't Speak English Caught Trying To Rob Bank Using A Translator App
      Alleged Illegal Immigrant Who Couldn’t Speak English Caught Trying To Rob Bank Using A Translator App

      You’d figure if you’re in the country illegally, you’d at least have the courtesy to learn the language before trying to hold up a bank…

      But basic human decency is dead these days, as was exemplified by a Venezuelan-born man named Yeixon Brito-Gonzalez, who was caught trying to rob a bank in Sandusky, Ohio last week, according to PJ Media. 

      The police were able to apprehend him because he couldn’t speak English and resorted to using a translation app to communicate his demands to the bank tellers. When the tellers – probably wondering if they were being “Punk’d” – did not comply, Brito-Gonzalez, evidently embarrassed, simply left the scene, the report says.

      The perp failed to prepare even basic English phrases like “give me the money” or bring an accomplice who could speak the language, the report says.

      Upon locating Brito-Gonzalez, the police brought along a Spanish-speaking officer to interrogate him but he tried to play dumb. The report says it was later revealed that he told the teller he needed “money in a bag”.

      Don’t we all…

      Sandusky Police Chief Jared Oliver said: 

      “I have been in law enforcement for over 20 years and this is the first time I encountered something like this, someone using a translator app to try and rob a bank. First time our officers have dealt with it too.”

      It’s has not been confirmed whether Brito-Gonzalez is in the U.S. illegally, though his lack of ID at arrest implies this might be the case.

      Nevertheless, while federal authorities will likely question him, there are doubts about enforcement under the current administration, suggesting he may not face stringent consequences (as has been the running theme across the U.S. since Joe Biden has been in office). 

      Sandusky is a small city nestled along the shores of Lake Erie. Known primarily for its role as a major hub for rail and water transport, Sandusky has been a vital part of Ohio’s economy since its establishment in 1818. 

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 22:00

    • Bidenomics – Inflation Persists And Jobs Decay: Gingrich
      Bidenomics – Inflation Persists And Jobs Decay: Gingrich

      Authored by Newt Gingrich via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

      Last week brought bad news for the American people and President Joe Biden. Inflation persists and jobs are decaying.

      President Joe Biden speaks about Bidenomics at CS Wind, in Pueblo, Colo., on Nov. 29, 2023. (Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images)

      On inflation, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported prices rose 3.5 percent between March 2023 and March 2024. This bad number is far higher than the U.S. Federal Reserve’s goal of 2 percent inflation—and it follows three years of price increases.

      Inflation continues to build even after the Federal Reserve pushed interest rates to their highest point in 23 years.

      Much to the Fed’s dismay, its restrictive private sector policies are being more than offset by the Biden administration’s massive deficits. While the Fed is trying to take liquidity out of the system and force a slowdown to lower inflation, the Biden administration keeps pumping borrowed money into the economy.

      The contradiction between the Fed and the Biden White House increases the scale of government and shrinks the private sector. Furthermore, since the federal government is the world’s largest debtor, high interest rates translate into an even bigger federal deficit.

      So, the long run consequences of Bidenomics on inflation is staggering. Measured from the time President Joe Biden took office, the prices Americans are paying have skyrocketed. In just three-and-a-half years, the price of eggs is up 49.3 percent, gasoline is up 47.5 percent, peanut butter is up 40 percent, butter and margarine are up 32 percent, electricity is up 28.3 percent, air fare is up 32.7 percent, used cars are up 20.9 percent—and the list continues.

      The American people feel these price increases, and they are unhappy. Most Americans rate the economy as poor, while only 38 percent consider the economy is in good shape. (Under President Donald Trump, 65 percent rated the economy as good.)

      As the Wall Street Journal editorialized:

      “[I]f voters are downbeat about the economy, persistent inflation is a good reason. Price increases across the Biden Presidency are unlike anything Americans have seen in recent decades. They have been a particular shock for low-income and younger workers who haven’t accumulated a wealth cushion in the stock market or housing values.

      “Mr. Biden is the main architect of his inflation problem—and ours.”

      Mark Halperin with his usual insight asserted: “The story of who will win this election might just be that voters demand a change from the mind-boggling high cost of almost everything. The prices are just too damn high.”

      As if inflation was not a big enough problem there is a an even bigger problem growing with the employment news.

      As Matt Weidinger outlined in AEI Ideas:

      “[I]n the past 12 months, employment among US natives is down by 651,000. Those declines were focused on men, a group President Biden already has increasing difficulties winning over.”

      “In contrast, employment among foreign-born individuals grew by 1,266,000 in the past year, driven by the rapidly growing population of foreign-born individuals ages 16 and over in the US, which rose by almost 2.6 million during the past year. “

      “The gap between US native and foreign-born employment is even starker since last summer. Since its peak in July 2023, employment of US natives has fallen by over 2.0 million, while employment of the foreign-born has risen by almost 1.4 million. “

      From President Biden’s standpoint, Weidinger highlights a deadly detail:

      “Friday’s jobs report reveals that unemployment among Black or African American individuals rose in March for the third consecutive month, to over 1.4 million, the highest level since January 2022. That group’s unemployment rate has risen from 5.1 percent to 6.4 percent in the past year.”

      The jobs numbers contain even more problems for President Biden because part-time jobs are increasing much faster than full-time jobs. More and more Americans are finding themselves working two or three jobs—often with little or no benefits—just to make ends meet in an economy of constantly rising prices.

      So, Bidenomics means rising prices, fewer jobs, more part-time employment, and a desperate sense that things are just not working.

      Still, the propaganda media is trying hard to paint a pretty picture. CNN, for example, called the latest monthly jobs report a “blowout.”

      But everyday Americans know when they go to the grocery store, pay monthly bills, or fill up their cars that life has gotten harder under President Biden.

      The trademark of Bidenomics may be the steady shrinking of products. Take a Trump era candy bar or box of cereal and place it next to the same product today. In most cases, the price increased, and the unit size has shrunk.

      Simply put: Bidenomics means you get less for more.

      If this economic failure persists for another seven months—and it almost certainly will—then Bidenomics may be Biden’s downfall.

      From Gingrich360.com

      Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 21:40

    • Why Does A Woke Maryland Private School Want To Know The Gender Identity Of Young Students, And If They Had "Oral Sex"?
      Why Does A Woke Maryland Private School Want To Know The Gender Identity Of Young Students, And If They Had “Oral Sex”?

      The parents of an elite Baltimore County, Maryland, private school, where tuition ranges from $32,000 for lower school to as high as $38,000 for upper school per year, are beyond frustrated. Many can’t voice their concerns about the woke mind virus infecting the school’s administration because contracts signed during the Covid era silence them from speaking out. 

      The St. Paul’s School in the Greenspring area, just above imploding Baltimore City, and nestled in steeplechase horse country, continues to have a weird fetish about asking young, vulnerable students about their “gender” and “sexuality.”

      In January, parents went bonkers when an “identity inventory” was handed out to young boys. The questionnaire asked them if they were “Cisgender” or “Transgender” or “Gender Non-Conforming” or “Agender.” 

      After the school hushed up several parents, making an example out of at least one, where the parent’s kids were suspended then reinstated after the parent spoke out on social media about wokenism being injected into the curriculum, the school could not help itself by going down the woke rabbit hole – once again. 

      Yet more parents have contacted us about another survey given to young girls at the school. This time, it’s called the “Independent School Health Check,” and it was administered by the Indiana University Center For Survey Research. 

      Parents are particularly livid with these two questions (and the answers): 

      1. “Do you currently identify your gender as being the same or different from your sex assigned at birth?”
      2. “How do you describe yourself?”

      One parent told us this is a “grooming mechanism …” 

      One very concerned parent asked why their kids are data mined by the school like Google does for internet search browsers.

      Another parent voiced concerns that other private schools in the area have “gone full woke,” while public schools in the state are imploding. 

      The lesson learned is parents need to heavily vet schools and or get involved to ensure their children are not being brainwashed by dangerous wokeism. 

      As for the concerned parents, now is the best time to homeschool – or how about – starting a non-woke school that actually focuses on learning instead of toxic gender nonsense.

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 21:20

    • Tucker Carlson: Congress Is Lying To You About FISA
      Tucker Carlson: Congress Is Lying To You About FISA

      Authored by Tucker Carlson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours)

      The U.S. House is expected to vote Friday on a two-year extension of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, commonly known as FISA. This transcript has been edited for length and reprinted with permission from Tucker Carlson.

      A few years ago, we learned conclusively that, in fact, the FBI and the federal intel agencies—the dozen or more federal intel agencies we have, for some reason—had been working secretly against Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

      The Justice Department building on a foggy morning in Washington, on Dec. 9, 2019. (Samuel Corum/Getty Images)

      Trump had whispered about this, then shouted about it, was roundly denounced as a conspiracy nut, a lunatic. But in the end, he was vindicated. It was true.

      These agencies spied on Trump, and they leaked some of what they learned to the media, which used it against Trump. Then these agencies concocted false stories about Trump. They tried to crush Trump completely in 2016 and then for the entire course of his presidency. Then they did the same thing in 2020 during the presidential election.

      And they’re doing it still. They’re trying to put him in prison for the rest of his life. So if we take three steps back, what you have here is what we’re seeing now.

      For the third time in three consecutive cycles, secretive federal agencies are trying to rig our presidential election. This is what the Democrats refer to as democracy, and they’re trying to defend it. But of course, it’s the opposite of democracy. It’s, in fact, the end of democracy in any semblance of a constitutional republic we ever had.

      If you have a secret police force threatening people, spying on them, and working secretly the levers of political power, then you don’t have a democracy. You have no control over really anything as a voter.

      So if there’s one thing the Republican Party, the opposition party, should be doing in response to this, right now, it’s fighting back against this descent into totalitarianism. They should be working to return freedom and democracy to the country. They should defend the Constitution. They should rein in these agencies, Washington secret police.

      But you will not be surprised to learn they’ve been busy doing just the opposite. So if you’re wondering why no one is going to prison for any of this, now that we know what actually happened, well, the reason is in part a law called FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, has been around a long time.

      Sen. Teddy Kennedy first proposed it, by the way, back in the mid-1970s. And that law allows the federal government to spy without a warrant on foreigners outside the borders of the country. The idea is bad people are doing bad things against us. We need to know what they are, and we can’t bother to go to a court to get a warrant every time we want to know, but it will never be used against American citizens. Well, of course, now we know it has been at scale.

      That law, FISA, has made it possible. So that law is now up for reauthorization in the House of Representatives. And amazingly, the new speaker of the House, Mike Johnson of Louisiana, has spent the last couple of weeks doing all he can to get that law reauthorized.

      In other words, to allow the federal agencies to continue to spy upon and punish people who disagree with them. In other words, Mike Johnson’s own party. Republicans, Trump voters. Mike Johnson has been working to do that, and that effort failed [Wednesday] because members of Congress heard from their constituents or came to their senses, saw the truth in a dream.

      Whatever happened, they stopped Mike Johnson from doing that for the moment. So that’s a good thing. And you ought to be celebrating. And even if you didn’t know it was happening—and a lot of people didn’t because it got very little media coverage. But of course, this is a temporary victory. Like all bad things, like that Chlamydia you got in a hot tub in Cabo in college, it will come back.

      This attempt to spy on you, an American citizen, without a warrant because you’ve been politically disobedient. Why will it come back? Because it’s what they really care about. And so, before it does come back, it’s worth just a very quick autopsy.

      What just happened? What do we just see so we can learn a couple of important lessons?

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      The first lesson we’re going to learn is that a lot of powerful people in the Congress are liars. They lie without shame, in fact, with pride. And they do so at the behest of or because of blackmail instituted by the intel agencies. And at the head of that list would be the chairman of the House Intel Committee, Mike Turner of Ohio.

      We’re going to play a clip from Mike Turner of Ohio saying exactly the opposite of what is true here. Is Mike Turner reassuring you that face, it would never, under the face of law, the U.S. government would never be allowed to spy on you without a warrant, because that’s unconstitutional. It never happened. It never will happen. And if you think otherwise, you’re probably one of those UFO-believing nutjobs who want to stop doing ayahuasca.

      Here’s House Intel Committee, pawn of the intel agencies, Mike Turner of Ohio:

      “They are—we are not surveilling foreigners in the United States. We’re not surveilling Americans, United States. Those individuals who say that is a warrantless search of Americans’ data are just not telling the truth. These are foreigners abroad. They’re a select group of individuals who are a national security threat. If you’re an American and you’re corresponding with ISIS, yes. If we’re, if we’re spying on ISIS, your communications are going to be captured. And you would want us to do that. All Americans would want us to try to make certain that we keep ourselves safe from these terrorist, outside terrorist groups, organizations. We are not spying on Americans. This is not a warrantless surveillance program. This is foreigners who are abroad only.”

      Every word of that is a lie. And we don’t need to guess. And I hate to use that pronoun, but I specifically don’t need to guess, because that actually happened to me.

      The [National Security Agency] broke into my text messages, read them, passed them to news organizations in order to discredit me, and then admitted that they did that. They spied on me and they did it under FISA because I was daring to text with a foreigner outside our borders.

      So Mike Turner knows that, he’s the chairman of the intel committee. He knows he’s lying, but he’s doing it anyway because it’s that important to preserve that core power.

      If you have the power to spy on someone and then to leak the information that you gather or manipulated and then leak it in order to control that person, that’s a major power. In fact, that’s a bigger power than any voter in this country has. And so he’s acting on their behalf when he lies to you. And so it shouldn’t surprise you that they want to keep that power.

      They want to keep it so badly that over the last week, U.S. government officials did something that may not have precedent in Washington. They lobbied members of Congress directly. They, in the words they used in Washington, they whipped the bill.

      Officials from the Department of Justice called, among others, [Rep.] Chip Roy of Texas to demand that he vote for FISA reauthorization.

      Imagine that—DOJ, Department of Justice, the federal law enforcement agency, called Chip Roy and said, “You got to do this.” Think about that.

      Is there any group in this country more powerful than the Department of Justice? They can put you in jail, and they’ve shown a willingness to do that. They could put kiddy porn on your computer. They’ve probably done that too. And everybody who serves in Congress knows that, and everybody’s afraid of them—along with the CIA and NSA and a bunch of other, three other agencies.

      Members of Congress are afraid of them because they know the consequences of disobedience. And so for them to call directly a member of Congress would be like the FBI coming to your House on Election Day and demanding that you vote for their designated candidate. And then having access to the record of who you actually voted for, as they do in the Congress.

      Can you imagine? You’d be highly motivated to vote for their candidate, wouldn’t you? Yes, you would. So they’re willing to do anything to get this enshrined in law, because it gives them legal cover to subvert democracy, which is their program, of course.

      Read the full transcript at TuckerCarlson.com. Reprinted by permission from The Daily Signal, a publication of The Heritage Foundation.

      Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 21:00

    • Sanctuary Cities Set Migrant Sex Offenders Free Instead Of Handing Them Over To ICE
      Sanctuary Cities Set Migrant Sex Offenders Free Instead Of Handing Them Over To ICE

      Long painted as safe havens of humanitarianism by the establishment media, sanctuary cities are slowly being exposed for the underlying hypocrisy that motivates their policies.  Red states such as Texas and Florida have been very effective in pulling back the curtain, using the busing of illegals to sanctuary cities as a tool to force Democrats to stand by their own open borders principles (or abandon them out of convenience). 

      As we witnessed when Ron DeSantis flew a few dozen illegals to the elitist neighborhoods of Martha’s Vineyard, wealthy leftists were quick to buy cheap take-out food for the migrants and pose with them for the news cameras.  Then, when the media was done with their propaganda segments the residents kicked those same migrants out of town within 48 hours and shipped them to the nearest military base.  One of the richest enclaves in the entire US and they refused to stand by their supposed convictions for more than two days; not one migrant was allowed to stay or work in Martha’s Vineyard.

      Democrats were so embarrassed by the incident that they tried to have DeSantis sued and charged with “human trafficking.”  The Martha’s Vineyard incident marked the beginning of a surge in migrant buses to cities like New York and Washington DC.  All it took was ten thousand to fifteen thousand illegals to overwhelm city welfare programs and subsidies.  Mayors in both metro areas have called for a declaration of emergency and federal aid, including National Guard troops.  In the meantime, the media blames conservative states for the disaster even though it is the sanctuary status of these cities that makes the crisis possible.   

      The message being sent is that the political left needs media cover for their policies because their policies constantly fail (or succeed in being destructive, depending on how you look at it).  They simply never intended for the surge of illegals to land on their doorstep.  One area that is consistently damaging to the progressive image is the catch and release of numerous illegal migrant criminals who go on to harm innocent American citizens.  The growing list of incidents surrounding migrant crime is creating a PR nightmare for Democrats. 

      People are starting to ask – If Democrats knowingly release dangerous migrant offenders onto the streets, are Democrats then accountable for the people those migrants go on to harm?  For example, Haitian migrant Cory Alvarez, who was arrested for raping a 15 year old girl with disabilities in Massachusetts, entered the United States using the Biden administration’s CHNV parole program.

      This program allows Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans to fly into the U.S. after they’ve supposedly been vetted and have a sponsor in the U.S.  Clearly the vetting process is non-existent and the flights are designed to allow illegals to bypass any existing border protections and claim “asylum”, thus making them semantically “legal.”  CHNV frequently transports migrants to sanctuary cities where they can avoid scrutiny by ICE.  But the problem goes further…

      A Colombian child sex offender in the US illegally was released onto the streets by California authorities rather than sent for deportation, due to sanctuary state laws.  The criminal, who’s identity has not been revealed publicly, was convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor and sentenced to four years in prison in December 2022, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).  Fifteen months later he was freed by San Bernardino County and a request from ICE to be notified of his release was not honored.

      The migrant traveled across the country to Boston, MA where he was finally apprehended by ICE agents.  Agents are frequently forced to work around sanctuary laws in Boston as well, recovering multiple migrant sex offenders daily and deporting them without the help of the city. 

      In the span of only two weeks in February 2024, ICE apprehended at least 275 illegals with sex offense convictions during a nationwide operation.  Imagine how many are still living within our borders because of sanctuary status.

      Sanctuary cities are run by local governments that have vowed to refuse to work with federal immigration authorities in any capacity, and some have even set out to obstruct or sabotage ICE agents in the apprehension of dangerous suspects.  But what can be learned from the trend of blue cities catching and then releasing the very worst kinds of criminals on the planet simply because they are migrants?

      It’s interesting that Democrats are usually so rabid about federal government control and intervention in most areas of American society, but when it comes to securing the border and vetting foreign immigrants, one of the few jobs that the feds should be doing today, leftists suddenly oppose federal presence.  The lesson here is that progressives are not willing to negotiate their open border agenda in the slightest, even to prevent child victimization.  This forces us to ask an important question:  If they aren’t willing to compromise to protect the most vulnerable of American citizens, why should conservatives compromise with them on overall immigration?       

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 20:40

    • Excused Juror Reveals Selection Process For Trump’s 'Hush-Money' Trial: 'All Have Prior Opinions'
      Excused Juror Reveals Selection Process For Trump’s ‘Hush-Money’ Trial: ‘All Have Prior Opinions’

      Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

      A juror who was excused from serving on the Manhattan trial of former President Donald Trump provided details about the questions potential jurors were asked.

      Kara McGee an excused juror, speaks to the media outside Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City on April 16, 2024, during the second day of the trial against former President Donald Trump for allegedly covering up hush money payments linked to extramarital affairs. (Kena Betancur/AFP via Getty Images)

      Kara McGee told media outlets outside the courtroom on Tuesday that she was dismissed but said she believes she could be impartial, adding still that it would be “very difficult for anyone really in this country to not come to this without prior opinions.”

      “We all have prior opinions on the defendant, unless you’ve been living in a cardbox,” she said, adding that she was excused because of her job in the cybersecurity sector.

      Regarding her personal feelings on President Trump, the woman said, “I’m not a fan.” The main reason why, she said, is because of how she believed he handled the COVID-19 pandemic response.

      But Ms. McGee provided some insight on the questions that were asked of the jurors.

      “One of which is: Do you have opinions about the ability for a former sitting president to be tried in a court of law? Which I think the way people answered that showed how they felt about case,” she said. “The other one was: Do you have any opinions about legal limits for campaign finance donation amounts? Which I believe was another one that was kinda meant to gauge feelings about the particular case,” she added.

      As of Wednesday morning, seven jurors have been selected with five more slots remaining. The judge has indicated that he will choose about six extra jurors to serve as backups.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Responding to the jury-selection process, President Trump wrote on Wednesday: “I thought STRIKES were supposed to be ‘unlimited’ when we were picking our jury? I was then told we only had 10, not nearly enough when we were purposely given the 2nd Worst Venue in the Country. Don’t worry, we have the First Worst also, as the Witch Hunt continues!”

      The former president is on trial for allegedly falsifying payments that were made during the 2016 campaign meant to bury potentially negative stories about him. Prosecutors say that he delivered $130,000 to former lawyer Michael Cohen to deal with a story about an alleged affair with adult actress Stormy Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, which the former president has denied.

      In court papers, President Trump’s lawyers have argued that the payments were legitimate expenses. He’s pleaded not guilty to the charges, which are felonies, and said it’s an attempt to denigrate his 2024 presidential chances.

      Before entering the court on Tuesday, President Trump described the judge, Juan Merchan, as a “Trump-hating” official who “shouldn’t be on this case.” Earlier, he said that the judge is “conflicted” because his daughter works as a consultant for the Democratic Party and has had high-profile clients including Vice President Kamala Harris.

      “It’s a trial that is being looked upon and looked at all over the world … they’re looking at, analyzing it. Every legal pundit, every legal scholar said this trial is a disgrace,” the former president added.

      The judge has refused to recuse himself in the case. On Monday, Judge Merchan again said he wouldn’t recuse himself and added that the matter will not be considered again until an appeals court renders a decision.

      Also Monday, Judge Merchan told President Trump that he has to show up in court every day it’s in session, adding that “there will be an arrest” if he doesn’t. It means that the former president will not be able to hold many campaign events, including in many key battleground states, for the next several weeks.

      Former president Donald Trump visits a bodega store in upper Manhattan where a worker was assaulted by a man in 2022 and ended up killing him in an ensuing fight in New York on April 16, 2024. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

      The former president visited a New York City bodega where a man was stabbed to death, with the aides saying he chose the store because it has been the site of a violent attack on an employee, a case that resulted in public criticism for the Democratic district attorney, Alvin Bragg, now prosecuting him.

      The visit was President Trump’s first campaign appearance since his criminal hush money trial began, making the presumptive GOP nominee the first former president in U.S. history to stand criminal trial.

      “They want law and order … every week they’re being robbed,” the former president said of businesses in New York, as he tried to compare his prosecution with what happens on New York streets. “You know where the crime is? It’s in the bodegas.”

      “Papito Trump is coming. Yeah!” said one passerby ahead of the former president’s arrival. Another woman who spoke to The Associated Press said that the former president “speaks the truth,” making reference to illegal immigration. “I think that he will make a difference,” she added.

      “I love this city,” the former president told reporters after emerging from the store. “We’re going to straighten New York out.”

      The Associated Press contributed to this report.

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 20:20

    • Iran Navy Escorting Iranian Commercial Ships To Red Sea To Prevent Reprisal
      Iran Navy Escorting Iranian Commercial Ships To Red Sea To Prevent Reprisal

      Iran has newly declared that its military will begin a mission to escort Iranian commercial ships to the Red Sea, protecting them from any potential hostile attacks or intercepts from the West or Israel, which comes as Washington and the European Union are readying expanded sanctions on the Islamic Republic.

      “The Navy is carrying out a mission to escort Iranian commercial ships to the Red Sea and our Jamaran frigate is present in the Gulf of Aden in this view,” announced Naval Commander Shahram Irani, as cited in state media.

      Getty Images

      Ironically Iran’s allies the Houthis are currently blocking global commercial shipping in the Red Sea, having up to this point launched dozens or possibly hundreds of attacks on Western and international vessels. The Houthis have said they will allow safe passage for Chinese and Russian vessels, and of course it goes without saying that Iranian ships will be protected.

      This fresh Iranian navy announcement also comes in the context of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) having seized the Portuguese-flagged container ship MSC Aries on April 13 near the Strait of Hormuz. The Iranians say it is an Israeli-linked ship. 

      Iran now appears to be preparing to protect against retaliation for this ship seizure, such as the possibility of the US Navy intercepting Iranian oil tankers, also against tense backdrop of Israel mulling a direct attack on Iran following the Saturday overnight Iranian drone and missile attack on the Jewish state.

      CNBC says that all of this is likely only the beginning: 

      Before this weekend’s tanker seizure, the last vessel Iran hijacked was the St. Nikolas on January 1. According to U.S. Naval Forces Central Command, that brought the total number of vessels being held to five, and over 90 crew members hostage. Previous to that, the Iranian-backed Houthis hijacked The Galaxy Leader on November 19.

      The latest development has shipping and energy experts bracing for a long-term timeline of uncertainty.

      “Iran is in this for the long haul,” said Samir Madani, co-founder of Tankertrackers.com, an independent online service that tracks and reports crude oil shipments in several geographical and geopolitical points of interest.

      Tehran has also recently reiterated long-running threats that it could close the vital Strait of Hormuz which its forces regularly patrol and is just off the Islamic Republic’s coast. 

      Iran’s military has also of late been threatening to attack US military bases across the Middle East, especially in Western Iraq and Eastern Syria. Western diplomats are currently seeking to push Prime Minister Netanyahu to stand down and not escalate further, but it seems Tel Aviv is indeed planning something imminent.

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 20:00

    • 2020: The Year The System Showed Its Real Face
      2020: The Year The System Showed Its Real Face

      Authored by Paul Rosenberg via FreemansPerspective.com,

      (Originally published September 28, 2020.)

      As we grew up, nearly all of us were inundated with stories of our glorious national fathers, our beautiful democracies, and so on.

      And being young, we for the most part believed them. The system gave us our prosperity, our comfort, our medicine, our sense of importance.

      Soon enough we learned that the system was also stupid and perverse, but we found a way around that contradiction by blaming one segment of the system or another: The Blues or the Greens or the Reds were the problem; it could not, must not, be that the system itself is the problem.

      Then came 2020, and the system revealed its true face.

      I suppose I should be fair and add that the system wasn’t always as rotten as it is now, but regardless, it wasn’t able to prevent the rot that overtook it.

      2020, In A Nasty Little Nutshell

      The system would like everything except the daily outrages (one for the Blues, one for the Reds) to go down the Memory Hole. So I think it’s important to recap the revelations of 2020:

      The system decreed who could work and who couldn’t. This was not done democratically; it was done by edict. “Democracy” did nothing to stop it.

      People were arrested for going to church or synagogue. This was the real disgrace of the police forces. Are there any orders from their paymasters they won’t enforce upon us?

      Political gangs roam the streets, beating, threatening and burning. Make no mistake, these are covertly authorized political gangs, serving political ends. This vile tactic goes back to ancient Rome at least, where gangs of thugs beat opponents in the streets.

      “Science” said one thing then the opposite, supporting whatever power wanted. Not every scientist, but more or less the entire grant-seeking, position-seeking complex showed themselves to be without integrity; they said and did whatever power wanted them to do.

      Mass media was as a fear delivery system. They were devoted to capturing eyeballs with fear and monetizing outrage. Journalistic integrity was a joke at best.

      Social media silenced thousands of dissenters, purely at the behest of political power. This was no less that the mass suppression of speech. (If you want to profit from becoming the public square, you have to act like a public square.) Free services have always been parasites, but these have shown themselves to be sycophantic to the point of fascism.

      The mandatory school system, around which millions of families had arranged their lives, was ripped away in an instant.

      Hate was legitimated. Political loud-mouths and televised faces have treated hate as the voice of justice, instead of the disease it is. Millions have joined in the barbarity, pretending that hate is actually duty, honor, and truth.

      More could be added, but this is quite enough to make my point: The system is not what we were taught it was, and 2020 has revealed that quite well.

      The System Doesn’t Deserve Us

      By referring to “the system” and “us,” I’m dividing the world into two parts, and so I should be clear on what those parts are:

      Us refers to producers: the people who grow food, transport it, process it, build machines, provide medical care, and so on. Everyone from the construction worker to the small business owner to the cleaning lady is a producer, and deserve great respect for what they do. We owe all the comforts of our lives, and frequently our lives altogether, to these people.

      The system refers to the entire governmental complex that takes our money and couldn’t survive without it. It also includes everything that couldn’t be what they are without them: Central banks, government school systems, businesses that live on government connections, television networks, social media behemoths, and more or less everything high and mighty.

      What I’d like is for the producers of the world to become clear on the fact that we don’t need them. Everything they “do for us” is done with our money, which they take from us by force and fraud.

      So let’s be honest about this: The system is a violent, corrupt and control-obsessed entity. Millions of us would choose other arrangements if we could, but the system forbids them. Forcibly.

      We should also understand that this has happened before. Here, to illustrate, is a passage from historian C. Delisle Burns on the real reason Rome collapsed:

      Great numbers of men and women were unwilling to make make the effort required for the maintenance of the old order, not because they were not good enough to fulfill their civic duties, but because they were too good to be satisfied with a system from which so few derived benefit.

      The system is not worthy of our labor and treasure. Whether or not it once was (and if so, when) no longer matters.

      2020 has made this much clear. It’s time to drop our child-training and look at the world like the adults we’ve become.

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 19:40

    • "Central Bank Observers Take Note": HSBC Warns "Weak Bull" Commodity Run Has Begun
      “Central Bank Observers Take Note”: HSBC Warns “Weak Bull” Commodity Run Has Begun

      Commodity prices provide a real-time snapshot of the global economy through spot prices, which are essentially high-frequency data about the current supply and demand environment. These prices are key components in measuring inflation, which has shown signs of easing over the past year. However, a recent surge in the Bloomberg Commodity Index and signs of a reacceleration in US inflation data are troubling for Fed chair Powell. 

      HSBC’s Paul Bloxham and Jamie Culling asked clients in a note: “Have commodity prices past the trough?” 

      Their answer, very simply, “It seems likely.”

      “Global commodity prices have picked up in recent weeks and could be past the trough,” the analysts said, noting an emerging “weak” upward global industrial cycle has materialized. They continued: 

      On the demand side, ‘green shoots’ in the global industrial cycle are becoming more apparent. On the supply-side, geopolitical factors are playing an increasingly disruptive role in the ongoing ‘super-squeeze.’ 

      At a deeper level, real commodity prices have already fallen back to their long-run average – that is, the relative prices of commodities to other goods and services are now not unusually high. 

      So, even if commodity prices only rise in line with other prices from here, they would be passed their trough. 

      The analysts warned their new machine learning commodity cycle tool is forecasting a “Weak Bull” run, indicating, “If the trough has passed, the recent disinflationary force from falling commodity prices may be done. Central bank observers should take note.” 

      The timing of HSBC’s “Weak Bull” commodity run comes as inflation is reaccelerating in the US. Last week’s March CPI data dump showed a stronger-than-expected 3.5% YoY print, an uptick from the 3.2% YoY rise in February. 

      Summing up the latest inflation report… 

      The hot inflation print has pushed rate traders to price in the first 25bps of cuts between September and November. Initially, rate traders were pricing in March cuts.  

      Hotter-than-expected inflation puts upward pressure on rates and borrowing costs with higher risks of derailing Biden’s reelection odds as Bidenomics fails. 

      The reacceleration of inflation has Larry MacDonald of The Bear Traps Report warning, “We’re only one event away from a 1970-style stagflation explosion.” 

      Could the return of the mid-70s inflation storm result from an escalation of the Israel-Iran war where Brent crude soars past $100bbl? 

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 19:20

    • Los Angeles Mayor Urges 'More Fortunate' Residents To Help Fund Housing For Homeless
      Los Angeles Mayor Urges ‘More Fortunate’ Residents To Help Fund Housing For Homeless

      Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

      Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has suggested that “more fortunate” residents help fund housing for the homeless as part of a new campaign to tackle the city’s ongoing homelessness crisis.

      Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass speaks during a press conference to announce new efforts to curb recent retail thefts at City Hall in Los Angeles, Calif., on Aug. 17, 2023. (Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images)

      Ms. Bass, a Democrat, announced the “LA4LA campaign,” which she said would speed up the creation of affordable housing for homeless individuals, during her State of the City address on April 15.

      The mayor called on “fortunate Angelenos”—including business leaders, philanthropic organizations, and others—to help the city “acquire more properties, lower the cost of capital, and speed up housing” for the homeless population under the new program.

      However, Ms. Bass didn’t provide further details regarding the specifics of the campaign, such as how much money business leaders and organizations should donate or how exactly the campaign will work.

      “We have brought the public sector together and now we must prevail on the humanity and generosity of the private sector,” the mayor said. “LA4LA can be a Sea Change for Los Angeles–an unprecedented partnership to confront this emergency … an example of disrupting the status quo to build a new system to save lives.

      “We will not hide people. Instead, we will house people,” she continued. “This means committing to the goal of preventing and ending homelessness—not hiding—not managing—but ending homelessness—with a new strategy and a new system that urgently lifts people from the street, and that surrounds them with the support and housing they need to never go back.”

      Bass Touts ‘Inside Safe’ Program

      During her address, the mayor touted her efforts to move homeless Angelenos out of short-term housing, including hotels and motel rooms, and into apartments under her “Inside Safe” program.

      That program, which initially launched in December 2022 when Ms. Bass declared a state of emergency on homelessness, has seen roughly 2,500 homeless individuals taken off the street and placed into interim housing, according to the mayor’s office.

      A total of 440 people have also been placed into permanent housing under the program, as per her office.

      However, roughly 613 of those who took part in the program have returned to homelessness, according to the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority. Another 42 have been incarcerated, and 38 have died, as per the agency.

      Ms. Bass said Inside Safe is “our proactive rejection of a status quo that left unhoused Angelenos to wait–and die–outside, in encampments until permanent housing was built.”

      Budget Deficit Woes

      Still, the mayor acknowledged that more than 46,000 people in Los Angeles currently have no home and stressed that motel rooms rented out on a nightly basis are increasingly adding up at a time when the city is already struggling under a burgeoning budget deficit.

      Los Angeles is currently facing a projected $467 million shortfall, driven by increased spending and lower-than-expected revenues.

      Ms. Bass noted that the homelessness crisis—along with the continued opioid crisis that is fueling fentanyl overdose deaths—has affected residents of Los Angeles both mentally and financially, forcing them to “pay the cost of the thousands and thousands of fire, paramedic and police calls.”

      The ongoing issues plaguing the city are also driving away business and tourism, she noted, highlighting the fact that many companies are fleeing the city out of safety concerns.

      “I just will not accept this–and our city cannot afford to accept this. That is why we are disrupting, challenging, and rebuilding the system. Inside Safe and our overall approach is evolving and will continue to evolve,” the mayor said.

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 19:00

    • Doug Casey On The New American Dream: "You'll Own Nothing and Be Happy"
      Doug Casey On The New American Dream: “You’ll Own Nothing and Be Happy”

      Via InternationalMan.com,

      International Man: According to a recent study by Investopedia, the classic middle-class American Dream now costs over $3.4 million.

      That’s the estimated lifetime cost of marriage, two children, cars, homes, healthcare, education, and retirement. It’s now entirely out of reach for many Americans.

      What do you make of this? How did this happen?

      Doug Casey: The fact is, despite the fact that his standard of living has been slipping over the past 50 years, the average American today lives much better and longer than a king during pre-industrial times. There were never any guarantees that Americans would live in the lap of luxury for their entire lives.

      We got to this high standard of living for two reasons. One, people tended to produce more than they consumed and saved the difference. And two, technology has been improving at almost the rate of Moore’s law for the last 200 years.

      However, there’s no guarantee that either of these fonts of progress will continue, especially since savings are being wiped out by the destruction of the dollar. A lack of savings means there won’t be a capital pool to finance further advances in technology.

      But there are other serious things at work, termites eating away at the foundations of civilization. It’s become customary for Americans to think that it’s okay for some people to live their entire lives without producing at all and to live at the expense of others. A lot of the country is on welfare. And many more are buried in consumer debt, which means they’re either living off the capital others have saved in the past, or they’re mortgaging their own futures.

      On top of that, since about 1980, the main export of the US hasn’t been Boeings or soybeans; it’s been dollars. Foreigners have accepted those paper dollars in exchange for real wealth. They’re really just another form of debt. At some point—soon—they’ll repatriate them in exchange for titles to land and companies.

      Capital is also being destroyed by the constant wars that the US fights against trivial countries on the other side of the world.

      The fact is that our institutions, from corporations to academia to government, have become corrupt, ineffectual, and bloated. The Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that, in the physical world, things inevitably degenerate over time. That’s also true in the world of human action. In general, as any institution gets old, it winds down. That’s true of the US, and it’s apparent to everyone—at least anyone outside of the Washington Beltway.

      International Man: As the American middle class continues to shrink, it seems the “New American Dream” is to merely get by and make ends meet.

      People will have to rent instead of own. They may not be able to afford kids, pets, ribeye steaks, or retirement. They’ll have to take on a lot more debt.

      The “New American Dream” looks more like the WEF’s “you’ll own nothing and be happy.”

      What’s your take?

      Doug Casey: It’s rather shocking that in a traditionally middle-class society like the US, that the “one percenters”—typically those wired to the State and major corporations—now own about one-third of the total wealth.

      What’s even more shocking is that the bottom half of society only owns 2% of the country’s wealth. That kind of an imbalance makes for instability. No wonder it’s said that the average guy can’t lay his hands on even $500 cash if there’s an emergency. No wonder a criminal like Klaus Schwab can promote his “You’ll own nothing and be happy” meme and not be hung from a lamp pole— a lot of people now feel they’d be better off in that kind of world.

      Increasingly, the wealth of the country is owned by corporations and their top management. It used to be said that “What’s good for General Motors is good for America.” I used to believe that because General Motors actually created cars, and that was good. But we’ve devolved. GM and other major corporations have become defacto arms of the State. Taxes, staggering regulations, subsidies, and bailouts have destroyed free-market capitalism.

      The capitalist system in the US is long gone. We’ve devolved into classical Mussolini-style fascism, which is to say, State corporatism, where corporations and the State work hand-in-glove.

      It’s euphemistically called a public-private “partnership.” The people in government and the people in top corporate levels scratch each other’s backs and reinforce each other’s positions. They feed each other power and money. This makes for a highly politicized society, where connections, not production, are what count.

      For instance, in the last election, $14 billion was spent on campaign spending to get the hoi polloi to vote for one party or another. But only a fifth of that money came from small donors—the rest from the wealthy and corporations. Of course, the rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer as our highly politicized society degenerates.

      International Man: Many people look back on how they viewed the future and how it was portrayed in movies. Many thought we would have flying cars by now, among other futuristic luxuries.

      Instead, we have a declining standard of living, and people look back on the good old days.

      Where do you think this trend is headed?

      Doug Casey: We’re heading in the wrong direction at an accelerating rate because there’s been a breakdown of moral fiber in society. People, in general, no longer understand what’s right and what’s wrong—or what’s good and what’s evil. They’re taking less responsibility for their individual lives and what happens around them.

      We’ve gone from a high-trust society, where you didn’t need to lock your car or your front door, to a low-trust society, where everybody is constantly observed, and security is of critical importance.

      At the same time, the country has generally gone from having low time preferences and being future-oriented to high time preferences; “I want it all, and I want it now.” They’re not as future-oriented as they once were.

      Going back to the question of moral fiber breakdown, the economic observer Thorstein Veblen coined the phrase “conspicuous consumption.” People wanted to show off expensive cars and clothes to advertise to other people that they were more successful. But now, because of all the debt in society, anyone can have a nice car. And nobody even cares about nice clothes anymore; everybody wears the equivalent of T-shirts and jeans.

      The trend setters have moved from owning and displaying frivolous goods to displaying frivolous ideas—like Wokeism. Everybody is adopting those ideas, to show that they’re hip, in-the-know, and part of the cognoscenti. In the past, adopting the conspicuous consumption lifestyles of their betters would only make them poor. Adopting these degenerate ideas makes them stupid and immoral—which is much worse.

      International Man: What advice do you have for struggling middle-class people who are about to be kicked down to the lower class?

      Doug Casey: First and most important, don’t go to college unless you need a STEM degree—Science, Technology, Engineering, or Math.

      Going to college today does nothing but misallocate four critically important years of your life, permanently indebt you, and corrupt your mind with the idiotic ideas that Marxist professors and administrations cram down students’ throats. Educate yourself. Read constantly.

      Next, work to become self-employed, not to “get a job.” You don’t want to rely on a job that somebody else gives you. And save your money—but don’t save in fiat dollars. Save in gold. When you have sufficient savings, learn to speculate and invest.

      International Man: As you’ve noted, The Greater Depression is a period in which there will be a significant decline in the general standard of living.

      Is there any way to make lemonade out of these lemons?

      Doug Casey: We’re well into what I’ve long called The Greater Depression. But I’d point out that most of the real wealth in the world will still exist – it’s just going to be owned by different people.

      The opportunity will exist for nimble entrepreneurs and speculators to do well, even as most people’s standard of living drops. But the big question is: For how long will the societal trend that we’re now on continue going down?

      When Rome collapsed over a period of several hundred years, living well and peaceably got harder and harder as Europe entered the Dark Ages. Even if you had a lot of money, it really didn’t do you that much good. That’s why it’s important to preserve what’s left of the idea of America.

      *  *  *

      Unfortunately, there’s little any individual can practically do to change the trajectory of this trend in motion. The best you can do is to stay informed so that you can protect yourself in the best way possible, and even profit from the situation. Most people have no idea what really happens when a currency collapses, let alone how to prepare… How will you protect your savings in the event of a currency crisis? This just-released video will show you exactly how. Click here to watch it now.

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 18:20

    • The Purpose Of War According To George Orwell (1984)
      The Purpose Of War According To George Orwell (1984)

      Some food for thought from George Orwell’s ‘1984’…

      Does anything really ever change? (emphasis ours)

      The primary aim of modern warfare is to use up the products of the machine without raising the general standard of living.

      Ever since the end of the nineteenth century, the problem of what to do with the surplus of consumption goods has been latent in industrial society. From the moment when the machine first made its appearance it was clear to all thinking people that the need for human drudgery, and therefore to a great extent for human inequality, had disappeared. If the machine were used deliberately for that end, hunger, overwork, dirt, illiteracy, and disease could be eliminated within a few generations. And in fact, without being used for any such purpose, but by a sort of automatic process — by producing wealth which it was sometimes impossible not to distribute — the machine did raise the living standards of the average human being very greatly over a period of about fifty years at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries.

      But it was also clear that an all-round increase in wealth threatened the destruction — indeed, in some sense was the destruction — of a hierarchical society. In a world in which everyone worked short hours, had enough to eat, lived in a house with a bathroom and a refrigerator, and possessed a motor-car or even an aeroplane, the most obvious and perhaps the most important form of inequality would already have disappeared. If it once became general, wealth would confer no distinction. It was possible, no doubt, to imagine a society in which wealth, in the sense of personal possessions and luxuries, should be evenly distributed, while power remained in the hands of a small privileged caste.

      But in practice such a society could not long remain stable.

      For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away.

      In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance.

      To return to the agricultural past, as some thinkers about the beginning of the twentieth century dreamed of doing, was not a practicable solution. It conflicted with the tendency towards mechanization which had become quasi-instinctive throughout almost the whole world, and moreover, any country which remained industrially backward was helpless in a military sense and was bound to be dominated, directly or indirectly, by its more advanced rivals.

      Nor was it a satisfactory solution to keep the masses in poverty by restricting the output of goods. This happened to a great extent during the final phase of capitalism, roughly between 1920 and 1940.

      The economy of many countries was allowed to stagnate, land went out of cultivation, capital equipment was not added to, great blocks of the population were prevented from working and kept half alive by State charity. But this, too, entailed military weakness, and since the privations it inflicted were obviously unnecessary, it made opposition inevitable.

      The problem was how to keep the wheels of industry turning without increasing the real wealth of the world. Goods must be produced, but they must not be distributed. And in practice the only way of achieving this was by continuous warfare.

      The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labour.

      War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent.

      Even when weapons of war are not actually destroyed, their manufacture is still a convenient way of expending labour power without producing anything that can be consumed. A Floating Fortress, for example, has locked up in it the labour that would build several hundred cargo-ships. Ultimately it is scrapped as obsolete, never having brought any material benefit to anybody, and with further enormous labours another Floating Fortress is built.

      In principle the war effort is always so planned as to eat up any surplus that might exist after meeting the bare needs of the population. In practice the needs of the population are always underestimated, with the result that there is a chronic shortage of half the necessities of life; but this is looked on as an advantage.

      It is deliberate policy to keep even the favoured groups somewhere near the brink of hardship, because a general state of scarcity increases the importance of small privileges and thus magnifies the distinction between one group and another.

      By the standards of the early twentieth century, even a member of the Inner Party lives an austere, laborious kind of life. Nevertheless, the few luxuries that he does enjoy his large, well-appointed flat, the better texture of his clothes, the better quality of his food and drink and tobacco, his two or three servants, his private motor-car or helicopter—set him in a different world from a member of the Outer Party, and the members of the Outer Party have a similar advantage in comparison with the submerged masses whom we call ’the proles’. The social atmosphere is that of a besieged city, where the possession of a lump of horseflesh makes the difference between wealth and poverty.

      And at the same time the consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival…

      …

      …war is waged by each ruling group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make or prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society intact.

      The very word ‘war’, therefore, has become misleading. It would probably be accurate to say that by becoming continuous war has ceased to exist.

      …

      War is Peace.

      In short – the purpose of war is to keep the ruling class in power while the lower classes remain powerless.

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 18:00

    Digest powered by RSS Digest

    Apr 17

    Today’s News 17th April 2024

    • US Push For A 'Middle East NATO' Failed To Emerge During Iran Strikes
      US Push For A ‘Middle East NATO’ Failed To Emerge During Iran Strikes

      Via Middle East Eye

      The Islamic Republic’s Saturday attack on Israel was a made-for social media moment. It was also the ultimate test of US efforts to cobble together a coalition of Arab states and Israel in a so-called Middle East NATO, to jointly defend an attack from Tehran.

      Israel, the US, France, the UK, and Jordan managed to intercept around 99 percent of the drones, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles fired at Israel by Iran in retaliation for an attack on its embassy in Damascus, Syria. Radar and early warning systems that the US maintains at its military bases across the Gulf were instrumental in tracking the slow-moving armada of missiles and drones, current and former US, Israeli and Arab officials told MEE, adding that the US was able to scramble jet fighters from Saudi Arabia and Qatar at the last minute to particpate in the operation. 

      But in the end, the oil-rich Gulf states downplayed any involvement and left the heavy lifting of fighting off Iran’s attack to the US, its western allies and Jordan, the resource-poor Hashemite Kingdom dependent on US financial assistance.

      For its part, Jordan cast its role actively downing Iranian drones as self-defense and not related to protecting Israel.  “There was unprecedented cooperation between Israel, the US and the Jordanians,” Michael Milshtein, a former Israeli military intelligence officer, told Middle East Eye. “But calling this a coalition is an illusion.”

      Middle East Eye reported on Friday that the Gulf monarchies were shutting down US options to launch strikes against Iran in the event Washington felt the need to retaliate against Tehran’s attack on Israel. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Oman, and Kuwait all scrutinized their basing agreements with Washington to do the bare minimum that was required and avoid being involved in direct strikes on Iranian targets. 

      Bilal Saab, a former US Department of Defence official, now at Chatham House, told MEE that the Gulf states’ calibrated actions underscored the limits of the Biden administration’s push for a Middle East Nato. “When we start seeing authorizations to use Gulf airspace to launch strikes on Iranian targets, then we can start talking about a Middle East Nato. Right now, it’s the exact opposite,” he said.

      “I think what we saw from Saturday’s attack pumps the breaks on any idea of an Arab and Israeli Nato.”

      Propaganda war

      As the dust from Saturday’s attack settles, the way regional states responded in the lead-up to the assault is becoming a new battleground between Tehran on one hand, and the US and Israel on the other – that has little to do with the Palestinians but rather the bigger question of who calls the shots in the Middle East.

      The Biden administration and Israel are keen to cast Israel’s successful defense as the byproduct of a united front of allies, including Arab states. Israeli war cabinet minister Benny Gatz praised the “regional cooperation” that allowed Israel to defend itself.

      Successful coordination with Arab states would allow Israel to present Saturday as a strategic win, which could help reduce tensions by lessening the need for a more forceful Israeli response, according to analysts. “What this weekend demonstrated is that Israel did not have to and does not have to defend itself alone when it is the victim of an aggression, the victim of an attack,” US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Monday.

      For its part, the Islamic Republic’s goal is to isolate Israel, preventing any cooperation between them and Gulf states. “It’s a total propaganda war right now,” Aziz Alghashian, a Saudi analyst and expert on ties between Israel and Gulf states told MEE.

      Tehran and Washington are already sparring over whether advance notice of the attack on Israel was given.

      Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian said that Tehran gave the US about 72 hours prior notice of the attack through “our friends and neighbours”. On Monday, the Wall Street Journal appeared to confirm that claim, reporting that Iran briefed officials from Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states on its attack. Turkish officials also told MEE that Turkey, a member of Nato, was briefed on the attack days in advance. The US, however, denied it was given a days-long heads up before the assault. 

      Julien Barnes-Dacey, director of the Middle East and North Africa programme at the European Council on Foreign Relations, told MEE that an Iranian leak to Gulf states would logically be passed on to the US because Arab rulers are afraid a deadly Iranian strike on Israel could spark a wider war, which Iran hoped to avoid. 

      “Jordan and the Arab Gulf states are first and foremost concerned about preventing regional escalation,” he told MEE. “I don’t see this as Gulf states doubling down on a strategic alignment with Israel. They are going to keep talking with Iran to prevent an unravelling that they fear will suck them all in.”

      ‘Provoking Iran’

      To be sure, the Arab Gulf states are linked more closely with Israel today than any time in history, and Israel’s war on Gaza has not led the UAE or Bahrain to rip up the 2020 Abraham Accords which saw them normalise ties with Tel Aviv.

      As part of that agreement, Israel was also absorbed into Centcom, the US’s overall central command in the Middle East. Israeli military officials were even dispatched to Qatar’s Al Udeid Air Base, MEE previously reported, but it’s not clear if those officials are still in the country.

      But Saturday’s attack on Israel underscored the US’s limited success in fostering closer security cooperation between Israel and the Gulf states, Milshtein, the former Israeli military intelligence officer, told MEE. Gulf states have no love lost for Iran, but are wary of what they believe to be the US’s waning influence in the region and limited appetite to come to their defense, as Washington did for Israel. The US did not retaliate to the 2019 attack on Saudi Arabia’s Aramco oil facilities that was blamed to have been backed by Iran.

      The Gulf states’ frustration with the US only grew when the Biden administration took office. Biden and members of his party criticised Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman over human rights issues. Saudi Arabia and the UAE also viewed the administration’s response to Houthi missile and drone attacks as tepid.

      In response, they moved to patch up ties with Tehran. In April 2023, the UAE appointed its first new ambassador to the Islamic Republic after seven years. Saudi Arabia and Tehran normalised ties in a deal brokered by China.

      “Most of the Arab states promoted reconciliation with Iran because they couldn’t rely on Biden’s administration,” Milshtein said. “They preferred to deal with Iran and not the Americans”

      Saab, at Chatham House, said to achieve true regional coordination between Israel and the Gulf states, Washington would need to provide concrete security guarantees. Saudi Arabia has requested such support, along with new weapons systems, as part of a deal to normalise ties with Israel, but those talks are stalled as Israel pounds the Gaza Strip. “The last thing the Gulf is going to do is provoke Iran and not have the backing of the Americans,” Saab said.

      Alghashian said Saturday’s attack on Israel likely reaffirmed Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman’s decision to restore ties with Tehran. He said Riyadh’s goal is to “stay out of the way” of tensions between Israel and Iran as it pursues its economic development. “The strategic value of restoring ties with Tehran is paying dividends,” he said.

      Tyler Durden
      Wed, 04/17/2024 – 02:00

    • 'They Must Be Destroyed': How Cuban Americans Face Assassination Threats, Terror List
      ‘They Must Be Destroyed’: How Cuban Americans Face Assassination Threats, Terror List

      Authored by Autumn Spredemann via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

      Several of Cuba’s latest “terrorists” live in Miami.

      (Illustration by The Epoch Times, Getty Images)

      Luis Zuniga, a former diplomat and political prisoner of the Castro regime, is one of 61 people listed as a “terrorist” by Cuba and accused of promoting, planning, organizing, financing, or supporting actions against the Cuban communist party.

      Exiles who oppose the Cuban communist party have suffered vicious attacks and assassination attempts over the years. However, a new wave of targeting was ignited after the regime, under its leader, President Miguel Díaz-Canel, published a list of alleged “terrorists” in December 2023.

      The list was given to Interpol and government officials from different nations, including the United States in December 2023.

      “I think the overt and covert campaign of threats and intimidation by the Cuban dictatorship against U.S. citizens of Cuban descent is very important,” Orlando Gutiérrez-Boronat told The Epoch Times. He is an author, cofounder, and spokesperson for the Cuban Democratic Directorate.

      Mr. Boronot’s outspoken resistance to Cuba’s communist regime landed him a spot on the so-called “terrorist” list. He has been accused of trying to destabilize the Cuban government, along with threats of violence on more than one occasion.

      “I think being included in that list … is definitely a threat.”

      Some believe Cuba’s “terrorist” list and the newest round of menace toward exiles was launched because the Cuban government is on increasingly shaky ground at home.

      The regime has witnessed 1,033 protests across the island in February and March this year, according to the Cuban Conflict Observatory. In recent weeks, demonstrations of all sizes have erupted across the island due to ongoing electricity and food shortages.

      It’s reminiscent of the protests in July 2021, which was the largest series of anti-government demonstrations on the island since former leader Fidel Castro’s 1950s revolution. More than 700 people connected with the landmark event are still in prison, according to Human Rights Watch.

      Now, Cuban Americans in Miami are fearful as Castro devotees launch a new wave of threats and their homes are targeted.

      Ramon Saul Sanchez is number 29 on the list. He said he’s been struggling for the freedom of Cuba for more than 40 years and asserts the terrorist labeling is just another communist party tactic to manipulate the narrative.

      “They like to use those labels. In Cuba, if you’re not pro-Castro, you’re a worm. You’re a counter-revolutionary,” he told The Epoch Times. ”I’ve never been convicted of terrorism or even charged.”

      (Illustration by The Epoch Times, Getty Images)

      Activist and journalist Ninoska Perez wasn’t at all surprised to find her name on the list.

      “I’ve always had the threats. They don’t like everyone to announce what they do wrong and their crimes,” Ms. Perez told The Epoch Times.

      When she worked with the Cuban American National Foundation, Ms. Perez said she was targeted as an enemy of Fidel Castro’s regime early on. She called the organization Castro’s “biggest nightmare” at the time since it showcased what life on the island was actually like under communism.

      Guerrero Cubano

      Today, Ms. Perez works for a Miami radio station and has recently had a member of her family in the city surveilled at home by suspected members of the Cuban regime.

      “It’s not only that they put you on a terrorist list, but they make public your home address.”

      In March, the YouTube channel “Guerrero Cubano,” which translates to Cuban Warrior, posted a video that contained photos and addresses of the homes of exiles whose names appear on the “terrorist” list. Ms. Perez’s cousin lives in one of the homes.

      She said it’s one thing to come after her since, as she put it, “I understand that what I do upsets a powerful dictatorship. I’m not complaining about that.”

      Coming after her family, however, is much worse.

      “It’s even worse because they’re subjecting her to this,” Ms. Perez said, adding that her cousin mentioned a couple of times that she’s seen strange cars parked near her house that don’t belong to any of the neighbors.

      Compounding this, she feels there’s little that can be done to stop the threats. “What’s the police going to do? Patrol your house 24 hours? They simply can’t do that.”

      In the Guerrero Cubano video, the narrator claims the Miami police have to be guarding homes now because people are scared. The same male narrator further states he will continue sharing information on the homes of Cuban exiles being targeted by the communist regime. He also claimed to know where the list members eat and what medications they take. The narrator even went as far as threatening to visit targeted exiles in the hospital.

      The Miami Police Department didn’t respond to an Epoch Times request for comment on the recent threats against Cuban exiles.

      “It’s scary for anybody,” Ms. Perez said.

      It’s a vicious cycle that Cuban Americans know all too well. Threats and attacks from communist agents have come in waves over the decades.

      She recalled a time in the 1990s when the Castro regime sent an assassin to Miami to kill a member of the Cuban American National Foundation. The target was afforded several days of police protection and the assassin failed. But, Ms. Perez said, the police can’t be everywhere all the time. If they intercept or deter one communist assassin or agitator, the Cuban regime can just send another.

      Cuban leader Fidel Castro inaugurates several newly built areas added to an old Havana hospital on 5 June 1989. Castro resigned on Feb. 19, 2008, as president and commander in chief of Cuba. (Rafael Perez/AFP/GettyImages)

      In the past several decades. Ms. Perez said the most notable lull in harassment or threats of attack from Cuba’s communist party was during the administration of President George H. W. Bush from 1989 to 1993.

      The U.S. State Department said it’s “aware of the list released by the Cuban government.”

      Read more here…

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 23:40

    • These Are The Most-Polluted Countries In The World
      These Are The Most-Polluted Countries In The World

      Almost the entire global population breathes air that exceeds the air quality limits set by the World Health Organization (WHO).

      In this graphic, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu maps the world’s most polluted countries according to IQAir, ranked by their annual average PM2.5 concentration (μg/m³) in 2023. The unit μg/m³ refers to micrograms per cubic meter.

      What is PM2.5?

      PM2.5 refers to fine particulate matter, with a diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less, that can travel deep into your lungs and cause health problems.

      In 2021, the World Health Organization (WHO) updated its air quality guidelines for PM2.5. The recommended maximum annual average level for PM2.5 is now 5 μg/m³, down from the previous target of 10 μg/m³.

      Common sources of PM2.5 pollution include engine exhaust, power plant combustion, smoke from fires, dust, and dirt.

      How Does PM2.5 Pollution Affect Humans?

      Research published in 2022 from the Air Quality Life Index (AQLI) found that 97.3% of the world’s population is exposed to levels of PM2.5 that exceed the WHO guidelines.

      This takes 2.2 years off the global average life expectancy, relative to a world that met the WHO guideline.

      In South Asia specifically, the AQLI believes residents could be losing up to 5 years off their lives. The region has been a global hotspot of air pollution for years, home to 37 of the 40 most polluted cities in the world.

      Interestingly, fine particulate matter can travel hundreds of kilometers, often crossing national boundaries.

      For instance, approximately 30% of air pollution in the Indian state of Punjab originates from neighboring Pakistan. Similarly, an estimated 30% of pollution in Bangladesh’s largest cities is traced back to India.

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 23:20

    • Biden's New Student Debt Relief Will Add Up To $750 Billion To The Budget Deficit
      Biden’s New Student Debt Relief Will Add Up To $750 Billion To The Budget Deficit

      By The Committee for A Responsible Federal Budget

      The Biden Administration recently announced a new plan to cancel student debt for up to 30 million borrowers and released a preliminary rule this morning detailing parts of this plan. The proposal, which is being introduced through the rule making process, would replace the Administration’s initial proposal to cancel between $10,000 and $20,000 per person of debt, which was struck down by the Supreme Court.

      Elements of the plan in today’s proposed rule would cost nearly $150 billion, according to the Department of Education. However, this excludes a proposal to allow the Secretary of Education to cancel debt for those facing hardship or likely to default. Including this provision, we estimate the plan could cost $250 billion to $750 billion, depending on how the additional cancellation is designed.

      The plan itself has five major components. It would:

      • Cancel accumulated interest for borrowers with balances higher than what they initially borrowed, capped at $20,000 for those in standard repayment and uncapped but restricted to individuals making less than $120,000 annually or couples making under $240,000 enrolled in an income-driven repayment (IDR) plan.

      • Automatically cancel loans for borrowers in standard repayment who would be eligible for cancellation had they applied for programs such as Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) or the new IDR program, Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE).

      • Automatically cancel loans for borrowers who have been repaying undergraduate loans for over 20 years or graduate loans for over 25 years.

      • Cancel debt of those who attended low-financial-value programs, including those that failed accountability measures or were deemed ineligible for federal student aid programs.

      • Forgive debt of borrowers who are “facing hardships” or are likely to default on their loan payments.

      The Department of Education has estimated the first four components of the plan would cost $147 billion over a decade, with half the cost stemming from the cancellation of accumulated interest. This is in line with estimates we are currently producing, though well above estimates of $77 billion from the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM). A huge source of uncertainty is how these provisions would interact with existing IDR programs and how much of the debt would otherwise be cancelled under current policy. 

      Importantly, today’s rule does not include the Administration’s hardship cancellation plan, which would “authorize the automatic forgiveness of loans for borrowers at a high risk of future default as well as those who show hardship due to other indicators.” 

      This is by far the most unclear and potentially the most costly part of their proposal, since cancellation could be both wide-ranging and ongoing. We estimate this proposal could cost between $100 billion and $600 billion over a decade. However, there’s a tremendous amount of uncertainty, with design choices possibly resulting in much lower costs than our range – for example, PWBM estimates this provision would only cost $7 billion. 

      It is unclear how the Administration will define hardship, but they discuss 16 possible criteria such as other consumer debt, age, and health care or housing expenses and also declare hardship could be defined based on “any other indicators of hardship identified by the Secretary.” In assessing default risk, the rule allows cancellation for cancellation for those with an 80 percent likelihood of default, as determined by the Secretary. Importantly, over $150 billion of debt is currently in default (and loans in default generally have around a 70 percent recovery rate). We also estimate that a further 6 million borrowers are over 90 days delinquent on their loans, which is another predictor of a high likelihood of default and would further push up the number. The historically high rates of delinquency appear to be related to challenges around restarting student loan repayments last year.

      While the default provision would be limited to the next two years under the most recent draft of the proposal, the hardship component has no time limit and thus opens a new venue for a future administration to cancel large amounts of student loan debt. An analysis by FREOPP argues that it could cover over 70 percent of college students. 

      In total, our $250 billion to $750 billion estimate for the total cost of the plan would be in line with the cost of the Administration’s $400 billion blanket debt cancellation, which was ruled illegal by the Supreme Court. It would be on top of more than $600 billion of debt cancellation already enacted through unilateral executive action. As we have shown before, these policies would put upward pressure on inflation and interest rates by supporting stronger demand, and much of the benefits would accrue to high-income and highly-educated Americans. In the coming weeks, we will produce further analysis of the Administration’s latest proposal and continue to refine our cost estimates as more data is made available. These analyses will be available at our student debt cancellation resources page.

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 23:00

    • These Are The Top 10 States By Real GDP Growth
      These Are The Top 10 States By Real GDP Growth

      Fueled by strong consumer spending and a resilient job market, the U.S. economy expanded faster than expected in 2023, with a real GDP growth rate of 2.5%.

      Oil-rich states were among the strongest performers in the country as production boomed. Much of this was due to the war in Ukraine driving up the price of oil, spurring companies to boost output. Other sectors, such as retail trade, also played a key role in driving growth amid robust consumer demand.

      This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Niccolo Conte, shows the fastest growing states by real GDP, based on data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

      Strongest State Economies in 2023

      As the world’s largest oil producer, the U.S. hit a historic 12.9 million barrels per day in crude oil production in 2023—more than any other country ever.

      Given these tailwinds, the top five fastest-growing states by real GDP in 2023 were all powered by the mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction sector. Below, we show the strongest state economies by real GDP growth last year:

      North Dakota witnessed the highest growth, with real GDP rising by 5.9%.

      As the third largest oil-producing state, it also has one of the strongest job markets in the country. In February 2024, the state’s unemployment rate was 2.0%, significantly lower than the national average of 3.9%.

      Falling in second is Texas, whose economy surged to $2 trillion in inflation-adjusted terms. In 2023, the oil and gas industry generated about $72 million per day in local and state taxes in addition to state royalties. Roughly half of U.S. crude oil exports are shipped from Corpus Christi Bay, a port along the Texas coastline.

      As the seventh-fastest growing state, Florida’s economy was largely supported by retail trade, its biggest driver. Moreover, Florida boasted the highest growth rates nationwide in both personal and property income, rising at 7.0% and 8.8%, respectively, over the year.

      By contrast, some of the slowest growing states were Delaware, Mississippi, and New York, each with a real GDP growth rate falling below 1%.

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 22:40

    • Red States Fight Growing Efforts To Give "Basic Income" Cash To Residents
      Red States Fight Growing Efforts To Give “Basic Income” Cash To Residents

      By Kevin Hardy of Stateline

      South Dakota state Sen. John Wiik likes to think of himself as a lookout of sorts — keeping an eye on new laws, programs and ideas brewing across the states.

      “I don’t bring a ton of legislation,” said Wiik, a Republican. “The main thing I like to do is try and stay ahead of trends and try and prevent bad things from coming into our state.”

      This session, that meant sponsoring successful legislation banning cities or counties from creating basic income programs, which provide direct, regular cash payments to low-income residents to help alleviate poverty.

      While Wiik isn’t aware of any local governments publicly floating the idea in South Dakota, he describes such programs as “bureaucrats trying to hand out checks to make sure that your party registration matches whoever signed the checks for the rest of your life.”

      The economic gut punch of the pandemic and related assistance efforts such as the expanded child tax credit popularized the idea of directly handing cash to people in need. Advocates say the programs can be administered more efficiently than traditional government assistance programs, and research suggests they increase not only financial stability but also mental and physical health.

      Still, Wiik and other Republicans argue handing out no-strings-attached cash disincentivizes work — and having fewer workers available is especially worrisome in a state with the nation’s second-lowest unemployment rate.

      South Dakota is among at least six states where GOP officials have looked to ban basic income programs.

      The basic income concept has been around for decades, but a 2019 experiment in Stockton, California, set off a major expansion. There, 125 individuals received $500 per month with no strings attached for two years. Independent researchers found the program improved financial stability and health, but concluded that the pandemic dampened those effects.

      GOP lawmakers like Wiik fear that even experimental programs could set a dangerous precedent.

      “What did Ronald Reagan say, ‘The closest thing to eternal life on this planet is a government program’?” Wiik said. “So, if you get people addicted to just getting a check from the government, it’s going to be really hard to take that away.”

      The debate over basic income programs is likely to intensify as blue state lawmakers seek to expand pilot programs. Minnesota, for example, could become the nation’s first to fund a statewide program. But elected officials in red states are working to thwart such efforts — not only by fighting statewide efforts but also by preventing local communities from starting their own basic income programs.

      Democratic governors in Arizona and Wisconsin recently vetoed Republican legislation banning basic income programs.

      Last week, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued Harris County to block a pilot program that would provide $500 per month to 1,900 low-income people in the state’s largest county, home to Houston.

      Paxton, a Republican, argued the program is illegal because it violates a state constitutional provision that says local governments cannot grant public money to individuals.

      Harris County Attorney Christian Menefee, a Democrat, called Paxton’s move “nothing more than an attack on local government and an attempt to make headlines.”

      Meanwhile, several blue states are pushing to expand these programs.

      Washington state lawmakers debated a statewide basic income bill during this year’s short session. And Minnesota lawmakers are debating whether to spend $100 million to roll out one of the nation’s first statewide pilot programs.

      “We’re definitely seeing that shift from pilot to policy,” said Sukhi Samra, the director of Mayors for a Guaranteed Income, which formed after the Stockton experiment.

      So far, that organization has helped launch about 60 pilot programs across the country that will provide $250 million in unconditional aid, she said.

      Despite pushback in some states, Samra said recent polling commissioned by the group shows broad support of basic income programs. And the programs have shown success in supplementing — not replacing — social safety net programs, she said.

      The extra cash gives recipients freedom of choice. People can fix a flat tire, cover school supplies or celebrate a child’s birthday for the first time.

      “There’s no social safety net program that allows you to do that.” she said. “ … This is an effective policy that helps our families, and this can radically change the way that we address poverty in this country.”

      Basic Income Experiments

      The proliferation of basic income projects has been closely studied by researchers.

      Though many feared that free cash would dissuade people from working, that hasn’t been the case, said Sara Kimberlin, the executive director and senior research scholar at Stanford University’s Center on Poverty and Inequality.

      Stanford’s Basic Income Lab has tracked more than 150 basic income pilots across the country. Generally, those offer $500 or $1,000 per month over a short period.

      “There isn’t anywhere in the United States where you can live off of $500 a month,” she said. “At the same time, $500 a month really makes a tremendous difference for someone who is living really close to the edge.”

      Kimberlin said the research on basic income programs has so far been promising, though it’s unclear how long the benefits may persist once programs conclude. Still, she said, plenty of research shows how critical economic stability in childhood is to stability in adulthood — something both the basic income programs and the pandemic-era child tax credit can address.

      Over the past five years, basic income experiments have varied across the country.

      Last year, California launched the nation’s first state-funded pilot programs targeting former foster youth.

      In Colorado, the Denver Basic Income Project aimed to help homeless individuals. After early successes, the Denver City Council awarded funding late last year to extend that program, which provides up to $1,000 per month to hundreds of participants.

      A 2021 pilot launched in Cambridge, Massachusetts, provided $500 a month over 18 months to 130 single caregivers. Research from the University of Pennsylvania found the Cambridge program increased employment, the ability to cover a $400 emergency expense, and food and housing security among participants.

      Children in participating families were more likely to enroll in Advanced Placement courses, earned higher grades and had reduced absenteeism.

      “It was really reaffirming to hear that when families are not stressed out, they are able to actually do much better,” said Geeta Pradhan, president of the Cambridge Community Foundation, which worked on the project.

      Pradhan said basic income programs are part of a national trend in “trust-based philanthropy,” which empowers individuals rather than imposing top-down solutions to fight poverty.

      “There is something that I think it does to people’s sense of empowerment, a sense of agency, the freedom that you feel,” she said. “I think that there’s some very important aspects of humanity that are built into these programs.”

      While the pilot concluded, the Cambridge City Council committed $22 million in federal pandemic aid toward a second round of funding. Now, nearly 2,000 families earning at or below 250% of the federal poverty level are receiving $500 monthly payments, said Sumbul Siddiqui, a city council member.

      Siddiqui, a Democrat, pushed for the original pilot when she was mayor during the pandemic. While she said the program has proven successful, it’s unclear whether the city can find a sustainable source of funding to keep it going long term.

      States look to expand pilots

      Tomas Vargas Jr. was among the 125 people who benefited from the Stockton, California, basic income program that launched in 2019.

      At the time, he heard plenty of criticism from people who said beneficiaries would blow their funds on drugs and alcohol or quit their jobs.

      “Off of $500 a month, which amazed me,” said Vargas, who worked part time at UPS.

      But he said the cash gave him breathing room. He had felt stuck at his job, but the extra money gave him the freedom to take time off to interview for better jobs.

      Unlike other social service programs like food stamps, he didn’t have to worry about losing out if his income went up incrementally. The cash allowed him to be a better father, he said, as well as improved his confidence and mental health.

      The experience prompted him to get into the nonprofit sector. Financially stable, he now works at Mayors for a Guaranteed Income.

      “The person I was five years ago is not the person that I am now,” he said.

      Washington state Sen. Claire Wilson, a Democrat, said basic income is a proactive way to disrupt the status quo maintained by other anti-poverty efforts.

      “I have a belief that our systems in our country have never been put in place to get people out of them,” she said. “They kept people right where they are.”

      Wilson chairs the Human Services Committee, which considered a basic income bill this session that would have created a pilot program to offer 7,500 people a monthly amount equivalent to the fair market rent for a two-bedroom apartment in their area.

      The basic income bill didn’t progress during Washington’s short legislative session this year, but Wilson said lawmakers would reconsider the idea next year. While she champions the concept, she said there’s a lot of work to be done convincing skeptics.

      In Minnesota, where lawmakers are considering a $100 million statewide basic income pilot program, some Republicans balked at the concept of free cash and its cost to taxpayers.

      “Just the cost alone should be a concern,” Republican state Rep. Jon Koznick said during a committee meeting this month.

      State Rep. Athena Hollins, a Democrat who sponsored the legislation, acknowledged the hefty request, but said backers would support a scaled-down version and “thought it was really important to get this conversation started.”

      Much of the conversation in committee centered on local programs in cities such as Minneapolis and St. Paul. St. Paul Mayor Melvin Carter, a Democrat, told lawmakers the city’s 2020 pilot saw “groundbreaking” results.

      After scraping by for years, some families were able to put money into savings for the first time, he said. Families experienced less anxiety and depression. And the pilot disproved the “disparaging tropes” from critics about people living in poverty, the mayor said.

      Carter told lawmakers that the complex issue of economic insecurity demands statewide solutions.

      “I am well aware that the policy we’re proposing today is a departure from what we’re all used to,” he said. “In fact, that’s one of my favorite things about it.”

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 22:20

    • Where Highly Educated Migrants Come From
      Where Highly Educated Migrants Come From

      Voters in India are getting set to head to the polls this weekend, in what has been dubbed the world’s biggest election.

      Nearly 1 billion people are eligible to determine whether Narendra Modi, leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), will rule the country for a third consecutive term.

      Statista’s Katharina Buchholz reports that,according to data from a Statista Consumer Insights survey, one of the major challenges facing the country right now  is that of unemployment.

      This will be a major sticking point for younger voters.

      With often better opportunities abroad, the country is losing valuable talent. And it’s not alone, as OECD data reveals. In fact, in 2015/2016 – the latest year on record – 40 million highly educated migrants were living in OECD member countries. While skilled migrants are certainly welcomed by labor markets in most developed nations especially in times of falling birth rates, the migration of the educated can also have a detrimental effect on their home countries – often described as brain drain.

      Infographic: Where Highly Educated Migrants Come From | Statista

      You will find more infographics at Statista

      As seen in the numbers, China and India had sent the most highly skilled migrants abroad as of the latest available date.

      Yet, compared to the size of their populations, the numbers are comparably low. Other major brain drain locations have lost many more talented workers in relative terms, for example the Philippines, Poland, Mexico and Russia.

      The Philippines have been known for supplying the world with health care professionals, especially nurses. Many of these highly skilled professionals emigrate to the U.S., forming the third-most important skilled labor emigration corridor of the OECD behind Mexican and Indian migration to the United States.

      As a result, 14.3 percent of highly skilled Filipinos had emigrated to the OECD as of 2015/16. This rate is even higher in small or isolated developing economies.

      In Caribbean state Guyana, almost 71 percent of the highly educated had left for the OECD, compared with 66 percent in Trinidad and Tobago and 63 percent in Mauritius.

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 22:00

    • A Generation Lost To Climate Anxiety
      A Generation Lost To Climate Anxiety

      Authored by David Zaruk via RealClear Politics,

      In a far-reaching new essay in The New Atlantis, the environmental researcher Ted Nordhaus makes a damning and authoritative case that while the basic science of CO2 and climate is solid, it has been abused by the activist class in service of a wildly irresponsible and unscientific climate catastrophism.

      This reckless alarmism, saturated across the mainstream media and endlessly amplified by it, has had profound societal consequences. It has both distorted public understanding of the massive benefits the carbon economy makes possible and grossly exaggerated the risks of extreme events it allegedly makes more likely. 

      As a result it has rendered reasonable debate on climate policy impossible, even as it has given cynical politicians an easy scapegoat for every social ill, drawing attention away from regulatory and institutional failures and laying blame instead at the feet of fossil fuel companies and other evil “emitters.” 

      Perhaps most perniciously, as Nordhaus details, the doomsday prophesying of climate extremists has created hardened skeptics on one side who are increasingly suspicious of all public “expertise”, while at the same time infecting true believers on the other side with a crippling, pathological fatalism that has come to be referred to as “climate anxiety.”

      Climate Anxiety

      If there’s any flaw in Nordhaus’ damning and comprehensive analysis it’s that he undersells just how much damage the advent of “climate anxiety” has done already—and how much more it’s likely to do in years to come.

      Yes, there’s the obvious cases of obnoxious and lawbreaking behavior, from climate iconoclasts defacing priceless works of art, to interrupting Broadway shows and sporting events, to gluing themselves to buses and holding up traffic on major thoroughfares.

      But it runs much deeper than that.

      Consider recent headlines: From Vox: “What to do when you’re completely overwhelmed by climate anxiety.” From The Guardian: “Climate anxiety adds to teenagers’ fears.” And the New York Times: “How Climate Change is Changing Therapy.” And perhaps most depressing of all, from the BBC: “Climate anxiety: ‘I don’t want to burden the world with my child.” The trend is so wide now that they have given it a name: birth strike.

      And the data backs up the headlines—like the recent Finnish study of 6,000 subjects that showed people with “woke” beliefs have higher rates of depression. 

      Developed countries are already facing real increases in mental health issues, many of them human-made and bound up in everything from the opioid crisis to the COVID pandemic. The manufacture of climate anxiety as an issue allegedly on par with those others is a dangerous distraction that draws resources away from solving these other mental health challenges.  

      Innovative Solutions or More Activism?

      Most of the real action on forestalling or mitigating the negative externalities created by the carbon economy is happening within industry itself. But instead of fueling a new generation of innovators and entrepreneurs to help produce these better, cleaner technologies, climate catastrophism has Gen Z curled up in a collective ball, while the likes of NPR tells its privileged listeners to “Let yourself feel the feelings — all of them” about our coming climate doom.  

      Influencers like Greta Thunberg are motivating the young to pursue careers in political activism instead of research and innovation. It is easier to make the world angry through protest than to make it better by finding solutions.

      Climate fear-mongering has created a dread so powerful it’s putatively putting people off of having children altogether, at a time when advanced countries are already facing precipitously declining fertility rates.

      This bleak picture raises the question of exactly what’s in it for the eco-extremist purveyors of gloom. For Nordhaus, it’s akin to a religious mission. “Apocalyptic claims about an unfolding emergency, rather, serve a millenarian agenda”, he writes, “that variously demands that we abolish capitalism, bring about an end to economic growth, power the global economy entirely with wind and solar energy, feed the global population only with small-scale organic agriculture, and cut global emissions in half over the next decade or two.”

      He doesn’t need to add that actually enacting that list of prescriptions would be both extremely unwise and largely impossible (and catastrophic). 

      Political Opportunism

      Nordhaus doesn’t go far enough. Because it doesn’t really matter whether drastic policy proposals would actually work if the real goal is just acquiring enough political power to dictate them. 

      Left-wing political leaders have been using the specter of a “climate emergency” to justify the expansion of their powers for years—limiting consumer choice with product bans, picking winners and losers with boondoggle subsidies, and using lawfare to try and put energy companies out of business by abusing “public nuisance” laws, just to name a few. 

      Even the political right is getting in on the action. Just recently a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators introduced the PROVE IT Act, a bill that pairs the Democrats’ long love of climate panic with Republicans’ newfound love of protectionism and industrial policy.

      Anyone who is paying close enough attention knows that these kinds of power plays are cynical, shortsighted, and counterproductive, but what we are collectively starting to realize is how much they’ve been enabled by the literal derangement of generations of well-intentioned folks by climate catastrophism.

      The bitter irony is that there is good evidence the climate “experts” know better—like a recent study of 2,066 people that found that higher levels of scientific knowledge about the environment and climate change was associated with less climate anxiety.

      When the famous teenage eco-activist Greta Thunberg snarled and sobbed at a UN climate conference that those in power had “stolen her childhood” she was absolutely right – just not in the way she thought…

      All is not Lost

      As the media reported children weeping in the streets during highly managed Extinction Rebellion or Just Stop Oil campaigns, shouldn’t there be some other direction for us to take? How can we motivate the next generation to be a force for innovation and positive change rather than feed them a steady diet of nihilism, hate, and anxiety? There are certain things that can be done to frame the future of humanity in a more positive light. 

      Here are some ideas on how to stop malignant activism from eroding the hopes of humanity:

      • Young people need positive mentors who are standing up to the pessimism with positive solutions. Scientists, professors, influencers need to focus on developing answers rather than acrimony.

      • Positive stories need to be told. While the media focused on Greta as she sucked the hope out of the youth, other young people, like Boyan Slat, whose Ocean Cleanup achievements were legitimately inspirational, were largely ignored. Too bad the media is now funded largely by climate catastrophe foundations that promulgate pessimism. A new approach to media reporting, more transparent, more balanced, is overdue.

      • Tech, business, and medical research sectors have venture capitalists who provide competitions and seed capital for young innovators to develop their ideas. Many recipients leave university to develop their ideas into successful companies. Very little like this exists for environmental health researchers. Rather there are a large number of bitter, under-funded postdocs who amplify the negativism.

      • Tort reform in the US is necessary. Nordhaus highlighted how law firms were benefiting from the amplified public hatred of fossil fuel companies. Their lucrative anonymous payments to scientists, NGOs, foundations, filmmakers and the media via dark, donor-advised funds is poisoning an already toxic political arena.

      • There needs to be better communication on the achievements and success stories of capitalism. The idea that the only solution to these climate challenges is to dismantle industry, restrict global trade, and block free markets is simply ludicrous.

      These are a few of the necessary steps to help the public find a balance between humanity and environmental concerns. On climate issues, there needs to be more hope than horror, more imagination than resignation, and more inspiration than anxiety. With better stories and more responsible storytellers, the climate narrative can be reshaped from one of bitter acrimony to a challenge for innovators to once again push humanity forward.

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 21:40

    • When Is The Social Security Trust Fund Running Out?
      When Is The Social Security Trust Fund Running Out?

      A social safety net is synonymous with a failsafe for many, but in the case of the U.S. Social Security system, additional action is needed to ensure it stays that way.

      The annual OASDI trustees report by the Social Security Administration, covering old-age, survivors and disability insurance, shows that under the present circumstances, the asset reserve dedicated to the benefit program could be depleted sooner rather than later.

      As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz reports, under the report’s intermediate scenario, asset funds would run out sometime in 2034, while this could happen as soon as 2031 if the administration was to shoulder a high volume of costs in the upcoming years.

      Under the low-cost scenario, the fund could remain solvent until 2066. The intermediate date was moved forward in the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, which seriously diminished Social Security’s income in payroll taxes.

      Infographic: When Is the Social Security Trust Fund Running Out? | Statista

      You will find more infographics at Statista

      The system’s expenditures have been above its income for some time – with the difference being taken out of the asset fund and the interest it creates – but the gap has been widening over the years.

      As Baby Boomers retire and Americans are having fewer children, the balance between those who are working and funding social security and those who are receiving old age, survivor or disability benefits continues to tip.

       2021 marked the first year when interest earned on the fund could no longer bridge social security’s spending gap, sending the asset reserve into a downward spiral.

      Because Social Security services are funded by the payroll tax on a pay-as-you-go basis, the income-cost gap equals the amount the administration would no longer be able to pay out if the fund would in fact be depleted. In order to stop funds from running low, Congress would have to act to provide additional revenue to Social Security, for example by raising the dedicated payroll tax, to lower its cost by cutting benefits or attempt a combination of both.

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 21:20

    • Idaho Supreme Court Upholds Ban On Student IDs For Voting
      Idaho Supreme Court Upholds Ban On Student IDs For Voting

      Authored by Chase Smith via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

      The Supreme Court of Idaho on Thursday, April 11, upheld recent legislative amendments to the state’s voter identification requirements, affirming a lower court’s ruling in favor of the Idaho Secretary of State, Phil McGrane, which eliminated the use of student IDs for voter registration and in-person voting.

      The unanimous ruling came in light of the suit filed by two voter advocacy groups last year, claiming two pieces of legislation disproportionately affected young and out-of-state college voters, infringing upon their right to vote and violating equal protection under the Idaho Constitution.

      The opinion of the court said, in part, “we conclude House Bills 124 and 340 are reasonable exercises of the legislature’s authority to enact conditions on the right of suffrage under Article VI, section 4 of the Idaho Constitution.”

      The Idaho State Capitol building in Boise, Idaho, in a file photo. (Carlos A Torres/Shutterstock)

      The Bills and Legal Arguments

      House Bill 124 removed student IDs as acceptable proof of identity at polling places, while House Bill 340 revised the identification needed for voter registration, eliminating the option to use the last four digits of a social security number.

      Instead, voters must now present a current Idaho driver’s license, a U.S. passport, a tribal identification card, or a concealed weapon license.

      In their lawsuit, BABE VOTE and the League of Women Voters, the two voter advocacy groups, claimed these changes would unduly burden young voters and out-of-state students in Idaho, constituting an unequal and heightened burden on their fundamental right to vote.

      Justice Robyn Brody, writing for the court, detailed that while voting is a fundamental right protected by the Idaho Constitution, the legislature is granted authority to prescribe reasonable qualifications and conditions on voter registration and voting.

      The court held that the changes enacted by House Bills 124 and 340 did not infringe upon the constitutional rights to vote and were appropriately within the legislature’s scope to ensure the integrity and efficiency of elections.

      In part, the court also found the groups’ arguments for lack of standing as un-persuasive when reviewing it with a strict lens, but said with a lenient view the groups did have standing.

      “While it may be an inconvenience for Plaintiffs, having to ’re-educate‘ voters and volunteers about changes in the law is not the ’concrete and demonstrable’ injury,” Justice Brody wrote. “Indeed, the mission of these organizations is voter education. We agree with the Secretary that educating voters about the need to produce identification at the polls is not a new harm; it is part of the organizations’ mission; thus, it is not a sufficient basis to invoke organizational standing.”

      The court, when applying a rational basis review, the most lenient standard of judicial scrutiny, concluded that the legislative amendments were “rationally related to legitimate government interests” such as maintaining election integrity and updating voter identification processes to reflect current standards.

      Reaction to the Decision

      The decision has been met with mixed reactions. Supporters of the bills argue that the updated laws strengthen the security and reliability of Idaho’s electoral process. Critics, however, maintain that the laws could suppress voter turnout among young and transient populations, particularly affecting students.

      “We are pleased to see that the Idaho Supreme Court recognizes the importance of voting and that access to voting and the security of our elections are not competing objectives,” Mr. McGrane said in a post on X. “Voters can have confidence in Idaho’s elections.”

      The plaintiffs argued that they did not get their day in court and that “justice has been denied” following the court’s ruling.

      “Citizens’ right to vote is fundamental to our democratic republic,” the groups said in a statement posted to X. “This legislature has tried virtually everything in its power to prevent young, disabled, homebound, and working class Idahoans from exercising that right. Since these laws were enacted, BABE VOTE and the League of Women Voters of Idaho have been unable to help approximately 20% of legally eligible Idahoans from completing their voter registrations. Today’s ruling validates this voter suppression and undermines democracy in Idaho.”

      The groups went on to say that they would do “everything in [their] power” to register as many voters as possible under “difficult” and “impossible” conditions of Idaho’s voter laws.

      “While the state may have won in court today, they have not won this battle,” the groups added in their statement. “Today, we are mobilizing students on high school and college campuses across Idaho and the country to register, educate, and turn out young people in record numbers, starting with the primaries this May.”

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 21:00

    • Shadowy Mayorkas-Linked NGO In Mexico Tells Border Invaders To "Vote Biden"
      Shadowy Mayorkas-Linked NGO In Mexico Tells Border Invaders To “Vote Biden”

      The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project posted an image on X of what they say is a flyer from a non-governmental organization operating in Mexico encouraging migrants to vote for President Biden once they arrive in the United States.

      “Reminder to vote for President Biden when you are in the United States. We need another four years of his term to stay open,” part of the flyer read. 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      The Oversight Project said the flyer was initially discovered by a Muckraker journalist while touring the site of Resource Center Matamoras in Mexico. 

      “They [flyers] also appear to be handed out when illegal aliens use the RCM for assistance in coming to the USA,” the group said. 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      RCM founder Gaby Zavala told one of Muckraker’s journalists that she is trying to flood the US with as many illegal aliens as possible before former President Trump is reelected. 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      “RCM bills itself as an operation which houses functions for Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), which helps illegal aliens enter the United States,” Oversight Project said, adding that disgraced Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas “is a former board member of HIAS, which received numerous grants from Soros’ Open Society Foundation over the years.” 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      RCM has connections with Soros-funded non-profits operating across the US.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jshttps://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Meanwhile, new documents from Judicial Watch show Mayorkas has met with NGOs facilitating the border invasion. 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      We can’t imagine anything more ridiculously corrupt… 

      Oversight Project concludes:

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Since the Biden administration opened the floodgates, 10 million illegal immigrants invaded the nation. A complex web of NGOs is facilitating the border invasion while the administration looks the other way. 

      We have reported:

      Meanwhile, in Mexico… 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      “A lot of Americans don’t understand just how much Mayorkas is in bed with open borders lobby,” Nate Hochman, senior advisor of America 2100, wrote on X. 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      One X user asked: “Is this not racketeering in addition to election interference?” 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 20:44

    • Red Colorado Counties Sue To Help ICE Arrest, Deport Illegal Immigrants
      Red Colorado Counties Sue To Help ICE Arrest, Deport Illegal Immigrants

      Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

      Two conservative Colorado counties—Douglas and El Paso—have sued the state of Colorado and its Democrat governor over laws that prevent local law enforcement from working with federal agents to arrest and deport illegal immigrants.

      Illegal immigrants rest at a makeshift shelter, in Denver on Jan. 6, 2023. Denver Mayor Mike Johnston announced a major shift on April 10, 2024, in the city’s response to the migrant crisis, extending support to six months but with only 1,000 spaces. (Thomas Peipert/AP Photo)

      “The nation is facing an immigration crisis,” commissioners and sheriffs from Douglas and El Paso wrote in their complaint, which was filed on April 15 at the Denver County District Court.

      The lawsuit targets two sanctuary state laws—House Bills 19-1124 and 23-1100—which prohibit local governments from joining with the federal government on immigration matters.

      Specifically, the bills prohibit local law enforcement from arresting and detaining illegal immigrants. They also bar state judicial officials from sharing information with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and prohibit local governments from entering into agreements with the federal government on matters of immigration enforcement.

      “It is our intent to bring suit specifically to address the illegal immigration crisis now present in this country,” George Teal, chair of the Douglas County Board of Commissioners, said during a press conference announcing the lawsuit.

      “Federal policies along the southern border … [have] resulted in an unlimited string of illegal immigrants into our communities,” Mr. Teal continued. “And we see it as the duty of the county to push back against the state laws that prohibit us from working with federal authorities to keep Douglas County and our communities safe.”

      The conservative counties allege in their complaint that the two laws that they’re challenging, which were signed into law by Colorado Gov. Jared Polis over the past several years, are illegal and unconstitutional. They allege that the laws violate various provisions of the Colorado State Constitution, including on intergovernmental relationships and distribution of powers.

      “We do believe we will have victory,” Mr. Teal added.

      ‘Stark’ Numbers

      Douglas County Commissioner Abe Laydon said during the press conference that he understands the hardship that illegal immigrants face but the lawsuit is about protecting local communities and prioritizing people who immigrate by legal means.

      “This is about putting America first and putting Coloradans first,” Mr. Laydon said, adding that he’s the first Latino elected commissioner in Douglas County and he recognizes the plight of those who are legitimately seeking refuge and asylum in the United States.

      Mr. Laydon described as “stark” the number of illegal immigrants that have been bussed into Denver—around 40,000 people from Venezuela. In order to provide assistance to this group, the mayor of Democrat-controlled Denver has asked the City Council to cut $45.9 million from its annual budget to pay for his $90 million illegal immigrant response program called the Denver Asylum Seekers Program.

      Among the cuts will be layoffs or furloughs of city employees, reduced hiring for difficult-to-hire positions, fewer supplies purchases, and deferral of some technology and capital projects, the Denver Mayor’s office said.

      Unlike Denver, Mr. Laydon’s county won’t be cutting services to residents in order to serve those that are coming here through improper channels.

      “Douglas County is a great place to be. But Douglas County is a place where quality of life comes first. And we want to prioritize the rights of those who are legally here first,” he said.

      The Colorado governor’s office did not respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit.

      A number of states have laws that either limit or expand the ability of local law enforcement to cooperate with immigration enforcement, with “sanctuary cities” like Denver facing increased scrutiny and criticism amid the record influx of illegal immigrants into the United States.

      Denver Cuts Taxpayer Services

      Denver Mayor Mike Johnston recently announced a 2.5 percent budget cut to all city agencies—including the police, sheriff, and fire departments—in order to find around $45.9 million to help pay for the city’s new program to assist illegal immigrants.

      The program, called the Denver Asylum Seekers Program, comes at a total price tag of nearly $90 million, with the other roughly half of the cost coming from a previously identified $44 million.

      Earlier this year, Mr. Johnston asked all city departments to find creative ways to cut costs by up to 15 percent to pay for “newcomer operations,” though he said at a recent press conference and press release that the updated plan managed to avoid “the worst-case budget cut scenarios.”

      The mayor’s office will take the brunt of the cuts, slashing 9.6 percent of its 2024 budget, followed by the Climate Action, Sustainability and Resiliency Department, which will cut 6.1 percent, according to a breakdown reported by KDVR-TV.

      The Sheriff’s Department will face a 2.2 percent cut, the Police Department will see a 1.9 percent reduction, while the fire department budget will be reduced by 0.8 percent.

      “After more than a year of facing this crisis together, Denver finally has a sustainable plan for treating our newcomers with dignity while avoiding the worst cuts to city services,” Mr. Johnston said in a statement. “So many times, we were told that we couldn’t be compassionate while still being fiscally responsible. Today is proof that our hardest challenges are still solvable and that together, we are the ones who will solve them.”

      Denver and other Democratic-led cities had asked the Biden administration for aid to assist with the influx of migrants into their communities.

      President Joe Biden asked Congress for $1.4 billion in funding for the effort as part of his budget. Congress refused and instead cut the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Shelter and Services Program from $800 million to $650 million.

      “Whether we’d like the federal government to do it or not, that was no longer a choice for us,” Mr. Johnston said.

      Jana Pruet contributed to this report.

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 20:20

    • Less Than One Third Of US Men Enjoy Reading
      Less Than One Third Of US Men Enjoy Reading

      It’s National Libraries Week in the United States and to mark it we’re looking at readership patterns around the world.

      As Anna Fleck shows, based on data from Statista’s Consumer Insights survey shows, women were more likely to say that reading is one of their personal hobbies than men in all of the selected countries.

      Infographic: Where Reading is More (& Less) Popular | Statista

      You will find more infographics at Statista

      The gender gap was widest in Germany, with a 20 percentage point difference, followed by Spain and Italy (with 19 p.p. difference each).

      Spain (58 percent) had the highest share of female readers who considered it one of their personal hobbies of the surveyed countries included in this chart, while Mexico had the highest share of men who said the same (41 percent).

      In the United States, 44 percent of women said reading was one of their main pastimes versus 30 percent of men. When looking at the U.S. adult surveyed population with both genders combined, the share of people selecting reading in response to this question increased with age (30 percent of 18-19 year olds, 32 percent 20-29 year olds, 36 percent 30-39 year olds, 38 percent for 40-49 year olds, 41 percent 50-59 year olds, 44 percent 60-64 year olds).

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 20:00

    • China's Crude Oil Imports Hit A Record High In 2023
      China’s Crude Oil Imports Hit A Record High In 2023

      By Tom Kool of OilPrice.com

      China’s crude oil imports hit a record high in 2023, rising by 10% year-over-year and breaking the previous record from 2020 when the world’s top crude oil importer took advantage of the price crash to gorge on cheap crude.

      Last year, China’s crude oil imports averaged 11.3 million barrels per day (bpd), up by 10% compared to 2022, according to Chinese customs data compiled by Bloomberg and the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

      After China lifted the Covid-related restrictions in early 2023, Chinese refiners boosted imports to record-high levels last year, to support transportation fuel demand and produce feedstocks for China’s growing petrochemical industry, the EIA noted in an analysis published on Tuesday.

      Russia, thanks to cheaper crude supply, was China’s top source of crude imports last year, the data showed. Russia was also the supplier whose crude sales in China jumped the most.   

      In 2023, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq were China’s main sources of crude oil imports. Compared with 2022, China’s 2023 crude oil imports increased the most from Russia, Iran, Brazil, and the United States.

      Between 2019 and 2021, Saudi Arabia was China’s top crude oil supplier, with Russia second with 15% of Chinese imports.

      In 2023, Russia was China’s top source of crude oil imports, supplying 19% of China’s crude oil imports, which averaged 2.1 million bpd, the EIA said.

      The surge in Chinese crude oil imports from Russia was the result of discounted Russian prices due to the Western sanctions and price caps on Russia’s crude.

      While China bought large additional volumes of crude from Russia, it reduced imports from Western Europe, notably from Norway and the UK, due to the higher prices of Western European crudes compared to the discounts on Russian oil, the data showed.  

      This year, China has continued to import large volumes of crude from Russia, despite only a 0.7% increase in overall Chinese crude imports in January to March 2024. Much of the increase in Chinese crude oil imports in recent weeks has been due to cheap abundant flows of Russian crude, which – hampered en route to India by the U.S. sanctions – has found a home in the world’s top crude oil importer, analysts say. 

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 19:40

    • The Evolution Of Intelligence
      The Evolution Of Intelligence

      The expert consensus is that human-like machine intelligence is still a distant prospect, with only a 50-50 chance that it could emerge by 2059.

      But what if there was a way to do it in less than half the time?

      Visual Capitalist partnered with VERSES for the final entry in our AI Revolution Series to explore a potential roadmap to a shared or super intelligence that reduces the time required to as little as 16 years.

      Active Inference and the Future of AI

      The secret sauce behind this acceleration is something called active inference, a highly efficient model for cognition where beliefs are continuously updated to reduce uncertainty and increase the accuracy of predictions about how the world works.

       An AI built with this as its foundation would have beliefs about the world and would want to learn more about it; in other words, it would be curious. This is a quantum leap ahead of current state-of-the-art AI, like OpenAI’s ChatGPT or Google’s Gemini, which once they’ve completed their training, are in essence frozen in time; they cannot learn. 

      At the same time, because active inference models cognitive processes, we would be able to “see” the thought processes and rationale for any given AI decision or belief. This is in stark contrast to existing AI, where the journey from prompt to response is a black box, with all the ethical and legal ramifications that that entails. As a result, an AI built on active inference would engender accountability and trust.

      The 4 Stages of Artificial Intelligence

      Here are the steps through which an active-inference-based intelligence could develop:

      1. Systemic AI responds to prompts based on probabilities established during training: i.e. current state-of-the-art AI.

      2. Sentient AI is quintessentially curious and uses experience to refine beliefs about the world. 

      3. Sophisticated AI makes plans and experiments to increase its knowledge of the world. 

      4. Sympathetic AI recognizes states of mind in others and ultimately itself. It is self-aware.  

      5. Shared or Super AI is a collective intelligence emerging from the interactions of AI and their human partners.

      Stage four represents a hypothetical planetary super-intelligence that could emerge from the Spatial Web, the next evolution of the internet that unites people, places, and things. 

      A Thoughtful AI for the Future?

      With AI already upending the way we live and work, and former tech evangelists raising red flags, it may be worth asking what kind of AI future we want? One where AI decisions are a black box, or one where AI is accountable and transparent, by design.

      VERSES is developing an explainable AI based on active inference that can not only think, but also introspect and explain its “thought processes.”

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 19:20

    • Coalition Of Attorneys General File Amicus Brief Defending Ken Paxton And His Top Deputy
      Coalition Of Attorneys General File Amicus Brief Defending Ken Paxton And His Top Deputy

      Authored by Jana J. Pruet via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

      A national coalition of 18 state attorneys general filed an amicus brief to defend Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s First Assistant Attorney General Brent Webster in a lawsuit initiated by the State Bar of Texas.

      “The State Bar of Texas’s Commission for Lawyer Discipline attempted to censure Attorney General Paxton and First Assistant Attorney General Webster for taking action over genuine concerns of unconstitutional conduct by states during the 2020 election,” Mr. Paxton’s office wrote in a press release on Monday.

      Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (C) talks to reporters with Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt (2nd L) and Texas Solicitor General Judd Stone (R) in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on April 26, 2022. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

      The brief was filed on Friday in response to complaints against the state’s top attorney and his top deputy for their decision to file the “landmark” case known as Texas v. Pennsylvania. Mr. Webster authored the petition contesting the 2020 presidential election results to the U.S. Supreme Court.

      “Neither the State Bar nor this Court is an appropriate forum for what is ultimately a political fight,” the group of attorneys general wrote in the brief. “And while it is, of course, true that the Attorney General is subject to general rules of professional conduct, those rules cannot be used to limit discretionary authority conferred by a State Constitution. Nor can they be weaponized to undermine the will of the voters who elected the Attorney General in the first place.”

      Montana AG Austin Knudsen, who led the coalition, said the commission’s complaint threatens the constitutional authority of elected officials.

      “The weaponization of the bar complaint process undermines the constitutional authority of elected officials and the will of the voters,” Mr. Knudsen told the Daily Caller. “I’m glad I could support Attorney General Ken Paxton in this instance as a number of attorneys general, including me, are facing similar attacks from their political adversaries. just for doing their jobs.”

      The coalition argues that the issue is not about the alleged misconduct but whether the court will allow state bars to take action against those with whom they disagree politically.

      “The real question in this case is not whether the alleged misrepresentations amount to violation of the rules of professional conduct,” the court document reads. “Instead, it is whether courts will permit the politicization of the State Bars and weaponization of disciplinary rules against elected executive officers discharging their constitutional duties.

      “The Supreme Court of Texas will likely be the first to consider that question. It should be a resounding ‘No.’”  

      The attorneys general argue that allowing the case to move forward will encourage further bar complaints made for the purpose of “obstructing the ability of attorneys general and their staff to carry out their constitutional responsibilities.”

      They are asking the Texas Supreme Court to reverse the decision of the appeals court.

      “The Court should grant the petition, reverse the court of appeals’ decision, and render judgment on behalf of the First Assistant,” the document states.

      Here is a list of the other 17 attorneys general who signed on to the amicus brief:

      • Alabama AG Steve Marshall
      • Alaska AG Treg Taylor
      • Florida AG Ashley Moody
      • Idaho AG Raúl Labrador
      • Indiana AG Theodore Rokita
      • Iowa AG Brenna Bird
      • Kansas AG Kris Kobach
      • Louisiana AG Liz Murrill
      • Mississippi AG Lynn Fitch
      • Missouri AG Andrew Bailey
      • Nebraska AG Michael Hilgers
      • North Dakota AG Drew Wrigley
      • Oklahoma AG Gentner Drummond
      • South Carolina AG Alan Wilson
      • South Dakota AG Marty Jackley
      • Utah AG Sean Reyes
      • West Virginia AG Patrick Morrisey

      Mr. Paxton said the state bar’s attempts to punish him and Mr. Webster will not stop them from defending the Constitution.

      “Thank you to my fellow attorneys general for siding with law and order,” Mr. Paxton said in a statement.

      “The State Bar is using a disgraceful tactic: weaponizing politically motivated lawfare to intimidate elected leaders and their staff from upholding the Constitution when it inconveniences their political agenda. This attempt to punish First Attorney General Webster and me for standing up for our country, our State, and our citizens will not succeed.”

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 19:00

    • Biden Refuses To Testify In GOP Impeachment Inquiry
      Biden Refuses To Testify In GOP Impeachment Inquiry

      Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

      President Joe Biden will not be testifying to U.S. House of Representatives members who are engaged in an impeachment inquiry against him, the White House said on April 15.

      President Joe Biden speaks during a joint press conference with the Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida at the Rose Garden of the White House, on April 10, 2024. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)

      Richard Sauber, special counsel to the president, told House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) that the president would not testify in the “partisan charade.”

      “Your committee’s purported ‘impeachment inquiry’ has succeeded only in turning up abundant evidence that, in fact, the president has done nothing wrong,” Mr. Sauber said in a letter to Mr. Comer.

      “Your insistence on peddling these false and unsupported allegations despite ample evidence to the contrary makes one thing about your investigation abundantly clear: The facts do not matter to you,” he added.

      Republicans in their investigation have found that millions of dollars flowed from businesses and individuals, including foreigners, to members of the Biden family while President Biden was vice president.

      They’ve also identified payments from Hunter Biden’s business to the president, and from the president’s brother to him, as well as emails between President Biden and an associate of Hunter Biden. Several witnesses, meanwhile, testified that President Biden would get on the phone with Hunter Biden’s associates and that he attended multiple meals with them.

      President Biden and the White House have maintained that he was not involved with the business undertaken by his son and brother.

      Mr. Comer wrote to the president in March, saying the evidence “wholly contradicts your position.”

      “In light of the yawning gap between your public statements and the evidence assembled by the committee, as well as the White House’s obstruction, it is in the best interest of the American people for you to answer questions from members of Congress directly, and I hereby invite you to do so,” Mr. Comer wrote at the time.

      “The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree in the Biden family. Like his son, Hunter Biden, President Biden is refusing to testify in public about the Bidens’ corrupt influence peddling,” Mr. Comer said Monday.

      “This comes as no surprise since President Biden continues to lie about his relationships with his son’s business partners, even denying they exist when his son said under oath during a deposition that they did,” he said. “It is unfortunate President Biden is unwilling to answer questions before the American people and refuses to answer the very simple, straightforward questions we included in the invitation. Why is it so difficult for the White House to answer those questions? The American people deserve transparency from President Biden, not more lies.”

      It’s not clear whether lawmakers are considering subpoenaing the president, and the White House did not respond when asked whether the president would comply with a subpoena.

      Mr. Comer and other members have said they want answers to questions, including those about the source of the money for the payment from his brother.

      They’re also wondering whether President Biden ever interacted with Hunter Biden’s associates, such as Chinese businessmen Jonathan Li, Ye Jianming, and Henry Zhao.

      Lawmakers also want more details about the work done by Eric Schwerin, one of the associates, for President Biden. Mr. Schwerin told lawmakers that he often met with President Biden and provided him with free services, including tax preparation.

      Lawmakers have yet to outline the next steps in the inquiry. The November election is looming and, if President Biden loses his re-election bid, he would exit the presidency regardless in January 2025.

      Mr. Sauber, the special adviser to the president, is leaving the White House early next month. He was brought on in 2022 to oversee the White House’s response to congressional investigations as Democrats braced to lose their majorities on Capitol Hill that year.

      The Associated Press contributed to this report.

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 18:20

    • RFK Jr Won't Pursue Libertarian Nomination, Says Team Trump Asked Him To Be VP
      RFK Jr Won’t Pursue Libertarian Nomination, Says Team Trump Asked Him To Be VP

      After seriously considering the possibility, 2024 presidential hopeful Robert F. Kennedy, Jr has declared he will not seek the Libertarian Party nomination, saying he’s confident he’ll achieve ballot access across the country on his own. Meanwhile, in a social media skirmish with Team Trump, Kennedy said Trump associates asked him to consider becoming the former president’s running mate. 

      In a political system with formidable ballot-access barriers that protect the Democrat-Republican duopoly, outsider presidential candidates are frequently attracted to the idea of running as a Libertarian — if only to access the party’s hard-earned, 50-state ballot qualification. 

      Thanks in part to his staunchly pro-Israel positions, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr faced an uphill climb to win the Libertarian Party’s nomination (Anna Moneymaker/Getty via Town & Country)

      “We’re not gonna have any problems getting on the ballot ourselves so we won’t be running Libertarian,” Kennedy tells ABC News. That declaration came as his team was celebrating their exploitation of a quirk in Iowa ballot-access law: Rather than gathering 3,500 signatures, the Kennedy team held a convention in West Des Moines. Consistent with state requirements, it included at least 500 voters who represented at least 25 of the Hawkeye State’s 99 counties.   

      Kennedy assured ABC that he’s “100% confident” he’ll manage the arduous process — which includes fending off Democrats’ lawfare — in all 50 states, saying “we’re going to add probably two to three states a week.”

      While Kennedy framed his decision solely in ballot-access terms, it was far from certain that he could have actually won the Libertarian nod. The nominee isn’t selected by party leadership, but by delegates at the group’s convention — all of whom show up fully free to vote for the candidate of their choice. Things can get wild and spontaneous, and not just in a political sense: 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Kennedy has plenty of overlaps with libertarians, some of his stances could be seen as disqualifying:

      • His staunchly pro-Israel statements before and during the Gaza war devastated his standing with non-interventionist libertarians (and progressive leftists to boot). The damage hasn’t caused him to temper his remarks: On Saturday, he oddly referred to Israel as “our oldest ally” and said “the U.S. ought to be bending over backwards to protect Israel.” 
      • While he’s expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of gun control, he said he would sign an “assault weapon ban” if Congress sent him one.
      • He’s also called for a $15 national minimum wage, more free childcare, and abolishing interest on all federal student loans. 

      Meanwhile, responding to a series of Truth Social posts by Trump, in which the former president called Kennedy “the most radical liberal” in the race, Kennedy said Trump’s “emissaries” asked him to become his running mate.  

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Trump’s co-campaign manager Chris LaCivita quickly fired back, denying Kennedy’s claim and calling him a “leftie loonie” to boot…

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Politico reports that Trump had casually floated the idea in conversations, adding that “Trump is known to workshop ideas to a variety of aides and allies, even if they never come to fruition. As he does with many political rivals, Trump has directed a mixture of flattery and abuse at Kennedy — as he did last week:  

      “He’s got some nice things about him. I happen to like him. Unfortunately he is about the ‘Green New Scam’ because he believes in that and a lot of people don’t.

      I guess that would mean that RFK Jr.’s going to be taking away votes from Crooked Joe Biden, and he should because he’s actually better than Biden. He’s much better than Biden. If I were a Democrat, I’d vote for RFK Jr. every single time over Biden.”

      Kennedy’s polling at 9.3% in the RealClearPolitics average. If nothing else, RFK Jr is a wild card who’s causing more worries among Democrats than Republicans.

      When Kennedy and third-party options are included in polls, they generally show their presence in the race is a net positive for Trump. In a head-to-head scenario, the RCP average has Trump up 0.2%. In a five-person race (which includes Kennedy, Jill Stein and Cornell West), Trump is ahead by 1.8%. Recognizing that, Dems have mobilized forces to file legal challenges to his ballot qualifications — you know, in the name of Protecting Our Democracy. 

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 18:00

    • The US-Mexico Dispute Over GM Corn Safety Could Transform American Agriculture
      The US-Mexico Dispute Over GM Corn Safety Could Transform American Agriculture

      Authored by Amy Denney via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

      Mexico’s effort to keep genetically modified corn out of the country is triggering a trade dispute with the United States and Canada that could affect the future of agriculture.

      (Illustration by The Epoch Times, Shutterstock, Freepik)

      The trade dispute hinges on a key question: whether genetically modified (GM) corn poses a threat to human health.

      U.S. trade representatives argue it does not and wants to force GM corn into Mexico. Given that GM seed is used in 90 percent of U.S. crops, the dispute could have far-reaching effects should Mexico win. Beyond the U.S. agricultural sector, it could damage the German and Chinese companies that make and sell those seeds.

      The Epoch Times has reached out to Bayer, the company that bought seed giant Monsanto, and Chinese state-owned Syngenta, but has yet to get a response.

      A Battle Over Biotechnology

      Corn has fed previous trade battles between Mexico and the United States, with Mexican producers previously protesting the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) for allowing American corn in without restriction. In the latest chapter, Mexico issued a presidential decree in February 2023 that bans GM corn in tortillas and dough and signaled the country’s intention to gradually replace GM corn in all animal and human foods.

      Mexicans march in Mexico City on Jan. 31, 2008,  in a march of hundreds of corn producers protesting against the NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), which liberates maize imports from the United States since Jan. 1. Corn has been a point of contention between Mexico and the United States. (LUIS ACOSTA/AFP via Getty Images)

      Canada, which is deeply integrated into U.S. and Mexican agricultural trade, and the United States both opposed the ban.

      Mexico has kept genetically modified corn from being grown within its borders for 25 years in an effort to protect both citizen health and ancient strains of maize. Corn is a staple crop eaten in 89 percent of Mexican meals.

      The United States has largely disregarded health concerns arising from GM crops and has spent the past year working to prove Mexico’s 2023 decree violates the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

      The restrictions, originally slated to go into effect this year, set off a disagreement now in the hands of a USMCA trade panel after Mexico and the United States failed to resolve it through negotiations.

      The United States contends that there’s no scientific evidence that GM corn is unsafe to eat, a claim Mexico refutes. Mexico says the United States hasn’t presented any evidence of GM corn’s long-term safety, particularly when eaten at high levels.

      Corn consumption is ten times higher in Mexico, raising concerns among its medical and governmental leaders about research linking GM crops to health issues.

      Clashing Visions and the Future of Agriculture

      The trade disagreement highlights clashing ideological values and interests. Mexico has concerns for public health and Indigenous maize. The United States aims to protect American farmers, food security, and the future of agricultural biotechnology.

      Ultimately, the three-member USMCA panel has to sort through the arguments, science, and finer points of Indigenous legal rights to make a decision. Lucy Sharratt, coordinator of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, said the ruling could generate cultural and environmental shockwaves.

      “If the panel pays attention to the science, they should come to the same conclusion as the Mexican government. If they’re swayed by politics and the power behind the technology, it’s going to be difficult for them to see the reality of the science,” she told The Epoch Times. “This is a hugely significant decision the panel has before them.”

      The Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, a group that raises education about the genetic engineering of food, was originally invited to share its opinion with the trade tribunal, but the offer was rescinded at the request of the U.S. and Canadian governments.

      Mexico’s Case

      Mexico filed a 200-page response to the U.S. trade violation complaint, which many observers say fulfilled the onus of its argument. It offered 66 articles in peer-reviewed journals pointing to GM corn’s associated health risks including increased damage to organs, cancer, antibiotic resistance, and reduced nutritional content.

      Mexico’s decree also included a ban on glyphosate originally intended to go into effect on April 1, but the government pushed back that date while researching alternatives available in suitable quantities.

      GM corn is tightly wed to glyphosate, the key ingredient in RoundUp and other herbicides. That’s because one of the most prominent traits in GM corn is resistance to glyphosate, the main ingredient in RoundUp. Monsanto, the German firm making most of the GM corn grown in the United States, calls the corn “Roundup Ready.” A rise in the use of glyphosate closely paralleled the rise in use of GM corn seed.

      Additionally, Mexico’s report included 74 studies and papers on the risks of glyphosate, pointing to research documenting residues found on GM corn and concerns that the volume of corn Mexicans eat creates the need for a different safety standard. Mexico’s decree isn’t an outright trade ban but it does create the need for suitable replacements for both GM corn and glyphosate.

      Though the language is vague, the decree calls for agricultural groups to offer input to Mexican agencies on how to design, promote, and implement alternatives to glyphosate.

      The Glyphosate Issue

      Glyphosate has become an important topic of research, and studies now suggest it has several potential consequences on human physiology.

      A 2014 study published in the Journal of Organic Systems looked at two decades of information on the rising rates of chronic diseases and their association with glyphosate use. Correlation doesn’t prove causation, but graph after graph of epidemiological data of 22 diseases reveal sharp increases that coincide with the accelerating use of glyphosate.

      The study found highly significant correlations between glyphosate applications and hypertension, stroke, diabetes prevalence and incidence, obesity, Alzheimer’s, autism, multiple sclerosis, inflammatory bowel disease, several types of cancer, intestinal infections, and more. Researchers used the Pearson correlation coefficient, the most common way to measure correlation.

      Additionally, Roundup Ready corn and soy in the U.S. were also found to have highly significant correlations with many of the same diseases. The authors concluded that the results warrant additional research on these relationships.

      Research done in Mexico has found glyphosate in the urine of children and adults, as well as evidence of it in industrial and native foods.

      Unsatisfied With the Science

      Mexico has objected to some of the research the United States was citing during negotiations, including sources that were not peer-reviewed, over a decade old, or funded by biotech companies. Mexico also raised concerns about the lack of long-term studies on humans eating GM corn, according to Timothy A. Wise, senior advisor for the Institute of Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP).

      Read more here…

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 17:40

    Digest powered by RSS Digest

    Apr 16

    Today’s News 16th April 2024

    • Security Ramped-Up In Germany After Jihadists Threaten Drone Strikes At Euro 2024
      Security Ramped-Up In Germany After Jihadists Threaten Drone Strikes At Euro 2024

      Authored by Thomas Brooke via ReMix News,

      An offshoot terror cell affiliated with Islamic State has published propaganda encouraging jihadists to target German football stadiums during this summer’s European Championships.

      In the latest issue of the “Voice of Khorasan” magazine, a publication run by ISKP, or Islamic State — Khorasan Province, the terror organization called for jihad at Europe’s flagship football tournament, which runs for a month in Germany from June 14 until July 14.

      Against a backdrop of an explosive drone flying across a football stadium, the publication used the headline, “If they restrict and oppress you on the ground, then attack them from the sky.”

      “Run over the infidels with your car, hit them with a knife, with poison, or blow out their brains with bullets and set fire to their houses,” it further wrote.

      German security services are understood to be treating the message as a credible threat. They are ramping up surveillance and implementing measures to combat any attempts to use drone strikes against stadiums hosting the event, which is expected to be attended by hundreds of thousands of football fans from across Europe.

      The threat is the latest in a long line of menacing imagery published by terror cells to inflict fear across the continent.

      Earlier this month, images circulated online of jihadists vowing to target the UEFA Champions League quarter-final games, prompting the authorities to bolster defenses at stadiums across Western Europe.

      “The main question is whether these are free riders or a serious threat,” a high-ranking state security officer told Focus.

      Authorities, however, are unwilling to take a risk on security and will treat the threat as credible.

      “It is to be feared that other terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda will also use their PR channels to agitate for an attack offensive in Europe and Germany,” the source added.

      The Afghan splinter group of Islamic State has grown in stature in recent months to become the primary organization of concern for security officials across Europe.

      A major counter-terror operation took place in the German city of Cologne before Christmas after security services in Austria, Germany, and Spain received intelligence of jihadists affiliated with the group planning to carry out several attacks at Christian landmarks including Cologne Cathedral.

      Last month, two Afghan nationals with ties to the U.N.-proscribed terror cell were arrested in Germany on suspicion of planning a terror attack near the Swedish parliament to avenge the permittance of Koran-burning demonstrations in the country.

      Several individuals are understood to have exploited the migratory route from Ukraine to enter the European Union to plan attacks, with Tajikistan and Turkmenistan nationals arrested in Germany in July last year having entered Western Europe from the war-torn country.

      Authorities in neighboring France are also concerned about the threat of terror attacks during Paris’ hosting of the summer Olympic Games this year, and its organizers have devised a “Plan B” in case terror threats jeopardize the event’s opening ceremony.

      “There is no terrorist threat to the Olympics and Paralympics today, but we will continue to monitor the situation,” Oudéa-Castéra told France 2 earlier this month.

      “Just because we don’t talk about it, just because we don’t mention Plan B, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist.”

      The terror alert level in France remains at the highest possible due to concerns over Islamic radicals and fears of retaliation against the West because of the war in Israel.

      Read more here…

      Tyler Durden
      Tue, 04/16/2024 – 02:00

    • The WHO's Road To Totalitarianism
      The WHO’s Road To Totalitarianism

      Authored by Bert Olivier via The Brownstone Institute,

      Several articles on the proposed amendments to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) international health regulations have appeared here on Brownstone, such as this excellent introduction. Consequently, there is no need to repeat this information in a similar format. What I would like to do instead is to pursue the question, what the implications would be for people worldwide if this organisation were to be successful in getting the representatives of member countries to accept the proposed amendments. More specifically, what are the likely consequences in terms of the concept and practice of totalitarianism?

      To understand this, one has to get to grips with the mode of rule called totalitarian government, of course, but I doubt whether most people have an adequate grasp of full-fledged totalitarian rule, despite recently experiencing it to a certain degree under “pandemic” conditions. Should the amendments proposed by the WHO be accepted in May, the citizens of the world would be subjected to unadulterated totalitarianism, however, so it is worthwhile exploring the full implications of this “anonymous” mode of governance here.

      This is done in the hope that, if representatives of the people—which is what they are supposed to be—in legislative bodies around the world were to read this article, as well as others related to the same topic, they would think twice before supporting a motion or bill which would, in effect, grant the WHO the right to usurp the sovereignty of member nations. The recent developments in the state of Louisiana in the United States, which amount to the rejection of the WHO’s authority, should be an inspiration to other states and countries to follow its example. This is the way to beat the WHO’s mendacious “pandemic treaty.”

      On her website, called Freedom Research, Dr. Meryl Nass has described the WHO’s notion of “pandemic preparedness” as a “scam/boondoggle/Trojan horse,” which aims (among other things) to transfer billions of taxpayer dollars to the WHO as well as other industries, in order to vindicate censorship in the name of “public health,” and perhaps most importantly, to transfer sovereignty regarding decision-making for “public health” globally to the Director-General of the WHO (which means that legally, member countries would lose their sovereignty).

      In addition, she highlights the fact that the WHO intends to use the idea of “One Health” to subsume all living beings, ecosystems, as well as climate change under its own “authority”; further, to acquire more pathogens for wide distribution, in this way exacerbating the possibility of pandemics while obscuring their origin, and in the event of such pandemics occurring, justifying the development of more (mandatory) “vaccines” and the mandating of vaccine passports (and of lockdowns) globally, thus increasing control (the key term here) over populations. Should its attempt at a global power grab succeed, the WHO would have the authority to impose any “medical” programme it deems necessary for “world health,” regardless of their efficacy and side-effects (including death).

      In the preceding paragraph I italicised the word “control” as a key term. What should be added to it is the term “total”—that is, “total control.” This is the gist of totalitarian rule, and it should therefore be easy to see that what the WHO (together with the WEF and the U.N.) strives for is total or complete control of all people’s lives.

      No one has analysed and elaborated on totalitarianism from this perspective more thoroughly than the German-born, American philosopher, Hannah Arendt, and her monumental study of this phenomenon—“The Origins of Totalitarianism” (1951 and in enlarged format, 1958) still stands as the authoritative source for the understanding of its historical manifestations. The latter, focused on by Arendt, are 20th-century Nazism and Stalinism, but it is not difficult to perceive its lineaments in what we have been living through since 2020—although a strong case could be made that 2001 marked its identifiable beginning, when (in the wake of 9/11) the Patriot Act was passed, arguably laying the authoritarian groundwork for totalitarian rule as clearly perceived by Henry Giroux.

      Arendt (p. 274 of the Harvest, Harcourt edition of “The Origins of Totalitarianism,” 1976) singles out “total terror” as the essence of totalitarian government, and elaborates as follows:

      “By pressing men against each other, total terror destroys the space between them; compared to the condition within its iron band, even the desert of tyranny [which she distinguishes from totalitarianism; B.O.], insofar as it is still some kind of space, appears like a guarantee of freedom. Totalitarian government does not just curtail liberties or abolish essential freedoms; nor does it, at least to our limited knowledge, succeed in eradicating the love for freedom from the hearts of man. It destroys the one essential prerequisite of all freedom which is simply the capacity of motion which cannot exist without space.”

      Reading this evocative characterisation of totalitarianism in terms of “total terror” makes one realise anew, with a start, how fiendishly clever the perpetrators of the so-called “pandemic” emergency were—which was no real pandemic, of course, as the German government recently admitted. It was the thin edge of the wedge, as it were, to insinuate “total terror” into our lives by means of curtailing our access to free movement in space. “Lockdowns” are the signature tool for implementing restrictions of free movements in space.

      It may not, on the face of it, appear to be the same as, or similar to, the incarceration of prisoners in the concentration camps under Nazi rule, but arguably the psychological effects of lockdowns approximate those experienced by inmates of these notorious camps in the 1940s. After all, if you are not allowed to leave your house, except to go to the shop to buy food and other essentials before you hurry back home—where you dutifully sanitise all the items you bought (a concrete reminder that venturing out in space is “potentially lethal”)—the imperative is the same: “You are not allowed out of this enclosure, except under specified conditions.” It is understandable that the imposition of such strict spatial boundaries engenders a pervasive sense of fear, which eventually morphs into terror.

      Small wonder the pseudo-authorities promoted—if not “commanded”—“working (and studying) from home,” leaving millions of people cloistered in their houses in front of their computer screens (Plato’s cave wall). And banning meetings in public, except for a few concessions as far as the numbers of attendees at certain gatherings were concerned, was just as effective regarding the intensification of terror. Most people would not dare transgress these spatial restrictions, given the effectiveness of the campaign, to instil a dread of the supposedly lethal “novel coronavirus” in populations, exacerbating “total terror” in the process. The images of patients in hospitals, attached to ventilators, and sometimes looking appealingly, desperately at the camera, only served to exacerbate this feeling of dread.

      With the advent of the much-hyped COVID pseudo-“vaccines,” another aspect of generating terror among the populace manifested itself in the guise of relentless censorship of all dissenting views and opinions on the “efficacy and safety” of these, as well as on the comparable effectiveness of early treatment of COVID by means of proven remedies such as Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin. The clear aim of this was to discredit contrarians who raised doubts over the official valorisation of these supposedly miraculous cures for the disease, and to isolate them from the mainstream as “conspiracy theorists.”

      Arendt’s insight into the indispensable function of space for human movement also casts the WEF’s plans to create “15-minute cities” worldwide in a disturbing new light. These have been described as “open-air concentration camps,” which would eventually become a reality by prohibiting movement outside of these demarcated areas, after an initial period of selling the idea as a way of combating climate change by walking and cycling instead of using carbon-emitting motor cars. The WEF and WHO’s “concern” with climate change as a putative threat to global health offers further justification for these planned variations on prisons for the thinly disguised incarceration of millions of people.

      The pertinence of Arendt’s thinking on totalitarianism for the present does not end here, though. Just as relevant as the manner in which it cultivates terror is her identification of loneliness and isolation as prerequisites for total domination. She describes isolation—in the political sphere—as “pre-totalitarian.” It is typical of the tyrannical governments of dictators (which are pre-totalitarian), where it functions to prevent citizens from wielding some power by acting together.

      Loneliness is the counterpart of isolation in the social sphere; the two are not identical, and the one can be the case without the other. One can be isolated or kept apart from others without being lonely; the latter only sets in when one feels abandoned by all other human beings. Terror, Arendt sagely observes, can “rule absolutely” only over people who have been “isolated against each other” (Arendt 1975, pp. 289–290). It therefore stands to reason that, to achieve the triumph of totalitarian rule, those promoting its inception would create the circumstances where individuals feel increasingly isolated as well as lonely.

      It is superfluous to remind anyone of the systematic inculcation of both of these conditions in the course of the “pandemic” through what has been discussed above, particularly lockdowns, the restriction of social contact at all levels, and through censorship, which—as remarked above—was clearly intended to isolate dissenting individuals. And those who were isolated in this way, were often—if not usually—abandoned by their family and friends, with the consequence that loneliness could, and sometimes did, follow. In other words, the tyrannical imposition of COVID regulations served the (probably intended) purpose of preparing the ground for totalitarian rule by creating the conditions for isolation and loneliness to become pervasive.

      How does totalitarian government differ from tyranny and authoritarianism, where one may still discern the figures of the despot, and the sway of some abstract ideal, respectively? Arendt writes that (p. 271–272):

      “If lawfulness is the essence of non-tyrannical government and lawlessness is the essence of tyranny, then terror is the essence of totalitarian domination.

      “Terror is the realization of the law of movement; its chief aim is to make it possible for the force of nature or of history to race freely through mankind, unhindered by any spontaneous human action. As such, terror seeks to ‘stabilize’ men in order to liberate the forces of nature or history. It is this movement which singles out the foes of mankind against whom terror is let loose, and no free action of either opposition or sympathy can be permitted to interfere with the elimination of the ‘objective enemy’ of History or Nature, of the class or the race. Guilt and innocence become senseless notions; ‘guilty’ is he who stands in the way of the natural or historical process which has passed judgement over ‘inferior races,’ over individuals ‘unfit to live,’ over ‘dying classes and decadent peoples.’ Terror executes these judgements, and before its court, all concerned are subjectively innocent: the murdered because they did nothing against the system, and the murderers because they do not really murder but execute a death sentence pronounced by some higher tribunal. The rulers themselves do not claim to be just or wise, but only to execute historical or natural laws; they do not apply [positive] laws, but execute a movement in accordance with its inherent law. Terror is lawfulness, if law is the law of the movement of some suprahuman force, Nature or History.”

      The reference to nature and history as suprahuman forces pertains to what Arendt (p. 269) claims to have been the undergirding beliefs of National Socialism and Communism, respectively, in the laws of nature and of history as being independent, virtually primordial powers in themselves. Hence the justification of terror being inflicted on those who seem to stand in the way of the unfolding of these impersonal forces. When read carefully, the excerpt, above, paints a picture of totalitarian rule as something predicated on the neutralisation of people, as human beings, in society as potential agents or participants in its organisation or the direction in which it develops. The “rulers” are not rulers in the traditional sense; they are merely there to ensure that the suprahuman force in question is left unhindered to unfold as it “should.”

      It takes no genius to perceive in Arendt’s perspicacious characterisation of totalitarian domination—which she relates to Nazism and Stalinism as its historical embodiments—a kind of template which applies to the emerging totalitarian character of what first manifested itself in 2020 as iatrocracy, under the subterfuge of a global health emergency—something well known to all of us today. Since then other features of this totalitarian movement have emerged, all of which cohere into what may be described, in ideological terms, as “transhumanism.”

      This, too, fits into Arendt’s account of totalitarianism—not the transhumanist character, as such, of this latest incarnation of the attempt to harness humanity as a whole to a suprahuman power, but its ideological status. Just as the Nazi regime justified its operations by appealing to nature (in the guise of the vaunted superiority of the “Aryan race,” for example), so the group of technocratic globalists driving the (not so) “Great Reset” appeals to the idea of going “beyond humanity” to a supposed superior (non-natural) “species” instantiating a fusion between humans and machines—also anticipated, it seems, by the “singularity” artist called Stelarc. I emphasised “idea” because, as Arendt observes (p. 279–280),

      “An ideology is quite literally what its name indicates: it is the logic of an idea. Its subject matter is history, to which the ‘idea’ is applied; the result of this application is not a body of statements about something that is, but the unfolding of a process which is in constant change. The ideology treats the course of events as though it followed the same ‘law’ as the logical exposition of its ‘idea.’”

      Given the nature of an ideology, explicated above, it should be evident how this applies to the transhumanist ideology of the neo-fascist cabal: the idea underpinning the historical process has supposedly always been a kind of transhumanist teleology—allegedly the (previously hidden) telos or goal of all of history has constantly been the attainment of a state of surpassing mere Homo and Gyna sapiens sapiens (the doubly wise human man and woman) and actualising the “transhuman.” Is it at all surprising that they have claimed to have acquired god-like powers?

      This further explains the unscrupulousness with which the transhumanist globalists can countenance the functioning and debilitating effects of “total terror” as identified by Arendt. “Total terror” here means the pervasive or totalising effects of, for example, installing encompassing systems of impersonal, largely AI-controlled surveillance, and communicating to people—at least initially—that it is for their own safety and security. The psychological consequences, however, amount to a subliminal awareness of the closure of “free space,” which is replaced by a sense of spatial confinement, and of there being “no way out.”

      Against this backdrop, reflecting on the looming possibility that the WHO may succeed in getting compliant nations to accept the proposed amendments to their health regulations, yields greater insight into the concrete effects this would have. And these aren’t pretty, to say the least. In a nutshell, it means that this unelected organisation would have the authority to proclaim lockdowns and “medical (or health) emergencies,” as well as mandatory “vaccinations” at the whim of the WHO’s Director-General, reducing the freedom to traverse space freely to ironclad spatial confinement in one fell swoop. This is what “total terror” would mean. It is my fervent hope that something can still be done to avert this imminent nightmare.

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 23:40

    • Population Projections: These Will Be The World's 6 Largest Countries In 2075
      Population Projections: These Will Be The World’s 6 Largest Countries In 2075

      The end of the 21st century will see the first plateauing (and eventually shrinking) of world population since the Industrial Revolution.

      As birth rates fall across the globe, what does this mean for the world’s most populous countries?

      To find out, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu visualized forecasts for the world’s six largest countries using data from the latest revised version of the UN World Population Prospects 2022.

      Projections are based on a “medium fertility scenario”, which assumes countries will converge at a birth rate of 1.85 children per woman, by 2045-2050.

      China’s Projected Population Decline

      China’s population boom has officially come to an end, with the country reporting two consecutive years of decreases (down 850,000 in 2022, and 2.1 million in 2023).

      Note: Figures are rounded.

      The country’s population in 2050 is forecasted to be 1.32 billion, which is roughly the same as it was in 2007. The UN believes this demographic downtrend will accelerate as we enter the second half of the century.

      What does this mean for the Chinese economy? Many worry that a smaller workforce, coupled with an aging population, will increase healthcare expenditures and hamper economic growth.

      India’s Population Boom Continues

      Meanwhile, the UN believes that India’s population will peak somewhere in the mid 2060s, just shy of the 1.7 billion mark.

      India’s population will not age as quickly as its neighbor. Those over the age of 65 will represent less than one-fifth of the population until 2060, and their share of India’s total number of people and will not approach 30% until 2100.

      Note: Figures are rounded.

      Finally, whether these predictions come true or not will depend on how quickly birth rates fall as the country develops. For example, India’s fertility rate fell from 6.2 in 1950, to 2.0 in 2021 (births per woman).

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 23:20

    • Water In Texas: A Window Into Problems Across The US
      Water In Texas: A Window Into Problems Across The US

      Authored by Suzanne Gasparatto via The Epoch Times,

      Humans cannot live without water, yet many of us take for granted that water is readily available. As more people move to cities, adding to already crowded populations, the availability of potable water isn’t a given any longer.

      While this planet has plenty of water, its distribution does not always coincide with areas where lots of people choose to live.

      For decades, Texans, like citizens of other states, have been struggling with regional water issues. Heavily populated but still growing Central Texas has long been known as an area of perpetual drought occasionally interrupted by flash floods. The booming metropolis of Austin, Texas, literally sits on top of water problems. Underneath Austin is the Edwards Aquifer, which experiences rapid changes in water levels due to high demand. Other Texas cities have similar problems.

      Cities as small as San Angelo and as large as San Antonio have purchased water rights in rural areas, diverting the supply of water used by farmers and ranchers over long distances for urban use. Rural Texas, which already had serious water deficits, is in trouble. Farmers and ranchers must have reliable supplies of water to produce the food that we eat.

      The Highland Lakes northwest of Austin were originally built to control downstream flooding and deliver water to farmers and ranchers. The population shift from rural to urban has placed huge demands on this water supply. Lack of rain plus additional urban population has caused water levels in lakes to be so low that boat docks are far from the shoreline.

      The recent large influx of people to Texas has spurred groups of investors to buy rural land and develop it into subdivisions. These investors are often from other states and are unaware of our water woes. They don’t realize that most rural Texas properties, including my location north of fast-growing Austin, depend upon individual water wells drilled by each property owner. Municipal water systems are nonexistent. Drilling deeper wells is not an option. Good-quality water isn’t available below relatively shallow levels.

      Existing wells are drying up as demand for more wells arises with the building of new subdivisions. Many people, including those in existing subdivisions, are having to purchase water in bulk and have it delivered to meet their basic needs.

      County officials in Texas do not have sufficient authority to manage growth while protecting our water resources. This authority needs to come from the Texas Legislature soon. Requiring larger acreage to qualify to drill a well is critical. Today, permission to drill a well can be obtained if you own as little as two acres.

      Adjacent to my ranch, developers are selling four-acre to six-acre tracts that will result in 205 additional water wells. Folks who spend $250,000 to $350,000 for these tracts will expect that there is plentiful water to fill their swimming pools and water their landscaped lawns. This isn’t accurate.

      These new wells will decimate our agricultural wells that are already low from years of drought. My County Commissioners Court doesn’t have authority to control this growth in a reasonable and fair manner for all residents.

      A short-term solution involves increasing the acreage required to drill a well from two acres to at least ten acres and requiring rainwater collection systems in conjunction with all new wells. When I bought this land, a professional engineer designed a rainwater collection system off the metal roof of my barns, from which I water all my livestock. That allowed me to reserve well water for personal use only, and I monitor usage daily.

      Requiring new wells to have pumps that limit pumping gallonage is necessary.

      The regional underground water conservation district recently added some new regulations, which, for new wells on small acreage, will limit pumping output.

      This is only a start in trying to manage over-consumption of available groundwater.

      A medium-term solution is to build desalination plants to clean up the brackish water that exists below current potable water well levels.

      A longer-term solution is building desalination plants along the Gulf Coast and creating a network of water pipelines throughout Texas to transport desalinated water to areas needing it. Existing easements for oil and gas pipelines can be made accessible for these water pipelines.

      U.S. taxpayers contributed vastly to the development of desalination plants around the world. It is time to take care of our own citizens’ water needs.

      In many populated areas, we have a shortage of adequate distribution of water. Vast parts of the western United States, on the other hand, have little water at all, and what they have is often being bought by cities and piped away from the source. Solutions are available. We only have to have the will to implement them.

      Read more here…

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 23:00

    • Yuan Weakens After 'Unbalanced' Chinese Economy Sees GDP Beat In Q1 But Domestic Consumption, Production Disappoint
      Yuan Weakens After ‘Unbalanced’ Chinese Economy Sees GDP Beat In Q1 But Domestic Consumption, Production Disappoint

      China’s economic growth beat expectations in Q1, rising +5.3% YoY – considerably stronger than the +4.8% consensus, and inching ahead of Q4’s +5.2% YoY growth.

      Source: Bloomberg

      Notably, that this is the first time the market compares two periods of economic growth without China’z Zero-COVID policy’s impact, and overall, as we detail below, economic activity data in March overall missed expectations.

      • Industrial production rose 4.5% in March from a year earlier (below economists’ forecast of 6%).

      • Industrial output rose 6.1% for the first quarter (below the 7.0% in February).

      • Retail sales climbed 3.1%, also disappointing (versus an expected 4.8% gain) – domestic consumption is still weak amid deflation pressure and after imports shrank during the month.

      • Investment flows were mixed with Property investment continuing to slide (down 9.5%, worst since December, and considerably worse than the 9.2% expected)…

      • …but broad-based fixed-asset investment expanded 4.5% in the first three months (better than the 4% increase projected by economists).

      • Finally, the surveyed jobless rate in March declined to 5.2% from 5.3% in February.

      Source: Bloomberg

      Simply put, China’s economic recovery has been unbalanced. 

      As Bloomberg reports, manufacturing is holding up, thanks to resilient overseas demand and Beijing’s efforts to cushion the blow from US trade restrictions by developing advanced technologies at home.

      But Chinese consumers have been slow to recover their appetite for spending, amid a prolonged real estate downturn that’s weighing on household and business confidence.

      Factory prices have been in deflation for more than a year, reflecting anemic domestic demand.

      The central bank on Monday kept the rate of its one-year medium-term lending facility unchanged, and drained cash on net from the banking system via the tool for a second straight month. The PBOC cut its reserve requirement ratio for banks by 50 basis points in February – a move that allows extra lending – and said there’s room for more cuts.

      But China has reasons to be cautious in any monetary easing, since widening the yield gap with the US risks adding to downward pressure on the yuan, which is weakening after the data…

      Source: Bloomberg

      Notably, China unexpectedly weakened its yuan defense as pressure from a resurgent dollar and poor sentiment pressured it toward a policy red line. Specifically, the PBOC set a weaker daily reference rate for the managed currency, implying some flexibility for it to depreciate alongside regional peers amid broad strength in the dollar.

      “The PBOC is bowing to reality, with dollar broadly higher and onshore dollar demand surging,” said Richard Franulovich, head of foreign-exchange strategy at Westpac Banking Corp.

      “They obviously want to control and contain the move though, so they are guiding yuan lower in a moderate and steady fashion.”

      Source: Bloomberg

      Finally, investors are closely watching one major government effort to boost domestic demand this year: a trade-in program that will encourage businesses to upgrade their machinery and households to buy new cars, refrigerators or washing machines. Shares of Chinese home-appliance makers jumped last week after officials vowed “strong” fiscal support for the plan.

      The degree of government support for households and businesses to spend at home will likely depend on how Chinese firms fare on international markets, Goldman Sachs economists led by Hui Shan wrote in a note last week.

      “If external demand is strong, then less domestic stimulus is needed,” they wrote.

      “If the property market continues to deteriorate, then more easing measures will be introduced.”

      The Goldman team raised their growth forecast, predicting the 5% target will be met, and said the government doesn’t seem keen to significantly exceed it.

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 22:40

    • A Heretic's View: Blaming Food For Obesity Is Like Blaming Water For Drowning
      A Heretic’s View: Blaming Food For Obesity Is Like Blaming Water For Drowning

      Authored by Edward Archer via RealClearScience,

      There is a politically expedient but problematic fiction that ‘consensus’ matters in science. Since a million matching opinions do not constitute a fact, a consensus — either real or apparent — is not a statement about evidence but an exercise in groupthink in which the status quo is made explicit.

      Thus, scientific progress requires conservative and heretical thinkers — conservatives protect the authority and continuity of science, whereas heretics put forth creative dissent in an attempt to push the limits of what we know. Nevertheless, few people are willing and able to challenge the status quo — and those who have were often reviled, incarcerated, or executed (e.g., Galileo, Semmelweis, and Vavilov). 

      Consequently, when facts conflict with theory, academic researchers often ignore the facts rather than confront the consensus. As a result, the ‘marketplace of ideas’ — and research funding — are predestined to conformity, sycophancy, and stasis. In other words, the more pervasive the consensus, the more servile the research, the less probable the progress.  

      Although this unfortunate reality is evident across many fields, it has been extremely detrimental to nutrition science. For more than 50 years, ‘Diet-centrism’ — the theory that foods and beverages cause ill-health, obesity, and cardiometabolic diseases — has been accepted by physicians, researchers, and the public almost without question. Yet despite the unity and ubiquity of the consensus, there are centuries of evidence refuting diet-centric beliefs. Thus, because a million matching but ill-informed opinions do not constitute a fact, the consensus linking calories, ‘carbs’, meat, milk, sugar, salt, fat, cholesterol, and ‘ultra-processing’ to death and disease is not a statement about scientific evidence but the obsequious — and sterile — status-quo made explicit.

      Accordingly, herein I present the heretical idea that the naïve determinism of ‘Diet-centrism’ — ‘you are what you eat’ and ‘what you eat is killing you’ — is not only simplistic and unscientific but specious because it ignores the fact that individual differences in metabolism (how the body ‘handles’ foods and beverages) is what matters most in diet-related health and disease. 

      Historical Evidence: It’s not the Food

      Before the 20th century, obesity and cardiometabolic diseases such as type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) were uncommon. Yet over the past 50 years, the prevalence of these maladies in horses, humans, dogs, cats, lab, and zoo animals increased to epidemic proportions. Given that these herbivores, omnivores, and carnivores have always consumed different diets, the claim that foods and beverages have suddenly caused parallel epidemics in different species is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence. Yet there is no valid evidence supporting this belief.

      To begin, humans have consumed highly palatable, ‘ultra-processed’ foods and beverages for thousands of years. Refined sugar, salt, butter, and cheeses date from 4000-8000 BC, and pasta, pizza, and pretzels were consumed in the 1st century AD. Although the consumption of ‘french-fries’ (‘chips’ in the UK) only began in the 17th century, potatoes fried in salt and animal fat quickly became the main source of nutrition in Ireland. By the 19th century, the Irish consumed ~4-5 lbs. of potatoes per person per day, with men consuming ~8-12 lbs./day. This is the equivalent of ~40 supersized servings of ‘french-fries’ every day for a lifetime. Yet despite consuming massive amounts of ‘carbs’, saturated fats, and salt, the Irish had little obesity or cardiometabolic diseases. 

      Similarly, the Amish — an ethno-religious group in the US — consume a high-calorie, highly-palatable diet that includes meat, potatoes, gravy, eggs, breads, pies, and cakes, and “is quite high in fat and refined sugar”. Yet the Amish have a greater life expectancy and substantially lower obesity, T2DM, heart disease, and cancer than other Americans. 

      Importantly, all humans start life consuming ~40% of their daily calories as dietary sugars and 25% as saturated fat — either in breast milk or infant formula (an ‘ultra-processed’, sugar-sweetened beverage with ‘added’ sugars, salts, and fats). Thus, recommendations to restrict ‘added’ sugars and ‘processed’ foods would prevent the feeding of most infants in industrialized nations. And contrary to current rhetoric, nations with the highest rates of sugar-sweetened beverage (formula) consumption by infants have the lowest rates of obesity and cardiometabolic diseases (Japan and Norway). Moreover, sugars added to foods and beverages enter the same metabolic pathways as intrinsic sugars. Thus, the glucose molecules in breast milk and the fructose molecules in fruit are exactly the same glucose and fructose molecules as in soda, sports drinks, and your favorite candy. This basic fact of biochemistry shows that the term ‘added sugar’ has no place in scientific discourse. 

      Furthermore, the medicinal use of sucrose (table sugar) for malnutrition and diarrheal diseases saves the lives of over 600,000 children each year. Thus, so-called ‘added’ sugars save more lives than any pharmaceutical agent. So if ‘food is medicine’, then table sugar is the greatest medicine of all. [Note: the phrase “let thy food be thy medicine” was fabricated by a journalist and attributed to Hippocrates to sell a diet book in the 1920s.] 

      Additionally, the most comprehensive report on dietary sugars —  published before the current anti-sugar hysteria — concluded that “feeding normal human volunteers at levels of fructose approximating the 90th percentile intake levels of the U.S. population failed to demonstrate adverse effects on insulin sensitivity or glucose tolerance [cardiometabolic health].” And contrary to current rhetoric, over the last two decades the use of sugars & sweeteners in the US declined ~16% as obesity and T2DM increased almost 40% and severe obesity increased 96%. Thus, less sugar is linked to more obesity and diabetes — and this so-called ‘sugar paradox’ is ubiquitous (see Australia and the UK).

      In sum, by ignoring contrary evidence, academic researchers and their ‘diet-centric’ consensus created a “fictional discourse on diet-disease relations”.

      The Logic of Causality 

      The search for universal criteria by which to infer causality has eluded philosophers of science for centuries. Yet, at its simplest, the search for causes is the search for ‘differences that make a difference’ — mere associations are meaningless. For example, water (and other liquids) are associated with 100% of drowning deaths. Therefore, in the absence of water no one drowns. Yet despite the perfect correlation and counterfactual evidence, no educated person argues that water causes drowning because not everyone who drinks, bathes, or swims, drowns. In other words, water is not causal because it is not the ‘difference that makes a difference’. 

      To be precise, water is a sine qua non for drowning (an indispensable part or essential element) — not a cause. Thus, given the same environment (the presence of water), individual differences such as the inability to swim, intoxication, or insentience cause a person to drown. 

      The Illogicity of Blaming Food 

      Foods and beverages are a sine qua non for life — everyone must eat and drink. Yet just as water does not cause drowning because not everyone who drinks, bathes, or swims, drowns — diet does not cause poor metabolic health because not everyone who eats and drinks becomes obese or diabetic. Yet in contrast to the perfect correlation between water and drowning, there is no clear correlation between diet and obesity. 

      For example, muscular, male athletes consume more calories, ‘carbs’, sugars, salt, fat, cholesterol, and ‘ultra-processed’ foods than obese, sedentary women, yet have lower levels of adiposity and T2DM. Thus, more foods, beverages, and physical activity are linked with better health and less disease. Clearly, athletes’ bodies ‘handle’ their diets differently than those of sedentary people. Therefore, metabolism — not diet — is the ‘difference that makes a difference’ in health.

      Similarly, in a 2013 study, my colleagues and I found that the people performing the least amount of physical activity gained the most fat mass — despite consuming less calories, less fat, and less sugar than those who ate more, performed more activity, and maintained their weight. Conversely, reducing physical activity causes an immediate decline in insulin sensitivity and metabolic health. Therefore, physical activity-induced differences in metabolism — not diet — cause differences in caloric intake, fat mass, and health. 

      Moreover, metabolism is the ‘difference that makes a difference’ in the ‘Oral Glucose Tolerance Test’ (OGTT) — a widely used test for diabetes and insulin resistance. In the OGTT, blood sugar is measured after patients consume a standard dose of dietary sugar. Over time, patients with weaker metabolisms have higher blood sugar than those with stronger metabolisms. Thus, given identical amounts of dietary sugar, differences in metabolism cause differences in blood sugar. It is nonsensical to argue that the dietary sugar caused the differences in blood sugar when each patient consumed the same amount. 

      What confuses most people — and [too] many researchers — is that different foods and beverages cause different metabolic responses. For example, consuming sugar or starch causes greater increases in blood sugar than consuming fat or protein. However, as the OGTT shows, it is not the increase in blood sugar after a meal that matters to cardiometabolic health but the decrease over time. 

      Stated simply, consuming dietary sugar increases everyone’s blood sugar — but not everyone’s blood sugar returns to ‘normal’ after a meal (e.g., diabetics). Thus, the diet-induced increase in blood sugar is irrelevant to cardiometabolic health because it is not the ‘difference that makes a difference’. What matters are the metabolic differences that cause blood sugar to decrease — or not — after a meal.

      Yet most importantly, as a recent “intensive food-as-medicine program” showed, altering your diet has little effect on cardiometabolic health over time, whereas adequate physical activity “obliterates the deleterious effects of a high-caloric intake”. This explains why muscular athletes can consume massive amounts of calories, ‘carbs’, and ‘ultra-processed’ foods yet remain lean and healthy.  

      In sum, differences in metabolism — not diet — cause differences in cardiometabolic health.

      ‘Differences that Make a Difference’ in Obesity and Metabolic Strength

      If people perform hard physical labor, they will consume more food, water, and oxygen than if they sat quietly in an office. Therefore, increased physical activity causes increases in metabolism that — in turn — cause increases in consumption (eating, drinking, and breathing). Therefore, if you ‘burn’ more calories through physical activity, you increase your metabolic strength, consume more calories, and maintain your weight. This fact explains why exercise rarely leads to weight-loss but is essential in health and preventing weight gain. 

      Conversely, when people reduce their physical activity ‘too much’ (below their ‘metabolic tipping point’), they weaken their metabolism. This causes them to consume more calories than they burn. In time, this leads to ‘acquired’ obesity and cardiometabolic diseases — independent of diet. In other words, a minimum amount of physical activity is needed for health, and individuals with extremely low levels will, over time, become obese, diabetic, or both — regardless of the foods and beverages they consume.  

      Importantly, if a woman’s physical activity is too low, her metabolism will be too weak to ‘handle’ pregnancy and she will consume too many calories. As a result, her children will be born fatter and with weaker metabolisms. In other words, they ‘inherit’ a life-long predisposition to obesity and cardiometabolic diseases. [Note: the non-genetic process of inheritance by which a mother’s prenatal metabolism irreversibly alters her descendants’ metabolism is known as a ‘maternal-effect’]. 

      Consequently, the fact that women ’move less’ than they did five decades ago explains the recent rise in ‘inherited’ (childhood) obesity and adolescent T2DM. For example, from 1965 to 2010, the time women spent doing housework decreased by ~2 hours per day while sedentary time increased by 1 hour/day. This reduced the number of calories burned by ~250/day and doubled the amount of time spent sitting. By 2020, women spent more time sitting in front of the TV and using social media than cooking, cleaning, childcare, exercise, and laundry combined. As a result, their metabolisms became weaker — and because metabolic strength is essential for a healthy pregnancy, the decline produced successive generations of obese children with weak metabolisms.  

      Moreover, because all mammals share the metabolic pathways of pregnancy, my work suggests that ‘maternal-effects’ caused the parallel epidemics of obesity and cardiometabolic diseases in horses, humans, dogs, cats, lab, and zoo animals.   

      Conclusion

      Consensus in academic research is rarely a statement about evidence. More often, it is an exercise in groupthink in which the status quo — right or wrong — is made explicit. Thus, progress needs heretics who are willing and able to challenge the consensus. Accordingly, I presented the heretical idea that humans have always consumed highly palatable, processed foods and beverages without increases in obesity or cardiometabolic diseases. Moreover, ‘acquired’ and ‘inherited’ differences in metabolism — not diet — cause obesity and poor metabolic health. Thus, the ‘diet-centric’ consensus linking calories, ‘carbs’, meat, milk, sugar, salt, fat, cholesterol, and ‘ultra-processing’ to death and disease is not only simplistic, but sterile and unscientific.

      Nevertheless, given that science progresses ‘funeral by funeral’ and that food-based fears generate profitable marketing campaigns (e.g., low-fat and no ‘added’ sugars) and billions of dollars to fund academic research, ‘Diet-centrism’ will be the dominant paradigm in nutrition ‘science’ for the foreseeable future. Bon appétit.

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 22:20

    • Conservatives Seek To Ban Private Funding Of Elections Ahead Of 2024 Races
      Conservatives Seek To Ban Private Funding Of Elections Ahead Of 2024 Races

      Authored by Steven Kovac via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

      During the pandemic-plagued 2020 election season, hundreds of millions of dollars from private sources were granted to big cities, an action that many Republicans believe unfairly tipped the scales in favor of Democrats.

      (Illustration by The Epoch Times, Shutterstock)

      Distributed for the stated purpose of protecting public health and assisting people to vote safely, the private funds helped popularize mail-in voting, ballot drop boxes, and ballot harvesting at a scale never seen before.

      In the years since 2020, either by legislation or referendum, Republicans have outlawed such private funding in 28 states.

      Twenty-two states still allow the practice, raising concerns among Republicans about the integrity of future elections.

      “The people of the remaining states should be angry at their legislatures for not banning private money to fund their elections. No government officials should be accepting private payments to do their jobs,” Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation and former member of the Federal Election Commission, told The Epoch Times.

      “When you allow private entities to give large donations for local election administration, the money can be used to manipulate the practices of local election officials for political advantage.”

      Mr. von Spakovsky said many nonprofits are, in reality, political advocacy groups that have no limit on what they can donate and little reporting accountability.

      “They receive unlimited sums of charitable, tax-deductible contributions and then grant them to localities. which has turned out to be a way to move the get-out-the-vote campaign of political parties or candidates into government offices. It’s wrong to use government officials to do that,” he said.

      Former Michigan state senator and election integrity activist Patrick Colbeck, a Republican, told The Epoch Times that he believes a larger scheme to privatize the execution of America’s election system is well underway and pointed out another of its perils.

      “Nongovernmental organizations are not subject to Freedom of Information requests. They are thus able to operate behind an effective veil of secrecy on what should be the most transparent process in government of them all—our elections,” he said.

      Parker Thayer, an investigative researcher with think tank Capital Research Center, said allowing half the country to use private funding in elections is “a national security risk.”

      “A 501(c)(3) organization can accept money from anywhere, including foreign sources like Russian oligarchs. Imagine such money being funneled to targeted jurisdictions in Alaska that are about to decide an oil-related referendum,” he told The Epoch Times.

      “Since 2020, the hide-the-ball approach of a few big nonprofits regarding where their money comes from has inspired many copycats. It’s only a matter of time before the next copycat does not have America’s best interest at heart. That’s something that all Americans should be worried about.”

      A voter casts his ballot at a drop box outside Philadelphia City Hall on Oct. 24, 2022. (Ed Jones/AFP via Getty Images)

      Mr. Thayer said the injection of nonprofits into the 2020 system exposed a flaw in the system, reduced trust, and made the running of elections much more partisan.

      In Wisconsin, 90 percent of 2020 nonprofit grant funding was given to the state’s largest cities; areas that turned out heavily for Joe Biden. Per capita, $3.75 went to big city dwellers and 55 cents to out-state residents, according to Capital Research.

      After 2020, Wisconsin legislators twice passed bills to prohibit private money in elections. Twice, Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, vetoed the bills.

      On April 2, primary election voters in the state approved two veto-proof constitutional amendments that stops private money in elections and prohibits privately funded staff from helping run state elections. The amendments passed with 54 percent and 58 percent approval, respectively.

      “Wisconsin has spoken, and the message is clear … Wisconsinites have turned the page on Zuckerbucks and secured our elections from dark money donors,” state GOP chairman Brian Schimming said in a statement following the referendum.

      Opponents of the amendments stated that the vaguely-worded ban on private funding of elections would create confusion, deprive clerks of badly needed dollars required to conduct elections, and will result in a scaling back of voter outreach programs designed to boost participation.

      Before the passage of the Help America Vote Act in 2002, local officials never received federal funding to pay for federal elections.

      “They got along just fine for all those years. What has happened in our states and localities?” Mr. von Spakovsky said.

      “Local election officials should talk to their legislators rather than going to private donors for money to run their elections.”

      Highlighting the partisan divide on the issue, Wisconsin Democratic Party chairman Ben Wikler said in a statement before the referendum, “Rather than work to make sure our clerks have the resources they need to run elections, Republicans are pushing a nonsense amendment to satisfy Donald Trump.”

      The former president made a campaign stop in Green Bay on the day of the primary. He was a strong proponent of the two amendments and urged his supporters to get out and vote.

      Public ire against the use of private funding in Wisconsin was first stirred in the summer of 2021 when former Brown County Clerk Sandy Juno, a Republican, came forward with allegations that out-of-state political operatives funded by donations from the nonprofit Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) took control of much of the administration of the November 2020 presidential election in Green Bay and other large cities in Wisconsin.

      Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta, testifies at a hearing at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 31, 2024. (Roberto Schmidt/AFP via Getty Images)

      CTCL and another nonprofit organization called the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR) were gifted a total of $420 million by billionaires Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan.

      The money, which has since been labeled “Zuckerbucks” by critics, was ostensibly granted to local election offices throughout the United States to purchase personal protection equipment and pay for other means to help local jurisdictions conduct safe and healthy elections during the COVID-19 pandemic.

      In a post-election accounting, Green Bay reported spending only 0.8 percent of its $1 million “Zuckerbucks” grant on personal protection equipment.

      More Abuses Come to Light

      Ms. Juno’s allegations were corroborated by special counsel Michael Gableman, a former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice, who was commissioned by the state legislature in 2021 to investigate possible violations of the law and other irregularities in the conduct of the November 2020 election.

      Read more here…

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 21:40

    • How Widespread Is Underage Drinking?
      How Widespread Is Underage Drinking?

      Alcohol abuse is a behavioral risk factor connected to 2.4 million deaths in 2019, according to the latest Global Burden of Disease study from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation of the University of Washington.

      While consuming large quantities of alcohol over a long period might not necessarily lead to a shortened lifespan, it hampers cognitive and motor function in its consumers.

      Additionally, as Statista’s Florian Zandt reports, multiple studies suggest that it also prevents proper brain development when abused by adolescents and young adults since the brain is among the last organs of the body to mature. Nevertheless, alcohol use and even heavy and binge drinking are especially common among U.S. residents aged 21 to 25, as the most recent National Survey on Drug Use and Health shows.

      Statista’s chart below, based on the results of this study, shows that the share of respondents using alcohol or participating in binge and heavy drinking in the last month from when they were surveyed is significantly higher for adults between 21 and 25 than for those aged 26 or older.

      61 percent of young adults consumed alcohol, while almost ten percent drank four to five drinks in a short timespan every day for at least five days in a row. The sudden spike between the age cohorts of 18 to 20 and 21 to 25 can be explained by the United States’ legal drinking age being set at 21.

      What’s harder to explain is that three percent of the respondents aged 12 to 17 participate in binge alcohol use.

      Infographic: How Widespread Is Underage Drinking? | Statista

      You will find more infographics at Statista

      The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism suggests that parents and teachers can play a decisive role in preventing children from abusing alcohol.

      The results of a comprehensive study published in the journal Alcohol, Clinical and Experimental Research analyzing if parents allowing their 14-year-old children to drink leads to unhealthy drinking behaviors are clear:

      “Adolescents who were allowed to drink were more likely to have transitioned quickly from their first drink to consuming 5 or more drinks at one time and to drinking heavily 3 or more times in the past year”, say the study’s authors in their conclusion.

      “Given well-documented harms of adolescent heavy drinking, these results do not support the idea that parents allowing children to drink alcohol inoculates them against alcohol misuse.”

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 21:20

    • Financial Forecast 2025-2032: Please Don't Be Naive
      Financial Forecast 2025-2032: Please Don’t Be Naive

      Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

      Rather than attempt to evade Caesar’s reach, a better strategy might be to ‘go gray’: blend in, appear average.

      Let’s start by stipulating that I don’t “like” this forecast. I’m not “talking my book” (for example, promoting nuclear power because I own shares in a uranium mine) or issuing this forecast because I favor it. I simply see it as the most likely trajectory of the global financial system, based on history and the dynamics of human systems. “Liking” it or not liking it has nothing to do with it: the opinions of Titanic passengers who didn’t “like” that the ship was sinking didn’t affect the outcome.

      You already know the global financial system is untenable. In a nutshell, the expansion of production and consumption has been funded by the expansion of credit–money borrowed from future resources and income. The rate of expanding debt far surpasses the anemic rates of expanding production, and this rapidly expanding mountain of debt is perched precariously on the phantom collateral generated by The Everything Bubble, the astounding expansion of asset prices as those with the lowest cost access to credit have bid up every asset class, from real estate to gold to bitcoin to stocks to fine art.

      All these assets are phantom collateral because they were bid up on the wings of cheap, abundant credit. History is rather decisive: all credit-asset bubbles pop, and the price of the assets round-trips back to pre-bubble valuations. As the bubble pops, credit shifts from being abundant and near-zero in cost to being scarce and dear.

      The commercial real estate sector (CRE) is a real-time example of this dynamic. Half-empty buildings are being dumped at a fraction of their peak valuations, and then sold again for even less or abandoned to default and liquidation. This is how all bubbles pop; there is no other template supported by history. Humans cling to magical thinking and grasp at straws rather than face the unwelcome reality that the cycle has turned and there is no happy ending for those who believe the “real value” of an asset is the peak price at the top of the bubble.

      Now that we understand the impossibility of keeping The Everything Bubble forever inflated, let’s shift our attention to those tasked with keeping the system from collapsing. In my view, the closest analogy is police officers tasked with protecting the often ungrateful and undeserving while being plagued by do-gooders and naysayers who are safely isolated from the wretchedness they demand the cops deal with in a manner that meets with their refined approval.

      In other words, us and them: only those who share the responsibility for protecting the often ungrateful and undeserving while being plagued by do-gooders and naysayers can understand. Outsiders know little of the realities and are often naive, basing their convictions on what they think “should happen” rather than the limitations of real life.

      This will be the mindset of the authorities tasked with “saving” the system we all depend on–especially the wealthiest who have benefited the most. These is of course the class that feels most entitled to advocate for special treatment: we’re rich and important, so you should listen to us and do what works for us.

      In other words, like the do-gooders, naysayers and whiners telling the cops how to do their jobs. Those tasked with saving a system sliding toward an inevitable crisis will have little patience for obstructionists, however well-meaning. The attitude of those carrying the responsibility for saving the system will be: do your part, get out of the way, stop whining and be grateful we’re saving the system for your benefit.

      Let’s now shift to a very common belief of “investors”: foreseeing this crisis, we’ve piled up “hard money” assets that are safely hidden from the grubby, illegitimate grasp of authorities. When the crisis sweeps away the bubble, we’ll still be rich, and we’ll then scoop up all the bargain-priced assets, making ourselves even richer.

      It gives me no pleasure to say the obvious: please don’t be naive. Those who will be trying to save the system from collapse understand that every asset is only richly valued now because of the credit bubble. From their point of view, “investors” who are planning to preserve the bubble-valuation of their assets and then emerge to snap up everything for pennies on the dollar are, well, the enemy.

      Another widespread belief holds that the hyper-wealthy always sneak through the wormhole and emerge with all their goodies intact. This fosters the idea that if they can do it, so can I. History offers examples on both sides: the great estates of the wealthiest Romans did not survive intact when the empire crumbled (or put another way, when control of the shards shifted to a new elite).

      As the bottom 99.5% feel the squeeze, their rage at those at the top not paying their fair share will rise exponentially, and the political pressure on authorities to go after the hyper-wealthy will become too intense to ignore. Many of those trying to save the system will have already had enough of coddled billionaires, bankers and financier grifters.

      Another conviction that will be revealed as naive is the faith that the rules will stay unchanged, allowing us to hoard our stash and emerge unscathed to scoop up the bargains offered by the less prescient. History is again rather definitive: the rules will change overnight, and continue changing, as needed. One “emergency measure” after another will be imposed and become normalized.

      It’s important to put ourselves in the shoes of those struggling with the impossible responsibility of keeping the system from collapsing. From their point of view, everyone trying to evade the wealth taxes, windfall taxes, special assessments, etc. are ungrateful whiners, as what will anyone have if the system collapses? We’re doing you all a favor, taking only 10% in a wealth tax to preserve the 90% that remains yours.

      Another point of naivete is what happens to obstructionists in a full-spectrum surveillance Corporate-state. China has shown other nation-states how to do it properly: every digital communication and transaction is monitored, and while VPNs and other gimmicks offer a few wormholes, the fundamental reality is: it takes an awful lot of effort to not leave a trail of crumbs, and at some point, is it worth all the effort? It’s much easier to just pay the wealth tax, the windfall tax, grumble about it, and move on to enjoy life as best we can.

      In China, the local authorities politely invite transgressors to tea, and offer a suggestion to mend your ways and keep your nose clean. Those who insist on mucking up the works after the kindly advice will be neutered one way or another.

      The naivete also extends to ways to evade surveillance. We’re all going to get by on barter. Really? Have you actually tried to exchange stuff with anonymous others? Like many encounters in online boards, people don’t show up, they flake out or decide not to make the deal. It’s tediously time-consuming and frustrating unless you already have a network of trusted contacts who do this kind of thing all the time.

      In my experience, reciprocity with other trustworthy productive people works better than barter. Instead of haggling over price/value, just give stuff away. In a trusted network, whomever gets the free stuff will scrounge up something to give you for free in return. These networks tend to have a “node,” an outgoing, friendly, trustworthy person who can find a welcoming home for whatever is being freely distributed, and pass around what’s being given to those who gave freely of their surplus.

      Another point of naivete is the belief that as an asset soars in value, the authorities will magically restrain themselves from noticing this juicy target. If we factor in history and human nature, we will conclude the opposite is more likely: the authorities will redouble their efforts to track and collect that which is Caesar’s from those trying to evade the collection of everyone’s “fair share.”

      Given the resources of the NSA et al., how plausible is it to think little old me is going to leave no digital crumbs as I go on my merry way? Thanks to automation of data scraping, it’s going to get easier and cheaper to scrape data looking for miscreants trying to avoid paying “their fair share.”

      The whole idea of a wealth tax is it’s a tax on all wealth, held anywhere in the world. So burying assets offshore only works as long as the authorities turn a blind eye to tax havens. As pressures mount, trusting the eyes to remain blind might not be as “sure-thing” as many seem to believe.

      As specific assets soar in value, a “windfall tax” will become politically appealing. Since all this soaring wealth is unearned, shouldn’t the fortunate owners pay a bit more due to the windfall nature of their unearned wealth? Of course they should.

      The key point to understand is the system will have to grab enough collateral to fund itself while collateral evaporates in the deflation of the Everything Bubble. This will truly be a case of TINA–there is no alternative. Desperation will drive policy extremes few think of as possible, much less inevitable.

      Something else that may be revealed as naive is the faith that moving to another nation-state will offer secure respite from those demanding we render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s. This faith overlooks the global reach of these dynamics: rampant inflation, the debasement of currency, the increasingly desperate need for collateral and revenue to keep the system from imploding, the rising cost of risk and credit, the scarcity of collateral, and so on. How will the nation-state we’re moving to respond to these financial crises? What are the odds that they will magically escape the crisis, or come up with a painless solution that doesn’t demand any sacrifices of residents? How secure will the rule of law and the wealth of foreigners be once push comes to shove?

      In summary: to understand the next 8 to 10 years, start by having some sympathy for the fox and not just for the hare. Here we are, trying to save the system that everyone depends on, taking a modest 10% wealth tax, and the ungrateful wretches are whining and trying to evade paying their fair share.

      Rather than attempt to evade Caesar’s reach, a better strategy might be to go gray: blend in, look average: post photos of kittens and puppies, complain about the cost of groceries, drive a look-alike vehicle, live in an unremarkable house, render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, forget about emerging as one of the rich who evaded Caesar and get on with enjoying one’s private life focused on well-being, and as difficult as it may be, work up a little gratitude for those carrying the responsibility for keeping the system from collapsing. A system that degrades but coheres is a far better place to live than a system that completely collapses.

      It gives me no joy to suggest please don’t be naive, but a realistic appraisal of what happens when things unravel suggests there are few limits on “emergency measures” anywhere on the planet and it’s best to plan accordingly and focus on what we can control rather than what we can’t control.

      *  *  *

      Become a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

      Subscribe to my Substack for free

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 21:00

    • Crime-Ridden San Francisco Wants To Punish Grocery Stores For Fleeing Said Crime
      Crime-Ridden San Francisco Wants To Punish Grocery Stores For Fleeing Said Crime

      Unpunished crime is so out of control in San Francisco that the city now wants to punish grocery stores who want to leave.

      Under the ‘Grocery Protection Act’ introduced by city Board of Supervisors member Dean Preston (Democratic Socialist), stores that want to flee all the crime and other increased liabilities will have to provide the city with six months advanced notice, and make efforts to find a replacement supermarket for the location being vacated, Benzinga reports.

      The move comes after While Foods shut down its flagship store in San Francisco after being open for just over a year, citing employee safety concerns.

      The reports show how workers at the store were routinely threatened with weapons, while vagrants would throw food at staff, engage in fights, and even defecate on the floor. 

      One incident saw a homeless man with a knife spray an employee with a fire extinguisher.

      …

      There were also cases of drug overdoses with one man dying in the bathroom after overdosing on fentanyl and methamphetamine. Thefts were also common with large quantities of alcohol stolen from the store.  –Daily Mail

      Nearly 570 emergency calls were logged from the location, including one call with desperate pleas to the police saying “male [with] machete is back,” and “another security guard was just assaulted.”

      Former SF Board of Supervisors member Matt Dorsey (who wasn’t assaulted at Whole Foods) said he was “incredibly disappointed” at the closing.

      “Our neighborhood waited a long time for this supermarket, but we’re also well aware of problems they’ve experienced with drug-related retail theft, adjacent drug markets and the many safety issues related to them,” Dorsey said.

      According to Preston, “Our communities need notice, an opportunity to be heard and a transition plan when major neighborhood grocery stores plan to shut their doors.”

      Dean Preston

      Preston’s proposal would allow anyone impacted by a noncompliant store closure to initiate legal proceedings.

      As Benzinga further notes, “It’s not just grocery stores that have had enough of the city. Other large businesses that recently closed their downtown San Francisco locations include Adidas, AT&T Inc., Nordstrom and Lego Group.”

      Maybe start punishing crime?

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 20:40

    • 20 Years Later, Abu Ghraib Torture Victims Get Their Day In Court
      20 Years Later, Abu Ghraib Torture Victims Get Their Day In Court

      Authored by Brett Wilkins via Common Dreams,

      Two decades after they were tortured by U.S. military contractors at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad, three Iraqi victims are finally getting their day in court Monday as a federal court in Virginia takes up a case they brought during the George W. Bush administration.

      The case being heard in the U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Al Shimari v. CACI, was first filed in 2008 under the Alien Tort Statute—which allows non-U.S. citizens to sue for human rights abuses committed abroad—by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) on behalf of three Iraqis. The men suffered torture directed and perpetrated by employees of CACI, a Virginia-based professional services and information technology firm hired in 2003 by the Bush administration as translators and interrogators in Iraq during the illegal U.S.-led invasion and occupation.

      Via AP: June 22, 2004 photo of a detainee in an outdoor solitary confinement cell talking with a military police officer at the Abu Ghraib prison on the outskirts of Baghdad.

      Plaintiffs Suhail Al Shimari, Asa’ad Zuba’e, and Salah Al-Ejaili accuse CACI of conspiring to commit war crimes including torture at Abu Ghraib, where the men suffered broken bones, electric shocks, sexual abuse, extreme temperatures, and death threats at the hands of their U.S. interrogators.

      “This lawsuit is a critical step towards justice for these three men who will finally have their day in court. But they are the lucky few,” Sarah Sanbar, an Iraq researcher at Human Rights Watch, wrote on Monday. “For the hundreds of other survivors still suffering from past abuses, their chances of justice remain slim.”

      “The U.S. government should do the right thing: Take responsibility for their abuses, offer an apology, and open an avenue to redress that has been denied them for too many years,” Sanbar added.

      U.S. military investigators found that employees of CACI and Titan Corporation (now L3 Technologies) tortured Iraqi prisoners and encouraged U.S. troops to do likewise. Dozens of Abu Ghraib detainees died in U.S. custody, some of them as a result of being tortured to death. Abu Ghraib prisoners endured torture ranging from rape and being attacked with dogs to being forced to eat pork and renounce Islam.

      A May 2004 report by Maj. Gen. Anthony Taguba concluded that the majority of Abu Ghraib prisoners—the Red Cross said 70-90%— were innocent. In addition to thousands of men and boys, some women and girls were also jailed there as bargaining chips meant to induce wanted insurgents to surrender. Some of them said they were raped or sexually abused by their American captors; lesser-known Abu Ghraib photos show women being forced to expose their private parts. Some female detainees were reportedly murdered by their own relatives in so-called “honor killings” after their release.

      Eleven low-ranking U.S. soldiers were convicted and jailed for their roles in the Abu Ghraib torture scandal. Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the prison’s commanding officer, was demoted. No other high-ranking military officer faced accountability for the abuse. Senior Bush administration officials—who had authorized many of the “enhanced interrogation techniques” used at prisons including Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo Bay—lied about their knowledge of the torture. None of them were ever held accountable.

      Bush’s successor, former President Barack Obama, promised to investigate—and if warranted, to prosecute—the Bush-era officials responsible for the torture that had become synonymous with the War on Terror. Instead, the Obama administration protected them from prosecution.

      In 2013, L3 Technologies agreed to pay $5.28 million to 71 former Abu Ghraib detainees who were subjected to sexual assault and humiliation, rape threats, electrical shocks, mock executions, brutal beatings, and other abuse.

      The following year, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court ruling prohibiting Abu Ghraib torture victims from suing U.S. companies implicated in their abuse. But the court later reversed itself, finding the case had sufficient ties to the United States to be heard in an American court. The suit was later dismissed under the political question doctrine, which prevents courts from ruling on issues determined to be essentially political.

      Getty Images

      However, in 2016, a 4th Circuit panel ruled that “the political question doctrine does not shield from judicial review intentional acts by a government contractor that were unlawful at the time they were committed,” allowing the Iraqis’ case to proceed.

      “This is a historic trial that we hope will deliver some measure of justice and healing for what President Bush rightly deemed disgraceful conduct that dishonored the United States and its values,” CCR senior attorney Katherine Gallagher toldThe Guardian on Monday.

      “In many ways, this case may be seen as setting a precedent for holding contractors accountable for human rights violations should they happen in other contexts, too,” she added.

      CACI—which denies any wrongdoing—has tried to get the case dismissed 20 times. The company still lands millions of dollars worth of U.S. government contracts. In February, Fortuneincluded the firm on its “World’s Most Admired Companies” list for the seventh straight year.

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 20:20

    • Lockheed Martin Wins $17BN Interceptor Contract To Protect US Homeland
      Lockheed Martin Wins $17BN Interceptor Contract To Protect US Homeland

      With one massive war in Eastern Europe grinding past two years and with another potential major war brewing in the Middle East, Western defense contractors are perhaps the only ones with a smile on their faces while much of the rest of humanity suffers.

      On Monday the US Missile Defense Agency (MDA) announced that Lockheed Martin has been awarded a new US government contract worth $17 billion, to develop the next generation of missile interceptor systems that would safeguard the homeland against intercontinental ballistic missile attack.

      Illustration via northropgrumman.com

      According to Reuters, “The multi-year contract covers the development of the Next Generation Interceptor (NGI) to modernize the current Ground-Based Midcourse Defense program.”

      “The network of radars, anti-ballistic missiles and other equipment is designed to protect the United States from intercontinental ballistic missiles,” the report continues.

      This comes on the heels of record year for sales of US military hardware to foreign governments, which topped $238 billion – a record and 16% jump from the prior year. For its fiscal 2025 budget, the Biden White House is seeking a $28.4 billion set aside for missiles defenses.

      The Missile Defense Agency said the following as part of its announcement: “MDA is confident in this decision based on the technical maturity of the solutions, objective contractor-provided performance data, technical rigor in the design development process and early testing built into the program from the onset.”

      Reuters has noted that longtime Washington foes like North Korea and Iran are growing ever more capable in delivering long-range ballistic missile attacks. And for the US aerospace giant, “The win represents a shot in the arm for Lockheed after the U.S. said it wants to reduce F-35 orders and the Army said in February that it was abandoning development of a Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft, a next-generation helicopter for which Lockheed had submitted a design.”

      In 2022 – closer to the start of the Russia-Ukraine war, Ian Bond, director of foreign policy at the Centre for European Reform, described the surge in the market for weapons as the highest since the Cold War. “This is certainly the biggest increase in defense spending in Europe since the end of the Cold War,” he said. 

      On the very same day of the announcement by MDA, pro-Palestine activists have targeted Lockheed’s Washington D.C. headquarters…

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Lockheed’s stock price traded below $340 a share, the price increased to over $450 within a few months of the war’s start. On Monday, Lockheed shares closed up 0.60% at 453.08.

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 20:00

    • Is Paxlovid A Dud?
      Is Paxlovid A Dud?

      Authored by Maryanne Demasi via The Brownstone Institute,

      Of all the antiviral drugs for Covid-19, Pfizer’s Paxlovid has been the most successful.

      Not for its safety and efficacy, but for its ability to earn the company billions in profits despite being largely ineffective for most people.

      In November 2021, before any data had emerged, the Biden Administration committed to purchasing 10 million treatment courses of Paxlovid worth $5.3 billion, pending authorisation by the US drug regulator.

      One month later, Paxlovid was granted emergency use authorisation (EUA) by the FDA for use in adult and paediatric populations, 12 years or older.

      The authorisation was based on early trial data showing the drug could reduce hospitalisations or death (89% relative risk reduction, 6% absolute risk reduction) in high-risk patients who were unvaccinated and had no prior exposure to Covid-19.

      But the problem was, most Americans by that time (Dec 2021) had already been vaccinated against Covid-19 or had prior exposure to the virus, making the trial results irrelevant to the majority of people.

      Pfizer had to prove its drug could benefit a broader market. 

      The manufacturer commenced the EPIC-SR trial, investigating the use of Paxlovid in unvaccinated people and vaccinated people with at least one risk factor for Covid-19 [clinicaltrials.gov].

      By July 2022, however, Pfizer stopped enrolling participants “due to a very low rate of hospitalization or death observed in the standard-risk patient population.”

      In a press release, the company announced that Paxlovid failed to impact its “novel primary endpoint of self-reported, sustained alleviation of all symptoms for four consecutive days.”  

      In other words, Paxlovid – a combination of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir – made no significant difference in alleviating symptoms of Covid-19 compared to placebo among non-hospitalised patients.

      Pfizer stated that it was difficult to find benefit in a population that was already at a low rate of hospitalisation or death from Covid-19.

      One year later, in August 2023, Pfizer quietly published the unfavourable findings on clinicaltrials.gov, without any fanfare or media attention. In fact, the media continued to promote the benefits of Paxlovid to the wider public.

      The New York Times, for example, ran multiple stories during the pandemic about the “Power of Paxlovid,” encouraging more people to take the drug and criticised its under-use.

      Simultaneously, Pfizer stoked public fear by overinflating the risk of Covid-19, paving the way for doctors to prescribe drugs like Paxlovid to manage the disease. Sometimes, the claims were misleading.

      Pfizer, for example, tweeted that 3 out of 4 American adults were at “high risk” for severe Covid-19, but then cited a study in the advertisement that did not support the claim – so far, the misleading tweet has been viewed 11.6 million times.

      “This is ridiculous,” tweeted Walid Gellad, Professor of Medicine at the University of Pittsburgh, “I don’t know how it is legal…3 out of 4 adults are not at high risk of severe Covid.”

      That didn’t stop FDA commissioner Robert Califf from taking to social media to promote the benefits of Paxlovid.

      He tweeted the drug could reduce the risk of developing ‘long covid’ based on weak evidence, and admitted to ‘cheerleading’ the use of Paxlovid because he felt overall “the evidence was strong.”

      Califf copped criticism for his lack of impartiality as the head of the regulator, but justified his actions in a “public health emergency.”

      Regulatory affairs expert Jessica Adams said it was a poor excuse.

      “Something is really wrong with public health ‘leadership’ if it thinks that every norm can be thrown out the window in an emergency,” said Adams. “The FDA has learned nothing during the pandemic and is setting terrible precedents for future emergencies.”

      By 2023, reports of people experiencing “rebound” symptoms after using Paxlovid, were increasing. Authorities could no longer claim it was “rare.”

      High-profile officials such as former CDC director Rochelle Walensky, former NIAID director Tony Fauci, President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden all had reported a rebound of Covid symptoms after completing a course of Paxlovid.

      Califf dismissed concerns about rebound, saying it was all just a “distraction,” but a study published in JAMA Network showed that symptomatic rebound in people with mild to moderate Covid-19 was as high as 25% after taking Paxlovid.

      In May 2023, the FDA granted Paxlovid full approval for managing mild to moderate Covid-19 infections in adults at high risk of developing severe disease (including vaccinated adults, despite no data showing benefit in this population).

      Last week, Paxlovid was back in the spotlight after the EPIC-SR trial was finally published in the New England Journal of Medicine, almost two years after Pfizer announced the futility of the study in July 2022.

      Regardless of all the positive media coverage and promotion of Paxlovid by public health officials and government advisors, the evidence is clear.

      Paxlovid, which now costs $1,400 for a 5-day course, has only shown benefit in a very rare population – that is, unvaccinated people who’ve never encountered the virus and are at high risk of serious Covid-19.

      *  *  *

      Republished from the author’s Substack

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 19:40

    • Illegal Immigrants Use Speedboat To Invade California – Nearly Run Over Beachgoers
      Illegal Immigrants Use Speedboat To Invade California – Nearly Run Over Beachgoers

      In a scene reminiscent of the Chuck Norris film Invasion USA, a speedboat loaded with at least a dozen illegal immigrants ripped through the waters just off the coast of Carlsbad, California, nearly slamming into bathers and surfers as they landed and sprinted across the beach.

      Some migrants raced to nearby waiting vehicles which sped away, the rest walked off in broad daylight to mix with the surrounding tourists.  Locals who filmed the migrants claimed police were called but didn’t show up.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Carlsbad, which is just north of San Diego, is only one of many beach towns in Southern California that has seen a spike in boats carrying illegals into the US.  Malibu has also seen multiple cases of invaders from the sea, usually small fast boats which are beached and left behind by migrants.

      A high percentage of young men among illegal migrants in the past couple of years has inspired public concerns that a number of these people may have extensive criminal records, might be gang or cartel members or, even more disturbing, that they could be foreign terrorists seeking to bypass the border altogether despite the lack of immigration enforcement by the Biden Administration. 

      Though the footage of immigrants shown frequently by the corporate media is careful to only depict travel weary mothers and children, the real story is the army of foreign military age males that are pouring into the US from abroad.  

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Regardless of the motives for their illegal entry into the US, the migrant surge has put the American economy in great jeopardy along with the housing market.  Over 60% of migrants will utilize welfare programs and government subsidies upon entry into the country, a problem which we have seen in full force in cities like New York and Washington DC where Democrat mayors have called for the declaration of a state of emergency along with federal aid.  Until recently, Biden has denied that there is any immigration threat at all.

      The migrant surge is expected to continue and perhaps expand even further as the US closes in on November elections.  The return of Trump to the Oval Office would likely mean the reinstatement of Title 42-like restrictions that remove incentives for asylum seekers to enter illegally and that also allow Border Patrol agents to immediately boot captured immigrants back to their nations of origin.  A mad rush to beat the clock and slip into America before borders are made more secure is about to ensue.

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 19:20

    • California Auditor Finds Homeless Council Can't Account For Money Spent
      California Auditor Finds Homeless Council Can’t Account For Money Spent

      Authored by John Seiler via The Epoch Times,

      Responsible businesses do regular audits of their finances to see which areas are making money and which not.

      Families also do audits, if only at tax time to see how much they owe.

      Contrast that with government. California State Auditor Grant Parks just came out with a new audit, “Homelessness in California: The State Must Do More to Assess the Cost‑Effectiveness of Its Homelessness Programs.”

      The Joint Legislative Committee requested the audit for homeless programs ending in 2023. Mr. Parks said the audit “focuses primarily on the State’s activities, in particular the California Interagency Council on Homelessness (Cal ICH),” which coordinates the state’s programs.

      This ought to be a massive scandal.

      Here’s the main conclusion.

      Note there’s no definitive number given, just “billions”—and even the number of programs, “at least 30,” is fuzzy:

      “More than 180,000 Californians experienced homelessness in 2023 – a 53 percent increase from 2013.

      To address this ongoing crisis, nine state agencies have collectively spent billions of dollars in state funding over the past five years administering at least 30 programs dedicated to preventing and ending homelessness.

      Cal ICH is responsible for coordinating, developing, and evaluating the efforts of these nine agencies.”

      Below is the chart of the PIT—point in time—counts of the homeless:

      (California State Auditor)

      Also note the number went up 20 percent after Gov. Gavin Newsom took office in 2019, despite his Jan. 7 Inaugural Address that year pledging, “We will launch a Marshall Plan for affordable housing and lift up the fight against homelessness from a local matter to a state-wide mission.” The Marshall Plan was a 1948 U.S. aid program to restore economic growth to war-torn Europe.

      ‘Lack of Coordination’

      Mr. Parks pointed to a Feb. 11, 2021 report by him, “Homelessness in California: The State’s Uncoordinated Approach to Addressing Homelessness Has Hampered the Effectiveness of Its Efforts.”

      And he said Cal ICH fulfilled a legislative requirement to report its financial assessments, but did so only for the fiscal years 2018-19 and 2020-21, not after.

      He added in the new report, “Further, it has not aligned its action plan for addressing homelessness with its statutory goals, nor has it ensured that it collects accurate, complete, and comparable financial and outcome information from homelessness programs. Until Cal ICH takes these critical steps, the State will lack up‑to‑date information that it can use to make data‑driven policy decisions on how to effectively reduce homelessness.”

      Basically, the state government and the citizens of California have little idea where these untold “billions” of dollars to help the homeless have gone.

      3 of 5 Programs Lack Enough Data

      Mr. Parks said he looked more closely at five of the “at least” 30 state homeless programs. I’ll break up his paragraphs to make it more clear: “When we selected five of the State’s homelessness programs to review, we found that two were likely cost-effective: Homekey and the CalWORKs Housing Support Program (housing support program). …

      • “Homekey refurbishes existing buildings to provide housing units to individuals experiencing homelessness for hundreds of thousands of dollars less than the cost of newly built units.

      • “The Housing Support Program’s provision of financial support to families who were at risk of or experiencing homelessness has cost the State less than it would have spent had these families remained or become homeless.

      “However, we were unable to fully assess the other three programs we reviewed … because the State has not collected sufficient data on the programs’ outcomes. In the absence of this information, the State cannot determine whether these programs represent the best use of its funds.”

      The three unassessed programs were:

      • The State Rental Assistance Program, “Provides funds for rental arrears, prospective rental payments, utility and home energy cost arrears, utility and home energy costs, and other expenses related to housing incurred during or due, directly or indirectly, to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

      • The Encampment Resolution Funding Program, “Provides competitive grants to assist local jurisdictions in ensuring the wellness and safety of people experiencing homelessness in encampments by providing services and supports that address their immediate physical and mental wellness and result in meaningful paths to safe and stable housing.”

      • The Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention grant program, “Provides local jurisdictions with funds to support regional coordination and expand or develop local capacity to address their immediate homelessness challenges.”

      If the rest of the “at least 30” homeless programs were examined, who knows how many would end up with too little data to assess. But if the 3 to 5 ratio holds, overall of the 30 it would be 12 assessed thoroughly, 18 not properly assessed because of too little data.

      Why Is Prop. 1 Money Needed?

      On March 5, California voters barely passed Proposition 1, which Gov. Gavin Newsom pushed hard. The margin was 50.18 percent yea to 49.82 percent nay. As I pointed out in my analysis in the Epoch Times, officially the bonds will cost $310 million a year for 30 years to pay back, or $9.3 billion total.

      The money will come from the general fund—which currently is $73 billion in deficit, according to the Legislative Analyst. Which is why for three decades I have called bonds “delayed tax increases,” because the money has to come from somewhere.

      Worse, as I noted, with interest rates staying high, the true payback amount could be higher, by some estimates as high as $12.45 billion.

      How can the state spend that money when it has no idea if the unaccounted “billions” currently being spent really are helping the homeless? Are the programs good, indifferent, or bad? Is the money really helping people—or just being wasted?

      It’s too bad this audit wasn’t available before the March 5 vote on Prop. 1. Likewise with the late production of the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for fiscal year 2020-22, which came out more than a year late on March 15, just after the election, and with a “net position” $29 billion worse than previously tallied.

      If voters had known how bad the state finances really were, and the inability to assess current homeless programs’ finances, would they have approved Prop. 1?

      Conclusion: What Really Can Be Done?

      Former state Sen. John Moorlach, for whom I worked as press secretary, has been involved in helping the homeless since when he was a Certified Public Accountant in private practice in the 1980s. Later, as an Orange County Supervisor, he was the chairman of the Orange County Commission to End Homelessness.

      “Newsom is throwing money everywhere,” he said. “But, really, what are you doing? What’s the program? What are the results? How do you measure? And it’s just so sad to watch.”

      If current programs aren’t working, what could?

      “Recently I’ve started to started to think the way you take care of you low-income housing is you’ve got to built some nice housing, and let people move up. Then the housing in the old part of town would be the low-income housing.”

      He contrasted that with the current system, in which new complexes are built specifically to house the homeless. But due to government regulations, such as prevailing wage laws, “each unit costs $900,000.”

      He said often the new housing is for people who don’t even want to live inside. And older housing is where the poor used to live before.

      What’s certain is the current approach of “throw money at everything—and when that doesn’t work, throw more money at it,” isn’t working. Especially because, as the new audit shows, we have no idea even where most of the money is going.

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 19:00

    • Heading For Supply Shock? Four Maritime Chokepoints Flash Red As Escalating Conflict Looms
      Heading For Supply Shock? Four Maritime Chokepoints Flash Red As Escalating Conflict Looms

      Just two days after Iranian commandos hijacked the Israeli-linked container ship MSC Aries in the Strait of Hormuz, it’s important to highlight that chaos continues to erupt at key global maritime chokepoints. 

      The hijacking of the Aries container ship was lost in the noise of the widely unsuccessful Iranian missile and drone strike against Israel on Saturday evening. It will likely be forgotten as the world focuses on what appears to be an imminent Israel counterattack against Iran. 

      Sal Mercogliano, a professor at Campbell University and shipping expert, wrote on X about an alarming number of maritime chokepoints under threat across the Middle East and Black Sea region. 

      Mercogliano pointed out four maritime chokepoints: the Bab el-Mandeb, the Strait of Hormuz, the Suez Canal, and the Bosphorus Strait, which are each experiencing some form of direct and/or indirect disruption due to the escalating chaos in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. 

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Let’s begin wit the latest fare up in maritime violence on Saturday morning. Iranian commandos hijacked Aries as it was heading towards the Strait of Hormuz. This incident will keep focus on the world’s busiest shipping lane and a critical chokepoint for the world’s oil supply.  

      “If the Straits become an unreliable oil trading channel the outcome is binary. All previous Hormuz sabre-rattling has come to nought and I sincerely hope this is the same outcome; to the degree it becomes real and the Strait of Hormuz become blocked, crude will shoot past US$100/bbl without stopping for breath,” Liberum’s Joachim Klement wrote in a note to clients on Sunday. 

      Meanwhile, Iran-backed Houthis have been targeting US, UK, and Israeli-affiliated ships for the last five to six months, disrupting global trade flows in and around Bab el-Mandeb Strait. The conflict has forced many Western vessels to sail around the Cape of Good Hope to avoid conflict in the region. Ship diversions have also led to sinking activity on the Suez Canal. 

      In the Black Sea region, Turkey’s Bosporus and Dardanelles straits have seen a lull in activity as the war rages on between Russia and Ukraine. 

      In the Middle East, 25% of global trade flows through the Suez Canal, Bab-El Mandeb Strait, and Strait of Hormuz, all of which are experiencing either conflict or some form of heightened risk (read the MUFG note here). 

      Here’s a snapshot of the world’s chokepoints. 

      An escalating conflict between Israel-Iran could quickly seize up one or more of these maritime chokepoints, spark supply chain chaos, and trigger an inflationary shock (maybe in the energy markets) across the West – something that would ruin Biden’s reelection odds or whatever is left of them and destroy Fed Powell’s ability to arrest inflation. 

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 18:40

    • Biden Spending $300 Million On Sanctuary Cities
      Biden Spending $300 Million On Sanctuary Cities

      Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

      The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is distributing $300 million to sanctuary cities that provide services like shelter and food to illegal immigrants amid a massive increase in incursions across the southern border.

      The $300 million in grants will be provided through the Shelter and Services Program (SSP), according to an April 12 press release. SSP offers funding to non-federal entities like NGOs and local governments that provide support to illegal immigrants released into the United States by the DHS. Out of the $300 million, $275 million will be distributed in the first allocation, with the remaining $25 million to be allocated later this year to meet operational requirements.

      “The initial funding will be available to 55 grant recipients for temporary shelter and other eligible costs associated with migrants awaiting the outcome of their immigration proceedings.”

      Costs covered under the program include expenses related to providing shelter, food, transportation, medical care, and personal hygiene for illegal immigrants. Other costs like modification of existing facilities, clothing, translation services, outreach information, and management and administration expenses are also covered.

      In addition to the $300 million funding, the DHS also announced $340.9 million for the SSP competitive grant program.

      Last year, over $780 million was distributed through SSP and another program that went to organizations and sanctuary cities across the country that provided services to illegal immigrants. Well-known sanctuary cities include Los Angeles, Chicago, New Orleans, New York City, and San Francisco.

      The Biden administration’s latest funding splurge comes as the influx of illegal immigrants into the United States has ballooned in recent years.

      According to data from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), border patrol agents encountered 1.73 million illegals at the southwest land border in fiscal year 2021. This number rose to 2.37 million in fiscal year 2022 and then to 2.47 million in 2023. For the first five months of this fiscal year, 1.34 million encounters have already been registered.

      Between October 2021 and March 2024, the total number of encounters stands at over 7.9 million illegal immigrants.

      During an April 10 press conference, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said he estimates that nearly 16 million illegal immigrants entered the United States under the Biden administration.

      “Since Joe Biden went into the Oval Office, it began on day one, they began to open that border wide,” he said. The Democrat government has taken more than 60 executive and agency actions to “open the border wide and send the welcome message to everybody around the globe, including violent criminals and terrorists and foreign nationals … coming here to do us harm.”

      Under the Trump administration, the number of people on the terrorism watchlist caught attempting to illegally enter the United States was 11. This number has surged to 351 under the Biden administration.

      “This is a disastrous situation,” Mr. Johnson said. “It’s a catastrophe that was caused by intentional policy choices.”

      Biden’s Pro-Immigration Policies

      Back in January 2023, the Biden administration announced the Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans (CHNV) program that allows people from the four nations the right to live and work lawfully in the United States for a period of two years under a legal mechanism called “humanitarian parole.”

      In an April 12 press release, CBP said that more than 404,000 individuals from these four nations who arrived via commercial flights “were granted parole under these processes.”

      According to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), “hundreds of thousands of inadmissible aliens from foreign airports” were ferried into some 43 American airports in the past year through CBP-approved secretive flights.

      CBP did not reveal the names of the 43 American airports that received 320,000 illegal immigrants last year. Instead, the agency admitted that the process was creating law enforcement vulnerabilities.

      “The public can’t know the receiving airports because those hundreds of thousands of CBP-authorized arrivals have created such ‘operational vulnerabilities’ at airports that ‘bad actors’ could undermine law enforcement efforts to ‘secure the United States border’ if they knew the volume of CBP One traffic processed at each port of entry,” CIS wrote in a post.

      Former President Donald Trump has harshly criticized the Biden administration’s border policies, vowing to institute stronger measures if he returns to the White House.

      Speaking to reporters in late February, President Trump called President Biden “the worst president our country has ever had.”

      “He’s allowing thousands and thousands of people to come in from China, Iran, Yemen, the Congo, Syria, and a lot of other nations, many nations are not very friendly to us,” the former president said.

      “He’s transported the entire columns of fighting-aged men and … they look like warriors to me. Something’s going on. It’s bad.”

      During a rally in Ohio last month, President Trump promised swift action on the illegal immigration issue. “On day one, my administration will terminate every open border policy of the Biden administration and we will begin the largest domestic deportation operation in American history.”

      “Nobody’s been hurt by Joe Biden’s migrant invasion more than our great African American and Hispanic American communities … because they’re taking your jobs and they’re creating lots of problems,” he said.

      The millions of illegal immigrants flooding into the United States also puts a strain on America’s Social Security program, which would end up negatively affecting the lives of retirees, the former president stated.

      “Your Social Security will be destroyed by the people coming in … There’s too many of them. It’s not sustainable. Joe Biden is costing you Medicare and he’s costing you your Social Security.”

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 18:20

    • Tepco Loads Fuel Rods In World's Largest Nuclear Power Plant As Atomic Era Reignites
      Tepco Loads Fuel Rods In World’s Largest Nuclear Power Plant As Atomic Era Reignites

      The world is finally realizing, after trying to rid itself of nuclear power following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, that the power of the atom will be the heart of clean, reliable electricity generation – not unreliable solar and wind.

      The latest sign that a nuclear renaissance is beginning to gain steam is news from Bloomberg on Monday morning that Tokyo Electric Power Co. will be loading fuel rods into one of the reactors at the Kashiwazaki Kariwa nuclear plant in Niigata prefecture. 

      The Kashiwazaki Kariwa is significant because it’s the world’s largest nuclear power plant, with a net capacity of 7,965 megawatts of electricity. Loading the No. 7 reactor with fuel rods is a sign that the power plant could be restarted soon.  

      Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority on Monday approved the plans to insert fuel rods at the No. 7 reactor at the site in Niigata prefecture. The plant will still need to complete additional inspections and win consent from the local governor — which is not guaranteed — before Tepco can restart generation.

      Approval for fuel loading is a step forward for Tepco’s facility, which has been halted since the Fukushima nuclear disaster brought all of Japan’s reactors offline. Kashiwazaki Kariwa has faced additional complications to a restart after security breaches in 2021.-Bloomberg

      The planned restart of Japan’s atomic fleet comes as power grids worldwide (maybe not China and or India) are undertaking massive decarbonization efforts to lower emissions. 

      In the US, the federal government recently announced that it would provide a $1.5 billion loan to restart a nuclear power plant in southwestern Michigan for the first time. NJ-based Holtec International acquired the 800-megawatt Palisades plant in 2022 with plans to dismantle it. Still, with support from the state of Michigan and the Biden administration, the focus has shifted to restarting the nuclear power plant next year. 

      And Patti Poppe, the chief executive officer of Pacific Gas & Electric in California, said just weeks ago, “Nuclear should be part of the future,” adding the state’s only nuclear power plant – Diablo Canyon – should be granted a license to expand its lifetime. 

      Governments are beginning to realize (and Wall Street) that nuclear power is the single largest source of reliable, carbon-free electricity. It will play a vital role in powering the economy, whether that’s AI data centers (read “The Next AI Trade”) or electric cars and trucks. 

      Still, restarting plants is not easy. Also, keep an eye on uranium futures.

      And uranium stocks. 

      Nuclear will be powering up America for the digital age. We outlined this as early as December 2020 in a note titled “Buy Uranium: Is This The Beginning Of The Next ESG Craze.”

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 18:00

    • "I Can't Go To My Son's Graduation": NY Judge Threatens Trump With Arrest
      “I Can’t Go To My Son’s Graduation”: NY Judge Threatens Trump With Arrest

      Update (1750ET): The first day of Donald Trump’s ‘hush money’ trial was fairly uneventful – aside from the judge, a complete dick, barring the former President from attending his son’s graduation and threatening arrest if he does.

      Speaking after a long day of jury selection and ground rules (with more than 50 jurors dismissed), Trump walked out of the courtroom and expressed his obvious displeasure.

      “As you know my son is graduating from High School, and looks like the judge will not let me go to the graduation for a son who’s worked very, very hard,” Trump said, adding that he was “looking forward for years to having graduation with his mother and father there,” adding that the trial is a “scam” and a “political witch hunt.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Judge Juan Merchan also won’t allow Trump to attend a Supreme Court hearing in DC regarding immunity.

      “We got a real problem with this Judge,” Trump continued, adding “that I can’t go to my son’s graduation, or that I can’t go to the United States Supreme Court, that I’m not in Georgia or Florida or North Carolina campaigning like I should be… it’s perfect for the radical left Democrats – that’s exactly what they want,” he continued, adding that it’s “election interference.”

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      *  *  *

      Update (1200ET): Monday’s ‘hush money’ trial against former President Donald Trump has begun, with jury selection and a discussion over evidence on the table. To get the blow-by-blow throughout the day, follow this thread on X by Inner City Press.

      The case stems from a $130,000 payment made by Trump’s former lawyer, convicted felon and admitted liar Michael Cohen, to adult film actress Stormy Daniels at the end of the 2016 election in an alleged scheme to buy her silence. Trump is required to be present for the trial, which will take place four days a week and could last up to two months.

      Judge Juan Merchan kicked off the day by refusing a request by Trump’s legal team to recuse himself from the case over an interview he gave to the press in which he mentioned the case, which Merchan said was within the law – while Merchan’s wife and daughter have worked for prominent Democrats and/or made anti-Trump statements.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Prosecutors sought to include evidence from the Access Hollywood ‘grab ’em by the pussy’ tape, as well as various sexual assault allegations from Trump accusers. Merchan allowed a transcript of the tape, and denied a request to present the other allegations in court.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Next, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked Trump’s attorneys to explain how the former president shouldn’t be held in contempt for allegedly violating Merchan’s gag order – arguing that Trump’s efforts have continued to this day, and that witnesses in the case “have incurred the wrath of Trump supporters.”

      And now, jury selection begins… with Merchan telling the court that 500 prospective jurors are waiting.

      https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

      Stay tuned for updates…

      *  *  *

      Authored by Jonathan Turley,

      I have long been critical of the case as a clear example of the weaponization of the criminal justice system. No one seriously believes that Alvin Bragg would have spent this time and money to prosecute what is ordinarily a state misdemeanor if the defendant was anyone other than Trump. One does not have to be like Trump to repel from the spectacle about to unfold in Manhattan.

      The famous Roman philosopher and orator Marcus Tullius Cicero once said, “The more laws, the less justice.”

      This week, New York judges and lawyers appear eager to prove that the same is true for cases against Donald Trump. 

      After an absurd $450 million decision courtesy of Attorney General Letitia James, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg will bring his equally controversial criminal prosecution over hush money paid to a former porn star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election.

      Lawyers have been scouring the civil and criminal codes for any basis to sue or prosecute Trump before the upcoming 2024 election. This week will highlight the damage done to New York’s legal system because of this unhinged crusade. They’ve charged him with everything short of ripping a label off a mattress.

      Just a few weeks ago, another judge imposed a roughly half billion dollar penalty in a case without a single victim who lost a single cent on loans with Trump. (Indeed, bank officials testified they wanted more business with the Trump organization).

      Now Bragg is bringing a case that has taken years to develop and millions of dollars in litigation cost for all parties. That is all over a crime from before the 2016 election that is a misdemeanor under state law that had already expired under the statute of limitations.

      Like his predecessor, Bragg previously scoffed at the case. However, two prosecutors, Carey R. Dunne and Mark F. Pomerantz, then resigned and started a public pressure campaign to get New Yorkers to demand prosecution.

      Pomerantz shocked many of us by publishing a book on the case against Trump —  who was still under investigation and not charged, let alone convicted, of any crime. He did so despite objections from his former colleague that such a book was grossly improper.

      Nevertheless, it worked. Bragg brought a Rube Goldberg case that is so convoluted and counterintuitive that even liberal legal analysts criticized it.

      Trump paid Daniels to avoid any publicity over their brief alleged affair. As a celebrity, there was ample reason to want to keep the affair quiet, and that does not even include the fact that he is a married man.

      It also occurred before the 2016 election and there was clearly a benefit to quash the scandal as a candidate. That political motivation is at the heart of this long-delayed case.

      It is a repeat of the case involving former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards. In 2012, the Justice Department used the same theory to charge the former Democratic presidential candidate after a disclosure that he not only had an affair with filmmaker Rielle Hunter but also hid the fact that he had a child by her. Edwards denied the affair, and money from donors was passed to Hunter to keep the matter quiet.

      The Justice Department spent a huge amount on the case to show that the third-party payments were a circumvention of campaign finance laws. However, Edwards was ultimately found not guilty on one count while the jury deadlocked on the other five.

      With Trump, the Justice Department declined a repeat of the Edwards debacle and did not bring any federal charge.

      But Bragg then used the alleged federal crime to bootstrap a defunct misdemeanor charge into a felony in the current case. He is arguing that Trump intentionally lied when his former lawyer Michael Cohen listed the payments as retainer costs rather than a payment — to avoid reporting it as a campaign contribution to himself.

      Thus, if he had simply had Cohen report the payment as “hush money,” there would be no crime.

      Once again, the contrast to other controversies is telling.

      Before the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton’s campaign denied that it had funded the infamous Steele dossier behind the debunked Russian collusion claims.

      The funding was hidden as legal expenses by then-Clinton campaign general counsel Marc Elias. (The FEC later sanctioned by the campaign over its hiding of the funding.). When a reporter tried to report the story, he said Elias “pushed back vigorously, saying ‘You (or your sources) are wrong.’” Times reporter Maggie Haberman declared, “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.”

      Likewise, John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman, was called before congressional investigators and denied categorically any contractual agreement with Fusion GPS. Sitting beside him was Elias, who reportedly said nothing to correct the misleading information given to Congress.

      Yet, there were no charges stemming from the hiding of the funding, though it was all part of the campaign budget.

      Making this assorted business even more repellent will be the appearance of Cohen himself on the stand. Cohen recently was denounced by a judge as a serial perjurer who is continuing to game the system.

      Cohen has a long record as a legal thug who has repeatedly lied when it served his interests. He has a knack for selling his curious skill set to powerful figures like Trump and now Bragg.

      For those of us who have been critics of Cohen from when he was still working for Trump, it is mystifying that anyone would call him to the stand to attest to anything short of the time of day . . . and even then most of us would check our watches.

      Fortunately witnesses are no longer required to put their hand on the bible in swearing to testify truthfully in court. Otherwise, the court would need the New York Fire Department standing by in case the book burst into flames.

      So this is the case: A serial perjurer used to convert a dead state misdemeanor into a felony based on an alleged federal election crime that was rejected by the Justice Department.

      They could well succeed in a city where nine out of ten potential jurors despise Trump. Trying Trump in Manhattan is about as difficult as the New York Yankees going to bat using beach balls rather than baseballs. It is hard to miss.

      However, this is a Pyrrhic victory for the New York legal system. Whatever the outcome, it may prove a greater indictment of the New York court system than the defendant.

      Tyler Durden
      Mon, 04/15/2024 – 17:48

    Digest powered by RSS Digest