• Enhancing Post-9/11 Safety: Armed Pilots
  Enhancing Post-9/11 Safety: Armed Pilots

  Submitted by Gun Owners of America,

  September 11th, 2001, was a turning point in American history, and for many people across the country, a day that forever changed their lives. Americans lost loved ones in the initial attacks, and many brave first responders gave their lives, saving those from the rubble during the aftermath.

  But 9/11 served as a wake-up call as well. In the wake of the attacks, the Transportation Security Administration was created, and steps were taken to harden security at airports and inside commercial aircraft.

  But 22 years later, the TSA is little more than “security theatre.” The agency has come under frequent criticism from journalists, politicians, and even previous heads of the agency itself.

  The criticism didn’t appear out of thin air either, as undercover probes of TSA by the Department of Homeland Security revealed that in 2015, screeners did not find 95% of weapons, drugs, and explosives being smuggled through airport security. In 2017, it was again reported that TSA continues to fail above 80% of its tests.

  While we certainly hope that this number continues to improve, TSA only provides its numbers of firearms found at checkpoints. These “catches” usually happen when gun owners forget their firearms in their carry-on bags.

  Additionally, a House Oversight Committee report found that TSA wasted hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on equipment that spends most of its “useful life” in storage. During the investigation for the report, TSA tried to hide its misuse of taxpayer funds by providing “inaccurate, incomplete, and potentially misleading information to Congress in order to conceal the agency’s continued mismanagement of warehouse operations.”

  While the TSA continues to provide “security theatre,” Gun Owners of America has ensured that real security measures can be taken by pilots.

  

  In 2002, Gun Owners of America worked closely with US Senators and Representatives to pass into law the Arming Pilots Against Terrorism Act.

  The law’s passage was an uphill battle that took over a year. From the very beginning, getting guns into airline cockpits was a struggle. The President at the time, George Bush, was only lukewarm to the idea, and the Federal Aviation Administration was flat out opposed to it. Plus ALPA, the largest airline pilots association, was initially against the idea as well. 

  But thanks to the grassroots support of Gun Owners of America members and pilots nationwide, the bill gained momentum and made its way to the resolute desk.  

  After the law was passed, initial estimates said that upwards of 30,000 pilots were expected to apply to carry their firearms in the air. In 2008, it was reported that one in 10 pilots carry a firearm in the cockpit. We can only imagine that the number has continued to increase over time.

  To this day, pilot carry remains an instrumental part of airline security. It provides pilots with a means of stopping terrorism and defending their aircraft should it come under attack. 

  So, this year, as we remember 9/11 and those we lost—GOA will continue to fight for the right to keep and bear arms and do whatever part we can to ensure tragedies like 9/11 never happen again. 

  *   *  *  

  We’ll hold the line for you in Washington. We are No Compromise. Join the Fight Now.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 23:30

• Childcare Now Costs $1,031 More Than Public College Tuition, On Average, In The United States
  Childcare Now Costs $1,031 More Than Public College Tuition, On Average, In The United States

  The next time someone asks whether or not you think Joe Biden’s “Inflation Reduction Act” is working, you can share with them a new research report showing that childcare is becoming more expensive than in-state college tuition in 28 out of 50 states.

  In fact, on average in the United States, childcare now costs $1,031 more than public college tuition, according to a new report from NetCredit.

  The report “researched the average annual fees paid for public and private college tuition and the average cost of childcare in each U.S. state” and then “calculated the difference in yearly fees paid for childcare and in-state college tuition”. 

  As part of their methodology, NetCredit then “compared these costs to local average salaries to find the affordability of childcare and in-state college tuition in every state.”

  

  Among other findings in their research was that in Hawaii, annual childcare costs $15,995 more than a year of in-state public college tuition and that childcare is most affordable in Utah, where annual costs are equal to 7.87% of the average annual salary.

  The report found that coastal states were the ones where childcare was most expensive and “much of the Midwest and eastern U.S. is priced in favor of childcare”.

  

  “Vermont and Pennsylvania are more affordable for childcare since they have the most expensive public college fees in our study,” the report noted. 

  Those receiving in-state tuition in Vermont spend 24.22% of their annual wage paying for it, the study found:

  The average salary in both Vermont and Pennsylvania is around $55,450, putting these states among the top 20 for average wages in the U.S. But public college costs are so high in these states as to make investing in a college education significantly less affordable than elsewhere. “About 6% of UVM’s budget is from the state, but in many states it’s 25-40%,” explains Richard Cate, vice president of finance at the University of Vermont. “Being a small rural state, we don’t have big business to help fuel tax revenue,” says Marie Johnson, director of student financial services.

  Here is a glance at the highest annual childcare costs in the U.S., and their difference between in-state college tuition:

  

  The study’s full results can be found in the above table, which you can toggle at this link.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 23:00

• Violent Criminals Continue To Pose as Migrant Children To Enter US; Congress Must Act Now
  Violent Criminals Continue To Pose as Migrant Children To Enter US; Congress Must Act Now

  Authored by R.J. Hauman and Lora Ries via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Despite all the “victory laps” Biden administration officials have taken as they brag that their unlawful policies and processing programs have reduced illegal immigration, recent border data shows the opposite.

  

  On top of that, there is an undeniable link between the increase in illegal entrants being welcomed into the country and an increase in violent crime, which is posing a significant threat to public safety.

  This is a matter that must be addressed when Congress returns in September, and its resolution is so critical that Congress must tie it to the negotiations for funding the federal government for the new fiscal year that starts Oct. 1.

  In July, as temperatures soared into the triple digits, Border Patrol agents apprehended more than 132,652 illegal aliens between the ports at the southwest border—a 33 percent increase over June, when 99,539 illegal aliens were apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico line.

  The lower total in June was clearly an artificial reduction due to the abuse of the parole system, a tool this administration uses to quickly bring in as many inadmissible aliens without visas through the actual ports of entry (not around them) as possible.

  Not all of these illegal aliens are the same, but certain groups present more challenges to an overwhelmed Border Patrol and are able to easily enter the United States—notably adults entering illegally with children as a “family unit” and minors who enter without a parent or guardian, also known as unaccompanied alien children.

  On top of increases in both single adult and family unit apprehensions, unaccompanied children at the southwest border increased by nearly 50 percent in July compared to June.

  The same Biden administration officials who have repeatedly begged Central Americans not to send their children on the treacherous journey to the United States at the hands of smugglers and traffickers have done absolutely nothing to slow their entries. Instead, their policies and methods of resettlement are encouraging more.

  The fact that unaccompanied children are regularly raped and exploited on their journey to the United States is a heartbreaking reality. And sadly, their lives do not improve once they enter the country, where they are then turned over to questionable, if not dangerous, “sponsors.” Many are also forced to work in unsafe conditions that violate child labor laws, go missing, or are sex trafficked.

  Furthermore, teenage members of MS-13 and other violent Central American gangs continue to take advantage of current U.S. policy and the easiest, most vulnerable migrant flow and enter the United States as unaccompanied children.

  More than 70 percent of unaccompanied children are teens, aged 15 to 17, according to the Department of Health and Human Services, with some adults even posing as minors.

  Too many Americans and migrants themselves have needlessly died at the hands of vicious gang members who were welcomed into the country and then released into our communities. Yet another tragic instance of this took place mere weeks ago, with the media refusing to explore the reality of the situation.

  Juan Carlos Garcia-Rodriguez, a 17-year-old native of Guatemala, illegally crossed into the United States and self-surrendered in El Paso, Texas, in January. He was quickly turned over to HHS custody as an unaccompanied child and released to a sponsor in Louisiana. On Aug. 19, he was arrested as a suspect in a brutal murder of an 11-year-old migrant girl in Pasadena, Texas.

  At the time of his arrest, his address was not in Louisiana with the sponsor but an apartment complex in Texas where the little girl was found after having been sexually assaulted, strangled, put into a trash bag, and hidden under her bed while her father was at work.

  The media continue to leave out the immigration details in their coverage of this brutal crime that should have been prevented in a concerted effort to cover for the Biden administration and keep the historic flow of unaccompanied alien children going and viewed in a positive light.

  U.S. Customs and Border Protection statistics show a consistent and alarming increase of convicted criminal aliens that it encounters. As such, this horrific crime by Garcia-Rodriguez is just one of the thousands of murders, rapes, and other violent crimes that occur each year at the hands of illegal aliens in the U.S.

  What is even more outrageous is the fact that Democrat politicians in the region and here in Washington continue to ignore such crimes.

  The same folks who claim that everything they do related to border security is humanitarian in nature have shown more outrage over inflatable water barriers that Texas erected than the murder of an 11-year-old girl by a now-18-year-old man allowed into the country by their policies.

  Enough is enough.

  Republicans on Capitol Hill will soon be at a crossroads when it comes to addressing the Biden Border Crisis and funding the federal government.

  It is essential that House Republicans unite behind a reasonable demand to include their already passed border security measure as part of any spending agreement that is passed to avert a government shutdown in late September.

  The bill, the Secure the Border Act (HR 2), fulfilled promises made to the American people on delivering solutions to a self-inflicted crisis that harms not just cities and states along the border but every city and state around the country.

  The bill’s intentions and contents are clear: It would end the crisis and restore sanity, safety, and security at our borders. A key component that helps do that is closing longstanding loopholes in the processing of unaccompanied alien children.

  It is vital that this bill is a part of any agreement for the continuation of funding for the federal government.

  If the federal government cannot perform the basic task of keeping our border secure and preventing instances like the murder of an innocent 11-year-old girl from happening, it should not be funded.

  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
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 22:30

• Reparations Backlash: California Voters Oppose "Unfair" Cash Payments For Slavery According To Berkeley Poll
  Reparations Backlash: California Voters Oppose “Unfair” Cash Payments For Slavery According To Berkeley Poll

  The sprawling social experiment known as California faces an uphill battle on reparations, after a new poll from UC Berkeley and the LA Times reveals that voters overwhelmingly oppose the idea of cash payments for black descendants of slaves by a 2-to-1 margin.

  

  The poll found that 59% of voters oppose cash payments vs. 28% who support the idea. Four out of 10 voters “strongly” opposed the idea.

  Interestingly, just 19% of those opposed cited cost as an issue. The majority simply says it’s unfair to today’s taxpayers and wrong to single out one group for reparations.

  In the Berkeley poll, when voters who oppose reparations were asked why, the two main reasons cited most often were that “it’s unfair to ask today’s taxpayers to pay for wrongs committed in the past,” picked by 60% of voters, and “it’s not fair to single out one group for reparations when other racial and religious groups have been wronged in the past,” chosen by 53%.

  Only 19% said their reason was that the proposal would cost the state too much, suggesting that money alone is not the main objection.

  Among Democrats, 43% favored and 41% opposed cash reparations. Republicans were strongly against the proposal at 90% with only 5% in favor. Independents were 65% opposed and 22% in favor.

  Black California voters were more likely to support cash payments than any other demographic, with 76% in favor and 16% opposed, the survey found. Almost two-thirds of white voters were opposed as were 6 in 10 Latino and Asian voters. -LA Times

  “It has a steep uphill climb, at least from the public’s point of view,” said poll director Mark DiCamillo, who was obviously disappointed at the results. “The idea of cash reparations is really what’s being strongly opposed,” he continued, adding “There could be other solutions that could be much more warmly received.”

  

  The sobering reality could put Gov. Gavin Newsom and his fellow Democrats in a tight spot, after state leaders have vocally endorsed the idea of reparations – going so far as to create California’s Reparations Task Force in 2020. The objective was to create a model for national reparations. But as the poll reveals, they are sailing against strong winds.

  The task force has indeed been hard at work. They propose payments to all descendants based on a plethora of criteria, ranging from health disparities to housing discrimination. But there’s more: The group also suggests ending the death penalty, restoring voting rights to all incarcerated individuals, and implementing rent caps in historically redlined areas.

  Members of the reparations task force previously said convincing non-Black Californians that the harms from slavery are still persisting today could be one of the biggest challenges for proponents.

  Much of the task force’s work centered on hearing testimony from academics, economists and other experts to gather evidence of the effects of slavery and to prove the ways in which government-sanctioned policies discriminated against Black people long after slavery was abolished. -LA Times

  When asked about his stance on reparations in the spring, Newsom said reparations are more than just cash payments.

  “It doesn’t have to be in the frame of writing a check; reparations comes in many different forms. But one cannot deny these historical facts, and I really believe very strongly we have to come to grips with what’s happened,” Newsom told Fox News host Sean Hannity.

  When asked whether the state is ‘doing enough’ to ensure that black residents have a fair chance to succeed, 29% said the California is doing too little, 22% said the state is doing too much, and 26% said it’s just enough. Nearly 1/4, or 23%, had no opinion.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 22:00

• Estimates Of China's Youth Unemployment Hit 50%
  Estimates Of China’s Youth Unemployment Hit 50%

  By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

  “The younger generation must inherit and carry forward the spirit of self-reliance, and hard work, abandon arrogance, and engrave the passion of youth in the water just like our parents did, on the monument of history,” declared Xi, some time ago.

  Youth unemployment across China continued its rise this summer. The official number approached 21% before Beijing halted its publication.

  

  Unofficial estimates stretched to nearly 50% when one counts the “lying flat”, a term adopted by youth who are choosing to quit the rat race altogether. In previous decades, agitated youth took to the streets. New forms of hyper-surveillance make such rebellion far harder. Instead, the young simply opt out.

  “The facts of countless successful lives show that in youth, if you choose to endure hardship, you will also choose to gain, and if you choose to contribute, you will also choose to be noble,” said Xi.

  Parents across the world nodded in violent agreement, because of course, nothing could be truer.

  “In youth, experiencing more beatings, setbacks, and tests, will help you walk a successful life,” said Xi, a cold terror slowly rising in the leader for life. The national savings rate rose further still, his subjects preparing for harder times.

  China’s fertility rate collapsed to a stunning new low of 1.09 per woman (from 1.30 in 2020). This symptom of profound pessimism, if not reversed dramatically, will lead to economic and then civilizational collapse.

  “In the later years of my life, I always reminded myself that hardship is an opportunity. I must persist in learning more and working more and go to difficult places to train myself,” said Xi, searching for a solution to a problem far more challenging than trade wars, chip dependencies, ghost cities, insolvent banks, stranded infrastructure built for a globalized world that is fading, not to mention his nation’s food, energy and water insecurity.

  All such problems are solvable provided a nation has a growing population of ambitious, optimistic, hardworking youth. But how to lift a nation whose young consider their current circumstances, assess their future, and quietly lie flat?

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 21:30

• Southwest Airlines Finds Bogus Parts On 737 Jet
  Southwest Airlines Finds Bogus Parts On 737 Jet

  Weeks after European aviation authorities flagged a London-based firm for supplying “unapproved parts” for jet engines on older Airbus SE A320s and Boeing Co. 737s, Southwest Airlines has confirmed to Bloomberg that one of these parts ended up on a 737. 

  Southwest told Bloomberg in an emailed statement that bogus low-pressure turbine blades from AOG Technics were found on one of its Boeing 737 NG. The part was immediately replaced, the airline said. 

  

  The part scandal spread across the Atlantic after the European Union Aviation Safety Agency said earlier this month, “Numerous Authorised Release Certificates for parts supplied via AOG Technics have been forged.” 

  AOG sold bogus parts for CFM56 engines, the world’s best-selling turbine, to repair shops servicing Airbus SE A320s and Boeing Co. 737s. Some of these older jets are used by budget airlines. 

  According to Bloomberg, CFM International, the GE-Safran manufacturing venture of the engine, “found 78 documents they say are falsified and which cover 52 CFM56 engine part numbers, along with two faked records for CF6 components.” 

  AOG began operations in 2015 in the UK and has supplied an unknown amount of CFM56 parts with fake certification to the global parts market. CFM and GE noted that no engine issue incidents have been traced back to AOG’s parts. 

  It may be time to ask other US airline carriers if they also used bogus AOG parts in their engines… 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 21:00

• Who's Better At Generating Innovative Ideas, ChatGPT Or MBA Students?
  Who’s Better At Generating Innovative Ideas, ChatGPT Or MBA Students?

  By Mish Shedlock of MishTalk

  Wharton professors say Ideas Are Dimes a Dozen and they put that theory to a test. But how does one determine a good idea? And what does better mean?

  

  Wharton notes the difference between consistency and better. For example, an airplane pilot who lands aircraft with average smoothness 10 times out of 10 is better than one who is brilliant 9 times out of 10 and crashes once.

  With ideas, one fantastic idea and 10 poor ones is better than 10 average ones. With that backdrop let’s dive into the article.

  Abstract: ChatGPT-4 can generate ideas much faster and cheaper than students, and the ideas are on average of higher quality (as measured by purchase-intent surveys) and exhibit higher variance in quality. More important, the vast majority of the best ideas in the pooled sample are generated by ChatGPT and not by the students. Providing ChatGPT with a few examples of highly rated ideas further increases its performance. We discuss the implications of these findings for the management of innovation.

  Introduction: Generative artificial intelligence has made remarkable advances in creating life-like images and coherent, fluent text. OpenAI’s ChatGPT chatbot, based on the GPT series of large language models (LLM) can equal or surpass human performance in academic examinations and tests for professional certifications (OpenAI, 2023).

  Despite their remarkable performance, LLMs sometimes produce text that is semantically or syntactically plausible but is, in fact, factually incorrect or nonsensical (i.e., hallucinations). The models are optimized to generate the most statistically likely sequences of words with an injection of randomness. They are not designed to exercise any judgment on the veracity or feasibility of the output.

  In what applications can we leverage artificial intelligence that is brilliant in many ways yet cannot be trusted to produce reliably accurate results? One possibility is to turn their weaknesses – hallucinations and inconsistent quality – into a strength (Terwiesch, 2023).

  ChatGPT can generate ides far faster than humans. This gives them a huge edge in coming up with a few great ideas. For this study the professors gave ChatGPT and the students the same prompt.

  I believe I would get a big zero in coming up with a truly innovative product idea.

  Could you do this? How fast?

  System Prompt “You are a creative entrepreneur looking to generate new product ideas. The product will target college students in the United States. It should be a physical good, not a service or software. I’d like a product that could be sold at a retail price of less than about USD 50. The ideas are just ideas. The product need not yet exist, nor may it necessarily be clearly feasible. Number all ideas and give them a name. The name and idea are separated by a colon.”

  User Prompt “Please generate ten ideas as ten separate paragraphs. The idea should be expressed as a paragraph of 40-80 words.”

  Do LLMs Enhance Productivity in Generating Ideas?

  The answer to this question is straightforward. ChatGPT-4 is very efficient at generating ideas. This question does not require much precision to answer. Two hundred ideas can be generated by one human interacting with ChatGPT-4 in about 15 minutes. A human working alone can generate about five ideas in 15 minutes (Girotra et al., 2010). Humans working in groups do even worse. In short, the productivity race between humans and ChatGPT is not even close.

  Still, the old saying that ideas are a dime a dozen is perhaps a tad optimistic. A professional working with ChatGPT-4 can generate ideas at a rate of about 800 ideas per hour. At a cost of USD 500 per hour of human effort, a figure representing an estimate of the fully loaded cost of a skilled professional, ideas are generated at a cost of about USD 0.63 each, or USD 7.50 (75 dimes) per dozen. At the time we used ChatGPT-4, the API fee for 800 ideas was about USD 20. For that same USD 500 per hour, a human working alone, without assistance from an LLM, only generates 20 ideas at a cost of roughly USD 25 each, hardly a dime a dozen. For the focused idea generation task itself, a human using ChatGPT-4 is thus about 40 times more productive than a human working alone.

  What Is The Quality Distribution of the Ideas Generated Using LLMs?

  A “stochastic parrot” can generate ideas, and LLMs do so shockingly productively. But we don’t care about quantity alone. More typically, the objective of idea generation is to generate at least a few truly exceptionally good ideas. In most innovation settings, we’d rather have 10 great ideas and 90 terrible ideas than 100 ideas of average quality.

  We, therefore, care about the quality distribution of the ideas, and in particular, the quality of the best few ideas in a sample. Of course, we might as well also measure the mean and standard deviation of the three sets of ideas, and we do so. Two useful measures of the extreme values are: What is the average quality of the ideas in the top decile of each of the three samples? Which sources provided the ideas comprising the top 10 percent of the ideas in the pooled sample?

  Chat-GPT generated the best-rated idea in our sample, with an 11% higher purchase probability than the best human idea. The average quality of the top decile in each of the three pools also follows the same pattern as average quality— seeded Chat-GPT ≻ ChatGPT ≻ Humans. Overall, we have 400 ideas, with an equal number generated by ChatGPT and humans. In the top 40 ideas (top decile) a full 35 (87.5%) are those generated by ChatGPT.

  ChatGPT vs the Screen Actors Guild

  The Screen Actors Guild (SAG) joined the Writers Guild (WGA) in coordinated strikes. The writers demand protection from Artificial Intelligence. Articles abound.

  • Deadline: September 6: WGA & SAG-AFTRA To Rally For California Bill That Would Grant Unemployment Insurance To Strikers
  • Deadline: September 6: SAG-AFTRA Says Dual Strikes Against Video Games & Film/TV Industry “Makes Sense” As Key Issues Of Wages & AI “Mirror” Each Other
  • MovieWeb: September 7: Bill Maher Says Writers Are Not ‘Owed a Living’ as the WGA & SAG-AFTRA Strikes Continue

  Hoot of the Day from the World Socialist Organization

  The World Socialist Website reports US film and television writers’ and actors’ anger reaching the boiling point

  The struggle by 11,000 film and television writers, members of the Writers Guild of America (WGA), is now in its fifth month, while 65,000 actors in the Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) are nearing the end of their second month on the picket lines.

  The militant determination of the writers and actors to fight for decent living standards and a more meaningful future for art and culture have been met with intransigence and outright cruelty by the entertainment mega-corporations united in the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP). The companies have made clear their willingness to drive thousands of artists into misery and out of the arts and entertainment industry.

  Similarly, with all its phony rhetoric about “solidarity,” SAG-AFTRA has prevented video game workers from joining the strike of their fellow union members and only this week began a strike authorization vote. Moreover, the use of “interim agreements,” allowing hundreds of productions to go ahead, has created a surreal situation of internal scabbing that weakens or negates the purpose of strike action.

  Outright cruelty!?

  I discussed this on July 24, asking If the Screen Actors and Writers Strikes Went on Forever, Who Would Care?

  The strike started on July 14. Did you notice? Care? I don’t watch TV so I am not a good judge.

  In a podcast, Maher expressed some sympathy for the writers.

  “I feel for my writers. I love my writers. I’m one of my writers. But there’s a big other side to it. And a lot of people are being hurt besides them — a lot of people who don’t make as much money as them in this bipartisan world we have where you’re just in one camp or the other, there’s no in between.

  You’re either for the strike like they’re f—ing Che Guevara out there, you know, like, this is Cesar Chavez’s lettuce picking strike — or you’re with Trump. There’s no difference — there’s only two camps. And it’s much more complicated than that.”

  But I side with Bill Maher who says writers are not “owed” a living and that the strike demands can be excessive and unrealistic.

  The strike demands of the United Auto Workers are also excessive and unrealistic.

  United Auto Workers (UAW) Demands

  • 32-hour workweek
  • 46 percent pay raise over 4 years
  • Right to strike over plant closures
  • Increased retiree benefits
  • Defined pension plan for all workers
  • Cost of living adjustments

  Bernie Sanders Comments and an Accurate Rebuttal

  The irony in the UAW case is Biden is recklessly pursuing an avenue faster than infrastructure allows and that will cost UAW jobs, but increase them elsewhere, in a highly inflationary manner. Note that Biden’s Green Energy Inflation Reduction Act Needs a Big Bailout Already “What, me worry?” Some on Twitter predict, even cheer for my demise to AI writers for my stance against the UAW. Like Bill Maher. I’m not worried. Unlike Bill Maher, I am so small no one would even want to bother to try to replace me. When I started this article, I had no idea it would morph into the Screen Actors Guild or the UAW. On a day to day basis, I have no idea what I am going to write about. Could AI have produced this article better? Even if so, would it bother? In retrospect, I am terrible at producing ideas for products, but pretty good at commenting on the global economic news. If I am replaced by AI, so be it. No one is owed a living. Not the Screen Actors Guild, not the UAW, and not me.

  UAW Gearing Up for a Strike, It Could be Long and Nasty

  On August 29, I commented UAW Gearing Up for a Strike, It Could be Long and Nasty

  Bloomberg estimates the UAW demands would add $80 billion to costs.

  If the Big Three automakers gave into UAW demand, they would all go bankrupt in short order.

  The fact is, EVs are easier to produce. That means fewer workers. But the workers want protection from losing their jobs. The SAG wants protection from ChatGPT.

  It’s really the same story. Change happens. It’s disruptive.

  Biden’s Green Energy Inflation Reduction Act Needs a Big Bailout Already

  

  The irony in the UAW case is Biden is recklessly pursuing an avenue faster than infrastructure allows and that will cost UAW jobs, but increase them elsewhere, in a highly inflationary manner.

  Note that Biden’s Green Energy Inflation Reduction Act Needs a Big Bailout Already

  “What, me worry?”

  Some on Twitter predict, even cheer for my demise to AI writers for my stance against the UAW.

  Like Bill Maher. I’m not worried. Unlike Bill Maher, I am so small no one would even want to bother to try to replace me.

  When I started this article, I had no idea it would morph into the Screen Actors Guild or the UAW. On a day to day basis, I have no idea what I am going to write about. Could AI have produced this article better? Even if so, would it bother?

  In retrospect, I am terrible at producing ideas for products, but pretty good at commenting on the global economic news.

  If I am replaced by AI, so be it. No one is owed a living. Not the Screen Actors Guild, not the UAW, and not me.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 20:30

• 'Derailing Goldilocks' – Goldman Questions The 'Soft Landing' Narrative
  ‘Derailing Goldilocks’ – Goldman Questions The ‘Soft Landing’ Narrative

  Equities sold off last week and rotated out of cyclicals and low quality assets as an uncomfortable combination of rallying rates & commodities prices derails the goldilocks soft landing scenario, triggering a readjustment of the market optimism.

  

  The smell of stagflation – not goldilocks – was everywhere with ‘inflation expectations’ too hot…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  …and growth expectations (‘hard’ data) too cold…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  As Goldman notes, rallying rates and commodities are derailing the goldilocks soft landing scenario.

  Cyclicals and long duration assets have been rallying jointly over the summer on the narrative of strong growth but limited headwinds from rising rates.

  This is no longer the case and cracks are appearing, sending rate-change expectations hawkishly higher…

  

  Source: Bloomberg

  The uncomfortable combination of rallying oil and US long end breaking up is disrupting this equilibrium and triggering a rotation into the “persisting inflation & sticky rates” narrative, adding pressure on equities and valuations.

  Cyclicals continue to trade rich relative to PMIs & fading China momentum across regions, but are beginning to close this dislocation as highlighted mid-August.

  

  Additionally, growth seems less durable in Europe, with underwhelming manufacturing production, making it all the most remarkable to see EU Cyclicals holding up as banks got unwound.

  

  And finally, the credit risk component is seeing limited focus, although as highlighted by Rich Privorotsky in his daily note: according to the Fed, 37% of non-financial corporates are in distress in what should be a positive growth backdrop.

  Given the dramatic tightening in lending standards, one has to wonder at credit spreads optimism…

  

  Goldman warns, there’s room for disappointment as goldilocks hope fades:

  Sentiment has cooled down a bit from July extreme greed but still remains optimistic on overall, leaving room for disappointment.

  The VIX fell below 14, IG credit spreads are at the tightest of the year, the AAII bull bear index has bounced back to greed territory, the GS risk appetite index remains range bound c. 0.6 Z-Score – all consistent with investors just back to school and yet to adjust to the evolving macro backdrop.

  

  Notably, our cross asset team noted that market correlation to macro growth surprise turned negative, suggesting rates are now high enough and that additional increases are seen as punitive from here .

  US non-profitable tech underperformance is consistent with this dynamic…

  

  The problem for Goldilocks believers is Energy.

  Oil and Gas supply restrictions triggered sharp moves in the commodity space.

  Oil is on the move and too hot to handle, breaking key resistances and now at the highest levels since Nov 22. This seems incompatible with 5y5y breakeven down…

  

  …and suggesting room for upside inflation surprise, and therefore higher rates and PE compression.

  Supply/demand dynamics catalyzed this move, with SPR starting to re-build, Saudi cutting production, and Australia strike pushing gas prices higher.

  Besides, it is interesting to note growing concerns on the implications of rising energy prices ahead of the winter season among investors.

  On the technical side, systematic flow is turning positive on the short term – however, CTA positioning in US equities remains very long c. 82nd 12m%ile, pointing at limited room for incremental demand from this investor base.

  September seasonality dynamics tend to benefit consensual longs & Momentum…

  

  …while Most Shorteds tend to underperform looking at data back since 2008.

  

  China uncertainty remains a key factor for investors and Pro Subs can read the full note here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 20:00

• Influencing Innovation: The Most Talked About Jackson Hole Paper
  Influencing Innovation: The Most Talked About Jackson Hole Paper

  By Jean-Laurent Cadorel of Exante Data

  • Monetary policy matters in the short-run through its impact on asset prices, demand, and activity;

  • Yet in the long run the economy is assumed to gravitate towards some “natural” rate of activity independent of such monetary actions;

  • A growing number of researchers are asking, however, whether monetary policy can have hysteresis effects and impact the natural rate through innovation activity.

  THIS YEAR’S Jackson Hole gathering was themed “structural shifts in the global economy.” Policymaker speeches garnered the most attention, of course. But there were also the usual academic contributions. And of these perhaps the most talked about was Monetary Policy and Innovation by Yueran Ma of the University of Chicago and Kaspar Zimmermann of the Leibniz Institute for Financial Research.

  Ma and Zimmerman argue monetary policy can have hysteresis effects on the economy through the financing of innovation; lower innovation can lead to lower growth and less desirable macroeconomic outcomes. The authors show this empirically using monetary shocks constructed à la Christina Romer and David Romer and a variety of measures of innovation in the United States. They find statistically significant and economically large effects using local projections.

  

  This result matters because it changes central bank calculus. For example, Taylor Rules implicitly assume the natural rate of interest is independent of the rate of interest set by the central bank—the natural rate being that “ground out” by frictionless markets, per Milton Friedman’s analogue in unemployment. And it is assumed the central bank anchors the money rate of interest to the natural rate of interest (per Woodford). So if economists now show monetary policy impacts the natural rate, Taylor Rules may need some rethinking: how can we target a natural rate of interest using a money rate if the latter impacts the former?

  Motivation

  Over the second half of the last century, macroeconomics has come to a compromise between the extreme (Keynesian) view than monetary policy is ineffective (in a liquidity trap) and monetary policy is all that matters (the extreme monetarist view). Today, it is generally understood that monetary policy has short-run effects but is neutral in the long run—Patinkin’s classical dichotomy prevails.

  Discussions about monetary policy have therefore focused on its short-run impact while natural forces are expected to do their work on the supply side of the economy.

  The paper by Ma and Zimmerman is part of a small but growing body of work interested in possible longer-term consequences of monetary policy which may operate through innovation and technological progress. They adopt a New Keynesian perspective with endogenous total factor productivity (TFP). Monetary policy influences firms’ incentives to develop and implement innovations.

  For example, following monetary policy contractions, reductions in aggregate demand can decrease profitability and incentives for innovation. Tighter financial conditions and lower risk appetite can decrease funding for innovation. A slower pace of innovation may then have lasting effects.

  This paper tests the effects of monetary policy on innovation activities, using a variety of metrics of innovation: aggregate investment in intellectual property (including R&D) from national accounts, the R&D spending of public companies, and measures based on VC investment and patent filing.

  Results

  The authors observe meaningful changes in innovation activity in the years following monetary policy shocks. First, investment in intellectual property products (IPP) in the national accounts (NIPA) declines by about 1 percent. The magnitude is comparable to the decline in traditional investment in physical assets. R&D spending in Compustat data for public firms declines by about 3 percent.

  

  Second, VC investment is more volatile, and declines by as much as 25 percent at a horizon of 1 to 3 years after the monetary policy shock. Third, patenting in important technologies measured by Bloom et al. (2023) declines by up to 9 percent 2 to 4 years after the shock. Patenting in other technologies declines by less than patenting in important technologies according to the importance classification in Bloom et al. (2023).

  

  An aggregate innovation index constructed by Kogan et al. (2017) using estimates of the economic value of patents also declines by up to 9 percent. Based on this paper’s output and total factor productivity (TFP) sensitivity to the aggregate innovation index, a 9 percent decline in the index can contribute to 1 percent lower real output and 0.5 percent lower TFP 5 years later.

  Mechanism

  For the transmission mechanism from monetary policy to innovation activities, Ma and Zimmerman find indications that both demand and financial conditions are relevant.

  First, by decreasing demand, monetary policy tightening can reduce the profitability of developing new products and the incentives to innovate (Shleifer, 1986; Fatas, 2000; Comin and Gertler, 2006; Benigno and Fornaro, 2018). In the data, they observe a stronger decline in both R&D and patenting in more cyclical industries. They also observe that patenting declines after monetary policy tightening among both public and private companies, and among both large and small public companies. To the extent that large public firms have abundant financial resources, the slowdown of innovation activities among these firms is likely driven by reduced demand.

  Second, monetary policy tightening can affect financial conditions and reduce the appetite for risk-taking (Bauer, Bernanke, and Milstein, 2023; Kashyap and Stein, 2023). In the data, they observe that VC investment for both early-stage and late-stage startups declines after monetary policy tightening. To the extent that early-stage startups are still in the product development phase and may not have products coming to the market immediately, reduced funding could reflect less appetite for investing in risky endeavors.

  Conclusion

  The Ma and Zimmerman contribution is an important empirical counterpart to recent papers exploring the possible longer-term consequences of monetary policy, which may operate through the influence of monetary policy on innovation and technological progress (Stadler, 1990; Moran and Queralto, 2018; Modery et al., 2021; Grimm, Laeven, and Popov, 2022; Amador, 2022; Fornaro and Wolf, 2023; Jordà, Singh, and Taylor, 2023).

  The authors document the response of innovation to monetary policy using a collection of measures.

  The results suggest that monetary policy could have a persistent influence on the productive capacity of the economy, in addition to the well-recognized near-term effects on economic outcomes. Rising interest rates since 2022 and a substantial decline in venture capital investment highlight how relevant these issues are. Recent breakthroughs in AI raise the hope that another technological revolution could be on the horizon.

  What does this mean for policy? The authors argue their contribution does not imply monetary policy should be more dovish. A number of economic observers have highlighted the misallocation of capital (excessive housing construction) or the emergence of asset bubbles (in debt markets, housing, and cryptocurrencies) due to the low level of interest rates.

  Striking the right balance between these two sides requires evidence and the authors contribute a persuasive set of results to the debate. But as they also point out. it is possible that the effects of monetary policy on innovation cancel out over the complete cycle. So, for now, the policy conclusions are not clear.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 19:30

• Senators Unveil Bipartisan Blueprint For Comprehensive AI Regulation
  Senators Unveil Bipartisan Blueprint For Comprehensive AI Regulation

  Authored by Amaka Nwaokocha via Cointelegraph.com,

  Two United States senators unveiled a bipartisan blueprint for artificial intelligence (AI) legislation on Friday, Sept. 8, as Congress intensifies its endeavors to regulate the emerging technology.

  

  The framework put forward by Senators Richard Blumenthal and Josh Hawley advocates for mandatory licensing for AI firms and makes it clear that technology liability protections will not shield these companies from legal actions.

  In a statement on X (formerly Twitter), Blumenthal expressed that this bipartisan framework represents a significant step forward — a robust and comprehensive legislative plan for concrete and enforceable AI safeguards. It is expected to be a guide in managing the potential benefits and risks of AI technology.

  Hawley emphasized that the principles outlined in this framework should serve as the foundational basis for Congress to take action regarding AI regulation.

  “We’ll continue hearings with industry leaders and experts, as well as other conversations and fact-finding to build a coalition of support for legislation.”

  The framework proposes creating a licensing system overseen by an independent regulatory body. It mandates that AI model developers register with this oversight entity, which would possess the authority to conduct audits of these licensing applicants.

  

  Additionally, the framework suggests that Congress should make it explicit that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which provides legal protections to tech firms for third-party content, does not extend to AI applications. Other sections of the framework advocate for corporate transparency, consumer and child protection, as well as national security safeguards.

  Blumenthal and Hawley, who lead the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and Law, have also revealed plans for a hearing. This hearing will include testimony from prominent figures such as Brad Smith, the vice chairman and president of Microsoft; William Dally, the chief scientist and senior vice president of research at NVIDIA; and Woodrow Hartzog, professor at Boston University School of Law.

  The unveiling of this framework and the accompanying hearing announcement precedes Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s AI forum. The forum is set to feature leaders from major AI firms who will provide lawmakers with insights into the potential advantages and risks associated with AI.

  Schumer also introduced an AI framework in June. His framework outlined an extensive range of fundamental principles, as opposed to the more detailed measures proposed by Hawley and Blumenthal.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 18:30

• Are Emergency Powers A Test To See What Americans Will Put Up With?
  Are Emergency Powers A Test To See What Americans Will Put Up With?

  During the hysteria of the covid pandemic questions swirled around how the federal government would respond to the events under the declaration of a national health emergency.  What kind of powers would they claim to have and which constitutional rights would they try to suppress?  What many Americans did not consider, however, was the implementation of emergency powers under state governments rather than the White House.

  Most of the covid mandates crushing the US economy during that period were not federal mandates, but state mandates, and there’s a good reason why covid tyrants chose to focus on state level restrcitions.

  There are a number of requirements and obstacles for any president seeking to enforce mandates at the federal level, along with more scrutiny and oversight than is commonly understood.  Though a president can declare emergencies unilaterally, there are still some legal checks and balances (to be sure, these are quietly being eroded with each passing year). 

  On the other hand, state governors in 44 states have sweeping authorities under emergency conditions, with very little immediate legal recourse.  As we have seen recently in places like Hawaii and now New Mexico, Democrat governors have been playing with fire (no pun intended) as they seek to push the envelope of emergency controls at the state level.

  In Hawaii, the exploitation of state emergency provisions under Governor Josh Green led to possibly thousands of deaths as they refused to release water supplies for fire fighting and even blockaded Maui residents, forcing them back into the blaze.  They have even put an information blackout in place and denied news organizations access to the scene of the disaster.  One has to ask – Was this done out of stupidity?  Or was this a test to see what kinds of trespasses and controls citizens would accept?

  In New Mexico we see a similar extreme overstep by Governor Michelle Grisham, who believes she has the authority to dictate the 2nd Amendment rights of  Albuquerque residents due to rising crime.  The level of mental gymnastics on display in her arguments to justify the banning of lawful open carry and conceal carry protections make it clear that this is not about protecting the public.  The lack of logic and reason indicates that this is an ideological decision based in zealotry.  Watch as she struggles to present any reasonable position – turning instead to deflection.

  After suspending the right to carry firearms, New Mexico’s Governor just said her duty to uphold her oath to the constitution is “not absolute” pic.twitter.com/wY3xSwIUIs

  — John Hasson (@SonofHas) September 9, 2023

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

  The root of her argument is this:  “I am banning legal firearms carry in Albuquerque because under emergency powers I can.” 

  That’s it.  That’s all she’s got. 

  But this is not a valid argument and there are a number of reasons why.

  First, crime is rising across the nation, predominantly in Democrat controlled cities. 

  Albuquerque has a Democrat mayor and New Mexico is a Democrat run state.  If crime is rising, it is the fault of Democrats.  But instead of taking responsibility for their terrible planning and policies, Democrat leaders are once again blaming inanimate objects (guns) and using mass punishment of people who lawfully carry (primarily conservatives).  In other words, Dems are ruining the country and creating a national crime wave, and then making conservatives pay for it with their rights. 

  Second, restrictions on open carry and conceal carry are not going to reduce the crime rate because criminals don’t care about laws or emergency powers. 

  If anything, the violent crime rate will rise as criminals feel emboldened knowing that most citizens are now disarmed. 

  Third, Grisham has presented no evidence of a legitimate emergency other than “crime is bad right now.” 

  The emergency is ambiguous rather than defined.  Meaning, emergency restrictions could be renewed over and over again, unless citizens step up and do something about them.

  Fourth, the focus on open carry and conceal carry seems to be an attempt at a totalitarian tip-toe. 

  A large number of gun owners do not carry regularly so they may not feel personally affected by the rules.  Meaning, the governor has reduced the level of opposition by attacking just one aspect of gun rights.  This is usually how authoritarians institute control – They don’t remove your rights all at once, they do it a piece at a time.

  Fifth, gun carry laws are generally a legislative decision that usually requires a public vote. 

  Grisham is attempting to bypass all checks and balances as if the legislative process does not matter.

  Sixth, emergency powers are often declared unconstitutional by courts after the fact. 

  For example, the Michigan Supreme Court held that the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act (EPGA), which Governor Whitmer used to justify her draconian COVID-19 executive orders, was unconstitutional because it delegated legislative power to the executive branch in violation of the Michigan Constitution.  But these court decisions often come well after the damage has already been done.  It is up to the citizenry to defy such orders when necessary and let the courts sort out the aftermath later.

  Seventh, Grisham argues that rising crime is a “public health emergency,” using the same language relegated to the covid response. 

  Crime has nothing to do with public health and is a legal concern handled through either social programs or increased police presence.  Disarming the public is not within the purview of a health emergency – Grisham has greatly overstepped her bounds. 

  The timing and tone of the state government decision on gun carry in Albuquerque reads like a political maneuver, a test to see what the public will submit to.  Grisham admits that she expects numerous legal challenges to her decision, but she does not seem too concerned with the public reaction.  Maybe she should be?  Or, is she so certain that the New Mexico 2nd Amendment community will sit on their hands that she feels comfortable there will be no protests, no open carry marches and no public defiance to be worried about? 

  One thing is inevitable, if Grisham is unopposed in New Mexico, numerous Democrat governors and mayors across the country will try to enforce the exact same emergency powers. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 18:00

• RFK Jr. Wants His Party Back: The American People "Are Tired Of Being Lied To By The Government & The Media"
  RFK Jr. Wants His Party Back: The American People “Are Tired Of Being Lied To By The Government & The Media”

  Authored by Jeff Louderbeck via The Epoch Times,

  On a steamy summer morning, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. strode into a hotel conference room in Columbia, South Carolina, amid a barnstorming town hall tour of a state where Joe Biden won close to 49 percent of the vote in the 2020 Democratic primary.

  

  Mr. Kennedy spoke about his 2024 presidential campaign. Democrat pundits say he is a fringe candidate who spreads conspiracy theories. Polls show him with the highest favorability rating of any presidential candidate.

  There is no path for Mr. Kennedy to defeat President Biden, critics claim, despite questions about President Joe Biden’s age and mental fitness, low approval ratings, and surveys showing that Americans are concerned about the economy.

  Earlier this year, the Democratic National Committee voted to give its full support to the president.

  Mr. Kennedy agrees that unseating an incumbent president in the same party is a daunting challenge but disagrees with doubters who say he has no chance of securing the nomination.

  The 2024 presidential nominee will be announced during the Democratic National Convention in Chicago next summer. Until then, Mr. Kennedy intends to continue to press his case.

  “The DNC has around $2 billion, and they’re spending that money generously to try to marginalize me in many ways, but I think most Democrats care about one thing more than anything else, which is to beat Donald Trump,” Mr. Kennedy told The Epoch Times.

  “I think President Biden cannot do that. I can.”

  

  President John F. Kennedy saw his nephew, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. at the Oval Office on March 11, 1961. (Abbie Rowe. White House Photographs. John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum, Boston)

  Mr. Kennedy is the nephew of President John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated in 1963; and the son of Robert F. Kennedy, who was shot and killed after a campaign speech while running for president in 1968.

  During his town halls and meet-and-greets, Mr. Kennedy tells stories from time spent with his uncle and father and connects them to his presidential campaign.

  He wants to continue his father’s legacy of uniting Americans from all economic classes and ethnic backgrounds.

  

  Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (L) wants to continue his father’s (R) legacy of uniting Americans from all economic classes and ethnic backgrounds.

  “I think we do that by telling the truth to people. My dad did it that way. He talked about uncomfortable issues but talked about the truth. I think people are tired of being lied to by the government, by the media,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “My dad ran against an incumbent president in his own party (Lyndon B. Johnson) during a divisive time. I’m running against a larger challenge because I am facing an entire infrastructure that is against me, from my own party and Big Tech and the pharmaceutical industry.”

  An environmental attorney and the founder of Children’s Health Defense, Mr. Kennedy is widely known for being outspoken about the health risks of vaccines. His stand on these and other issues has drawn support from voters who are not left-leaning.

  

  (Left) Then-Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy speaks to a crowd on racial equality outside the Justice Department on June 14, 1963. (Middle) Then-President John F. Kennedy speaks with his brother Robert F. Kennedy in 1963. (Right) (L–R) Brothers John, Robert, Ted Kennedy. (Public Domain)

  The candidate, however, has said that he won’t do that, reiterating that stance over the last month in town halls and meet-and-greets in South Carolina, Virginia, and New York City.

  “I’m a Democrat. This is my identity, but I want my party back,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “I’m running for president because the Democratic Party has lost its way. I want to remind the Democratic Party of what we are supposed to represent.”

  “A focus on the middle class and labor, the well-being of minorities, a focus on the environment, civil liberties, and freedom of speech.”

  He frequently talks about “unity” and “healing the divide.”

  “I intend to bridge this toxic polarization that is really destroying our country and tearing us apart,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  He called his campaign a “peaceful insurgency” that he hopes will appeal to conservative Republicans, independents, moderates, and liberal Democrats.

  “During the 35 years I spent as one of the leaders of the environmental movement in our country, I was the only environmentalist who was regularly going on Fox News. I went on Sean Hannity repeatedly—Bill O’Reilly, too,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “I want to talk to media members and voters who share differing opinions than mine, because how else are you going to persuade?

  

  A supporter of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., awaits his 2024 presidential bid announcement in Boston on April 19, 2023. (Joseph Prezioso/AFP via Getty Images)

  “I think we have a lot more in common than what the media portrays. What keeps us apart are things that are rather trivial. We let them feed this toxic polarization. We need to talk. We need to have conversations with people from a wide range of views.”

  Days after a House hearing on censorship in July that saw Democrats attempt to block Mr. Kennedy from testifying, a Harvard-Harris poll showed that he has a higher favorability rating than any other 2024 presidential candidate.

  Mr. Kennedy saw a favorable rating of 47 percent and an unfavorable mark of 26 percent, according to a survey of 2,068 registered voters, conducted July 19–20 and released on July 23. Former President Trump carried a favorability rating of 45 percent compared with an unfavorability number of 49 percent. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis had a 40 percent favorable rating and 37 percent unfavorable, and President Biden’s rating was 39 percent favorable and 53 percent unfavorable.

  

  Mr. Kennedy also had the highest net favorability of all 2024 presidential candidates in a June poll from The Economist/YouGov.

  Kennedy campaign manager Dennis Kucinich is a former Democratic congressman from Ohio who ran for president in 2004 and 2008. He believes Mr. Kennedy can “rebuild and save” the country and that there is a path to victory over Biden.

  “He is the only Democrat who can reach across the political spectrum, which means he can win in 2024,” Mr. Kucinich told The Epoch Times.

  “Conservatives, liberals, independents, and libertarians are responding to this campaign because of the unique qualities of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and because there is an understanding he stands for unity, freedom, truth, and authenticity. That is what’s resonating with people.”

  When asked about President Biden and former President Trump, Mr. Kennedy is measured in his responses.

  “I’m not going to attack other people personally,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “I don’t think it’s good for our country. And what I’m trying to do in this race is bring people together, is try to bridge the divide between Americans.”

  ‘Poison, Hatred, and Vitriol’

  Mr. Kennedy stands for “de-escalating” what he called “poison, hatred, and vitriol.”

  Mr. Kennedy has repeatedly expressed his disapproval of President Biden’s job performance, but he has refrained from personal attacks about the 80-year-old’s mental fitness.

  “If there’s a policy I disagree with—like the war, like censorship, the lockdowns—I’m going to criticize those, but I’m not going to attack him as a man,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “I will say, whether he’s up to it or not, whether he’s making his own decisions—the decisions that are coming out of the White House are bad decisions.”

  President Biden is not scheduled to appear in Democrat primary debates, a decision Mr. Kennedy believes the president should reconsider.

  “I think it would be better if we have a democracy where every candidate debates,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “I suppose he is making a strategic decision that’s based upon his own interest, but I think we’re living in a period when people have lost faith in the democratic process, and they think the system is rigged.”

  President Joe Biden and President Trump should take the debate stage as a sign of respect for American voters, Mr. Kennedy said.

  

  Then-President Donald Trump and then-Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden participate in the final presidential debate at Belmont University in Nashville, Tenn., on Oct. 22, 2020. (Jim Bourg/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

  “Americans shouldn’t feel like we live in the Soviet Union, where the party picks the candidates. I think it would be much better for our democracy, and we’d be a better example for the world and improve our credibility with the American people if we actually allowed democracy to function and all the candidates participated in debates, and town halls, and retail politics.

  “It is important for the Democratic Party that there is a primary debate. Ultimately, a Democrat will debate a Republican, and the Republican will likely be Trump. He is probably the most successful debater in this country since Lincoln Douglas,” said Mr. Kennedy, noting how President Trump defeated a crowded pool of Republican primary candidates in 2016.

  “He has his own technique that people like. It’s like going into a prize fight. You need practice, and that usually happens in the primary,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “Asking the president to not debate in the primary is like asking a prizefighter to practice by sitting on the couch.”

  In South Carolina, Virginia, and New York City, Mr. Kennedy talked to voters about the economy and issues on which he disagrees with President Biden.

  In Charleston, he criticized the president for continued financial support to Ukraine.

  “One of the big problems we have in our federal government is the addiction to war,” Mr. Kennedy said. “President Biden went to Congress and asked for another $24 billion for the Ukraine War.

  “We’ve spent $8 trillion dollars on wars since 9/11. If we kept that money home, we would’ve had child care for every American. We would have free college education for every American. We’d be able to pay for our Social Security system.”

  He believes that he, and not President Biden, is the candidate who will best represent Democrats in 2024 and beyond.

  “I am the only choice that is going to end the war machine, that is going to really focus on rebuilding the American middle class, taming inflation,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  

  (Left) A man shows a Remington 700 hunting rifle and a Remington 1100 shotgun available for sale at Atlantic Outdoors gun shop in Stokesdale, N.C., on March 26, 2018. (Right) Syringes of Moderna COVID-19 vaccines at a vaccination site in Los Angeles on Feb. 16, 2021. (Brian Blanco/Getty Images, Apu Gomes/AFP via Getty Images)

  About gun control, Mr. Kennedy said, “I do not believe that, within that Second Amendment, there is anything we can meaningfully do to reduce the trade and the ownership of guns.”

  “Anybody who tells you that they’re going to reduce gun violence through gun control at this point, I don’t think is being realistic,” he said.

  “I think we have to think about other ways to reduce that violence.”

  Mr. Kennedy did note that he would sign an assault weapons ban if he were president and the legislation was placed on his desk.

  A vocal opponent of the pharmaceutical industry, Mr. Kennedy vowed at a town hall in Brooklyn on Sept. 1 that he would ban pharmaceutical advertising.

  He is outspoken about the dangers of the COVID-19 vaccine for some in the population who were coerced to take them, but he told the Epoch Times that he is not “anti-vaccine.”

  “I’ve never been anti-vaccine,” he said.

  “I’ve said that hundreds and hundreds of times, but it doesn’t matter because that is a way of silencing me. Using that pejorative to describe me is a way of silencing or marginalizing me.”

  Mr. Kennedy has said that, initially, he was not in favor of former President Trump’s border wall. But after seeing the border firsthand in Arizona in July, he changed his mind. He said there is a need for increased infrastructure and technology at the border, including more segments of a physical wall, and sensors in areas where a wall isn’t feasible.

  Until the United States can seal the border, he said he doesn’t think it is possible to get an immigration reform package through Congress.

  

  Illegal immigrants wait in line to be processed by the U.S. Border Patrol after crossing through a gap in the U.S.–Mexico border barrier in Yuma, Ariz., on May 21, 2022. (Mario Tama/Getty Images)

  Mr. Kennedy visited the Arizona–California border with Mexico in early June and met with illegal immigrants, Border Patrol agents, and other stakeholders.

  “The Democratic Party thinks our function should be welcoming all immigrants into the country no matter what, and to basically open the borders. And the experiment has been a disaster, a humanitarian catastrophe,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “I watched it firsthand. I watched 300 people come across the border and then be processed and sent to locations all over the country with court dates seven years down the road.”

  “There’s now seven million people who have come across illegally and have no legal status in this country. Those people are very vulnerable now to unscrupulous employers who are paying them $5 and $6 an hour,” he said.

  Mr. Kennedy called the Biden administration’s open border policy “a way of funding a multibillion-dollar drug and human trafficking operation for the Mexican drug cartels.”

  “As president, I will secure the border, which will end the cartel’s drug trafficking economy. I will build wide doors for those who wish to enter legally so that the U.S. can continue to be a beacon to the world where diversity and culture make us great,” he said.

  “Immigration is good for our country, but this kind of immigration is unfair to everybody,” he said.

  Ending the Ukraine War

  Mr. Kennedy has called for de-escalating the war in Ukraine. He explained that he is sympathetic to the Ukrainian cause and added that Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded the country illegally, but he chastised the United States for its role in the conflict.

  “We have neglected many, many opportunities to settle this war peacefully,” he said. “We have turned that nation into a proxy war between Russia and the United States.”

  

  Ukrainian soldiers preparing U.S.-made MK-19 automatic grenade launcher towards at a front line near Toretsk, Ukraine, on Oct. 12, 2022. (Yasuyoshi Chiba/AFP via Getty Images)

  Mr. Kennedy has urged President Biden to negotiate a peaceful end to the Russia-Ukraine war, which started when Russia invaded the neighboring nation in February 2022.

  “Russia is not going to lose this war. Russia can’t afford it,” Mr. Kennedy said. “It would be like us losing a war to Mexico.”

  As part of his reasoning for ending the Ukraine war, Mr. Kennedy referenced his uncle, President John F. Kennedy.

  “My uncle Jack said that the primary job of an American President of the United States is to keep the country out of war. He kept out of Vietnam. He sent only 16,000 military advisers there—mainly Green Berets,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “In October 1963, he learned that one of his Green Berets had died, and he asked his aide to give him a combat casualty list, and the aide came back and said 75 had died so far. He said: ‘That’s too many.’”

  The American Dream

  When it comes to supporting labor unions, Mr. Kennedy’s ideas are similar to President Biden’s.

  “In my administration, you can expect vigorous action by the Justice Department and the Department of Labor to enforce laws against union-busting and unfair labor practices,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “We will also raise the minimum wage so that unions have a higher floor from which to bargain. We will negotiate trade treaties that don’t pit American workers against low-wage foreign workers in a race to the bottom.”

  At his campaign stops. Mr. Kennedy likes to talk about the flourishing economic period the nation experienced after World War II.

  “I grew up during the heyday of American economic prosperity. It was in the 1950s and 1960s that the archetype of the American Dream was born. It was not something available only to a lucky few; it was within the reach of most Americans,” he said.

  “A single wage-earner with a high school education at that time could own a home, raise a family, have vacations, and save for retirement. That is how it should be. If you work hard, you should have a decent life.”

  Mr. Kennedy said that, if elected president, he would create a 3 percent mortgage for Americans guaranteed by the government and funded by the sale of tax-free bonds. He would also work to make it less profitable for large corporations to own single-family homes in the United States.

  “If you have a rich uncle who co-signs your mortgage, you will get a lower interest rate because the bank looks at his credit rating. I’m going to give everyone a rich uncle, and his name is Uncle Sam,” Mr. Kennedy said at a recent town hall in Spartanburg, South Carolina.

  The first 500,000 of those 3 percent mortgages would be reserved for teachers, he said.

  “Both President Trump and President Biden are running on platforms that they’ve brought prosperity to this country. But when I travel around South Carolina and other states, I’m not seeing that,” Mr. Kennedy told an audience in Charleston.

  “I’m seeing people who are living at a level of desperation that I have not seen in this country—ever.”

  Corporations Killing the Dream

  Making it easier for Americans to buy single-family homes without competing against institutional investors is a priority, Mr. Kennedy said.

  A Wall Street Journal report in 2021 showed that 200 corporations were aggressively buying tens of thousands of single-family houses, including entire neighborhoods, and significantly increasing rental prices.

  According to data reviewed by Stateline, investors purchased 24 percent of the single-family homes bought in 2021. In 2022, the number climbed to 28 percent of single-family home purchases, according to the organization.

  A MetLife Financial Management study contends that institutional investors could own up to 40 percent of single-family homes by 2030

  Calling the issue a “crisis,” Mr. Kennedy put the blame on asset management behemoths like BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard.

  A 2017 paper published by Cambridge University Press reported that the three firms constitute the largest shareholder in 88 percent of S&P 500 firms.

  “And now they have a new target, which is to gain ownership of all the single-family residences in this country. And they are on a trajectory to do that,” Mr. Kennedy told an audience in Greenville, South Carolina.

  “Usually, when a company buys a home with a cash offer, there is an LLC with an ambiguous name. It often can be traced back to one of those big companies,” he said.

  Mr. Kennedy noted that Larry Fink, the CEO of BlackRock, is a World Economic Forum (WEF) board member.

  “The WEF is a billionaire boys club that meets in Davos every year and has a plan, which is New World Order and what they have called the Great Reset,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “Klaus Schwab, who wrote the book on that agenda, says that you will own nothing and you will be happy. They are well on their way to accomplishing that first part.”

  At every stop in South Carolina, Mr. Kennedy said that one of his first priorities as president would be to change the tax code so that “it will be less profitable for large corporations to own single-family homes.”

  Curbing credit card debt is another way to help more Americans achieve home ownership and become more financially comfortable.

  “Many Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. The average income in this country is $5,000 less than the average cost of living. What that means is people have to make up the difference by putting those expenses on credit cards,” Mr. Kennedy told a crowd in Richmond, Virginia.

  “We recently reached a milestone in this country with more than $1 trillion in personal credit card debt,” Mr. Kennedy said, adding that many creditors are charging interest rates of 22 percent and higher.

  “If it was the mafia, it would be loan sharking, and they would go to jail, but for banks and credit card companies, it is considered the cost of doing business.”

  Before concluding his remarks about credit card debt, Mr. Kennedy posed a question to the audience.

  “Who do you think owns many of those companies?” he asked.

  “BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard. They are strip mining the wealth of the American public, and their political clout allows them to do that.”

  Primary Season

  Under a new format, South Carolina will hold the first Democratic presidential primary on Feb. 3. Earlier this year, encouraged by President Biden, the DNC voted to strip the Iowa caucus of its traditional lead-off spot in the party’s presidential nominating process and replace it with South Carolina.

  In late August, as Mr. Kennedy traveled around South Carolina, he stopped in Orangeburg to officially open a statewide campaign office.

  

  Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks at a town hall at a home in Spartanburg, S.C. on Aug. 22, 2023. (Jeff Louderback/The Epoch Times)

  New Hampshire has long been the country’s—and the GOP’s—first primary after the Iowa caucuses. Under the Democrats’ new calendar, which differs from the Republicans’ primary calendar, it would vote with Nevada on Feb. 6.

  Because of the move, President Biden’s name might not appear on New Hampshire’s Democrat primary ballot.

  The DNC rules panel gave New Hampshire and Iowa until Sept. 1 to comply with new rules or face possible sanctions. Republican and Democrat legislators in New Hampshire have said that they won’t adhere to the schedule change, saying state law prohibits the move.

  If President Biden’s name doesn’t appear on the ballot, that would leave Mr. Kennedy to compete with author Marianne Williamson in the New Hampshire primary.

  New Hampshire’s Democratic party leaders have said that a longtime state law requires that their primary be scheduled ahead of any other primary.

  In 2020, candidate Joe Biden lost the Democratic caucus in Iowa and the primary in New Hampshire before winning decisively in South Carolina. He has said that South Carolina more accurately represents the party’s diverse voting base.

  “Everyone knows the real reason the DNC made the change. The people of South Carolina didn’t ask for it. No, it is simply another undemocratic attempt to rig the primary process in favor of their anointed candidate, Joe Biden,” he added.

  “The DNC seems to have forgotten the purpose of the modern primary system to begin with, which was to replace backroom crony politics with a transparent democratic process,” Mr. Kennedy added.

  “If the Biden campaign thinks they can win with administrative tricks and evasions, they will be in for a rude surprise in both New Hampshire and South Carolina.

  First Office in New Hampshire

  Mr. Kennedy opened his first office in New Hampshire in August.

  “New Hampshire plays an important role in American democracy because they have this history, and they have a cultural affinity for vetting candidates early on in the process, and they do a very good job of it,” Mr. Kennedy told The Epoch Times.

  “In many other states, politicians can fly over at 30,000 feet and carpet bomb the state with billions of dollars in advertising. It’s kind of a kabuki theater of democracy rather than real democracy,” he said.

  “In Iowa, you go to the farms and stock sales. In New Hampshire, you have to go to the barber shops and the nail salons and the diners, and you have to shake hands with people, and you have to answer difficult questions and then follow-up questions. You get to know people, and that is important.”

  Mr. Kennedy recalls campaign trips with his uncle and father in the 1960s.

  

  Supporters gather around then-presidential candidate John F. Kennedy during one of his campaigns at a shopping center in Maryland on May 12, 1960. (Library of Congress)

  “I remember the crowds and the enthusiasm. That is what we are seeing at our events. Enthusiasm. Intensity,” he said.

  “There’s nothing like meeting people face to face and hearing their concerns. When we were in New Hampshire, we had one event in a sparsely populated area in one of the most northern counties, and we drove down a long dirt road. I thought, ‘How is anyone going to show up at this event?’ and we had 500 people there. That is inspiring.”

  Mr. Kennedy supports abortion in the first three months of pregnancy.

  “I can argue there’s nobody in this country that has worked harder for the rights of medical freedom and personal bodily autonomy than me,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “That applies to the vaccines and abortion.

  “I don’t think the government should be telling us what to do with our bodies and dictating for Americans what we can and cannot do in the first three months of pregnancy. It’s a woman’s choice.”

  That stance could cost him potential support from conservatives, he conceded.

  “I’ve seen photos of late-term abortions, and they’re horrifyingly troubling,” Mr. Kennedy said. “I respect people who have different points of view, and for people who say that ‘it’s the only issue that I care about,’ they will likely vote for someone else because of my beliefs.

  “If you’re a one-issue voter, and that’s something that you deeply care about, I might not be the right candidate for you,” he added. “But I feel like there’s a lot of people now who want authenticity in their political leadership, and they want somebody who’s going to tell them the truth.”

  Censorship

  Also ranking high among issues Mr. Kennedy feels strongly about is censorship—from the government as well as Big Tech.

  He has filed legal action against the Biden administration and Google, among other entities, for alleged censorship. He has appeared before Congress to testify about the issue.

  “I was censored not just by a Democratic administration, I was censored by the Trump administration. I was the first person censored by the Biden administration, two days after he came into office,” Mr. Kennedy told the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government in July.

  

  Robert Kennedy Jr. (R), 2024 Presidential hopeful, is sworn in before testifying at the “Weaponization of the Federal Government” hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington on July 20, 2023. (Jim WATSON / AFP)

  In February 2021, he was barred from Instagram, for what owner Meta described as breaking its rules regarding COVID-19.

  At the time, a company spokesperson said Instagram removed Mr. Kennedy’s account for “repeatedly sharing debunked claims about the coronavirus or vaccines.”

  In June, Instagram restored the account.

  “As he is now an active candidate for president of the United States, we have restored access to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s, Instagram account,” Andy Stone, a spokesperson for Meta, said in a June 4 statement.

  Mr. Kennedy’s Facebook account has remained active.

  Meta removed Instagram and Facebook accounts belonging to Children’s Health Defense (CHD), Mr. Kennedy’s non-profit. CHD, according to its website, advocates to “end childhood health epidemics by working aggressively to eliminate harmful exposures, hold those responsible accountable, and establish safeguards to prevent future harm.”

  Meta said that the CHD accounts were banned because they repeatedly violated the company’s COVID-19 policies. Mr. Kennedy still bristles at the move.

  “Silencing a major political candidate is profoundly undemocratic,” he said.

  “Social media is the modern equivalent of the town square. How can democracy function if only some candidates have access to it?”

  Allegations of Anti-Semitism

  What bothers Mr. Kennedy even more are accusations earlier this year that he is “anti-Semitic.”

  At a gathering in July, a secretly recorded video was leaked to the media where Mr. Kennedy can be heard describing research that reported that the COVID-19 virus disproportionately affected Caucasian and black people while being comparably mild for Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people, whom Mr. Kennedy suggested had a stronger immune response to the virus.

  Democrats and other critics of Mr. Kennedy condemned the comments as “racist” and “anti-Semitic.”

  Mr. Kennedy has vehemently denied the allegations.

  At the July 20 House hearing on censorship, Democrats attempted to prevent him from testifying. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) introduced a motion to move the hearing into executive session, which would have closed the hearing from public view.

  “Mr. Kennedy has repeatedly made despicable anti-Semitic and anti-Asian remarks as recently as last week,” Ms. Wasserman Schultz said, citing a section of House rules that she said Mr. Kennedy’s comments violated.

  In a recorded vote, all 10 Republicans present at the hearing voted to shelve Ms. Wasserman Schultz’s motion. All eight Democrats present voted in favor of the motion.

  Mr. Kennedy testified that he has “never uttered a phrase that was racist or anti-Semitic,” and he continued to defend himself on July 25 in New York at a World Values Network presidential candidate series event.

  Just as he said in July, Mr. Kennedy pointedly refuted the claims that he is anti-Semitic.

  “I’ve been involved in controversial issues for most of my career. Usually, it doesn’t affect me,” he said.

  “The accusation of anti-Semitism cuts me and hurts me. It hurts Cheryl [Hines, Kennedy’s wife]. It hurts our family, and so that was painful.

  “I’ve literally never said an anti-Semitic word in my life, but I believe they [Democrats on the House committee] probably thought whatever they were doing was right in one way or another,” he said.

  “There’s a way to censor people through targeted character assassination. You use vile accusations to marginalize them, and that is the kind of censorship I’m now dealing with,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  The Democratic contender concluded his comments about censorship with a message that reflects a key component of his campaign platform

  “If we’re going to really heal the divide between Americans—which is one of the things that I’m trying to do with this campaign—we can’t react even to hatred with hatred. We have to react with forgiveness. React with kindness and react with generosity,” Mr. Kennedy stated.

  “Harboring resentment is like swallowing poison and hoping someone else dies. It corrodes our souls.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 17:30

• CNN's Van Jones Sounds Alarm Over 'Grandpa' Joe Biden Running In 2024
  CNN’s Van Jones Sounds Alarm Over ‘Grandpa’ Joe Biden Running In 2024

  After seeing this shitshow of a performance by President Biden at the pos-G20-Summit press conference, how can anyone be surprised that even the most vehement ‘believer in ‘Bidenomics’ has had enough…

  I can’t believe @DNC is going to run him in 2024 pic.twitter.com/kSg89RpUMW

  — Quoth the Raven (@QTRResearch) September 10, 2023

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

  Reality appears to be setting in for Democrats after a recent poll revealed that two-thirds of Democrat-leaning voters don’t want President Biden to run in 2024, 82% of whom said they want “just someone besides Joe Biden.”

  

  Jones, a former Obama adviser, was asked by co-host Poppy Harlow on “CNN This Morning” about recent comments from former Obama aide Jim Messina, who told Politico Playbook that Democrats worried about recent polls are “fucking bedwetters.”

  “If Jim Messina says that we’re bedwetters, invest in Pampers and Depends because a lot of people are terrified that Joe Biden is in real trouble and that you can’t talk about it,” Jones said, adding “So that’s what’s going on.“

  That said, Jones did admit that Messina “is right” in that “is right” since “it may, in fact, be true that a year from now things look very different because there’s been a year of a real campaign, and all this kind of stuff.”

  “But right now, today, I think a lot of Democrats look at these numbers and say the whispers are finally showing up in this data,” Jones said of a recent CNN poll in which Biden’s approval rating has dropped to just 39% – with voters concerned about his advanced age and declining mental faculties.

  Watch:

  The Left is turning on Biden. Newsom Time?

  New CNN Poll: Two-thirds of Dem voters said they would prefer someone other than Biden

  CNN’s Van Jones on Dem worries about Biden: ‘Would you give this Grandpa a high-stress job for six more years?’ pic.twitter.com/jtFWNLzHEd

  — RPK Report (@RPKReport) September 7, 2023

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js“They worry about Joe Biden,” Jones continued, adding “Joe Biden’s like that grandpa that you love, that you believe in.”

  (That takes ‘probably inappropriate‘ showers with his daughter?)

  “But you start to wonder, you know, would you give this grandpa a high-stress job for six more years or would you want something else for him?”

  Frankly, the fact that the president’s aides had to play him out tells you all you need to know about the struggles The White House is having to hide Biden’s degradation…

  WATCH: Joe Biden’s staff cuts off a rambling Joe Biden mid-sentence and abruptly ends his news conference.

  I have never seen this occur with any other president. pic.twitter.com/LqvW2VsESH

  — Andrew @ Don’t Walk, RUN! (@DontWalkRUN) September 10, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 17:00

• The G18: When Neither China Nor Russia Show Up
  The G18: When Neither China Nor Russia Show Up

  By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

  Maybe it is the new math, but is it really the G20 when neither China nor Russia show up?

  I’m not sure anyone really expected Russia to show up. Leaving the borders of Russia is not the best thing that Putin could do for his own safety or security. The fact that China (Xi) did not attend is more interesting. I haven’t seen an official statement as to why he did not attend, but I have read that the reasons could include anything from “solidarity with Putin” (which seems unlikely) to “escalating tensions along the Himalayan border between China and India” (was not on my radar screen) to “a fractious tone at the recent Beidaihe meeting” (which has come up in some of our recent geopolitical discussions). There is a Nikkei article alleging that Xi was reprimanded by party elders at this year’s Beidaihe meeting. Is it possible that questions about the domestic economy kept him from the G20? I don’t know, but earlier this year China abruptly changed their zero-Covid strategy after a series of protests were reported.

  I don’t know why Xi did not attend the G20, but it doesn’t strike me as a good sign for global relations.

  The G18 (or G20) issued a statement about the war in Ukraine (which was apparently not critical enough of Russia) citing risks to the global economy (see The Economist Who Cried Recession) and included some climate initiatives (which I am not overly optimistic about given the fact that China didn’t attend).

  Made By China

  I continue to argue that one way for China to extricate itself from its current economic weakness is to sell more of their own brands (see China’s Next Move).

  The following helps support that view:

  • The yuan is on the cusp of record weakness.

  

  This weakness should provide a competitive advantage for Chinese exports.

  • There have been reports that certain phones and products will be banned for employees of certain Chinese government entities. That would presumably create an opportunity for Chinese brands. I have not seen a confirmation of this ban, but the market certainly responded to headlines about this on Thursday.
  • Huawei’s latest phone incorporates 7 nanometer chips made by SMIC. This is impressive technology and has reportedly caught the attention of the U.S. Commerce Department.

  I continue to believe that one of the most underpriced risks (in the market and in corporate boardrooms) is the potential for rapid growth in the sale of Chinese brands. The events of the past week have only reinforced that view.

  In the meantime, I’m looking for China to ramp up support for their economy in the coming days and weeks. So far, they have only done some things at the margin and markets have not been impressed.

  Inflation versus a Slowdown

  This week the “inflation” camp won. Yields increased across the curve and there was a small uptick in the probability of another rate hike this year (still less than 50% though). That seemed to weigh on the stock market as we are in a “good news is bad” mode.

  think that the move in rates is overdone, and they should drift lower (I’m looking for 4% on 10s) which would be good for risk assets (especially if accompanied by some new and larger stimulus measures in China).

  I am leaning more towards the belief that the “soft landing” view will be challenged in the coming weeks as we get new data. The anecdotal evidence seems to be pointing towards slowing spending/growth in many areas. This should show up in the data if the anecdotes are broadly representative of the state of the economy (and I believe that they are).

  I’m getting nervous about the current state of the economy (there are some potentially large headwinds if I’m correct on China’s strategy), but I am still bullish risk for a trade (betting on “bad news is good news” at least until we get sub 4% on 10s).

  I would have liked to see a G19 and am curious why Xi did not attend. It could be a “nothing burger” but it is curious to say the least.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 16:30

• Alpha
  Alpha

  By Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

  Alpha

  “It requires that you think holistically about your portfolio,” said the CIO of a sovereign wealth fund, somewhere in Asia Pacific. “It’s the way you’d think in my seat. You’d look at the overall risk, netted off across all the portfolio positions,” he said. “It’s similar to running a multi-strat fund with a comprehensive risk management structure and a center book, the difference being that we are by design long the market rather than market neutral.” We were talking about a Total Portfolio approach to investment management. Of the largest pools of investment capital in the world, several of the leading performers are run in such a way.

  “Typical large investment funds have asset class teams, and each will try to optimize its own portfolio, its own allocation,” continued the same CIO. “Whereas we try to optimize across the whole portfolio, every asset class, all opportunities, at least conceptually,” he said. “If you go down the route of having asset class teams, you somehow need to find how to compare the returns of capital across asset classes and manage a competition for capital so that you allocate to the best investment. There’s always a conflict between bottom up and top down.”

  “We organized ourselves in a different way,” he said. “We have a whole team of generalists and hopefully they can do anything,” he said. “But the reality is that you naturally get market segmentation. And expertise on certain asset classes and sectors is very important.” So, he’s been trying to increase the degree of specialization across the investment team without losing the whole of portfolio approach. “And it gets harder at the size we’re running at,” he admitted.

  “One of our key advantages is that we have a very long-term horizon,” he explained. “It allows us to have quite a high risk appetite.” They take substantial active risk around their reference portfolio, accepting the volatility required to generate alpha. “We think about where we have structural advantages, where and why we may have a better chance of making money than others in such a competitive marketplace.” They don’t require short term cash flows. “We can really look through situations, events, dislocations, see across the chasms.”

  “Perhaps our biggest advantage is governance,” he explained. “You can only really think long-term if you have real buy in from your investors,” he said. “We have only one investor, a clear mission, and strong buy in.” As a sovereign wealth fund, they have access to unique investment opportunities, managers, and certain reputational advantages too. “We’ve been able to stick with our strategy because people have bought into it. And of course, if there were ever a few years of negative returns, that could be tested. But the philosophy has worked well.”

  Anecdote:

  “Conceptually it’s very easy,” said the CIO. “Practically it’s very hard,” he continued. A lovely winter day in August, the world upside down. We were discussing dynamic asset allocation, which for them consists of adjusting one’s portfolio to lean against powerful market trends. “It is the part of our investment program that our peers are most interested in discussing.” He leads a sovereign wealth fund with the world’s top performance for the past decade. To outperform requires investors do those things others generally do not. Defying the crowd at such scale is high art.

  “We base our dynamic asset allocation decisions mostly on relative valuations. It is a mean reversion process that capitalizes on volatility harvesting. And at times we will underperform, even have substantial drawdowns, but in the long run it has produced tremendous alpha.” In 2021-22 the approach helped contribute to the portfolio outperforming its 80/20 equity/bond benchmark by 700bps.

  “If you’re entering a high-volatility trending environment, the strategy is not very good. But if you’re entering a high-volatility non-trending environment, it is quite a good approach,” he said. “The periods that are both most challenging and ultimately rewarding are when you’ve had markets selling off a lot and your long position gets bigger and bigger, your liquidity is drawing down. You need to have the right limits at those times, and our limits are bigger than others because of our long horizon,” he said. 

  “When that happens, like it did during Covid, when the collapse was faster and deeper than we thought it should be, it made us wonder, do we understand the underlying distribution?” Such periods torture those who risk defying the crowd, because of course, no one can outperform without paying a steep price, emotionally, mentally, physically. “It made us consider, if something is at an extreme, do we feel more confident that it will revert? Or less confident, because perhaps we don’t understand the underlying system?”

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 15:30

• "Who Is Biden Working For?" Admin Under Fire For 'Illegal, Reckless' Cancellation Of Alaska Oil Leases
  “Who Is Biden Working For?” Admin Under Fire For ‘Illegal, Reckless’ Cancellation Of Alaska Oil Leases

  Did someone pay Bidens to weaken the United States?

  After canceling the Keystone XL pipeline project, draining the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to dangerously low levels (some of which was sold to a Hunter Biden-linked Chinese energy giant), and vowing “no more oil drilling” on US soil while America’s geopolitical adversaries – two of whom paid his family handsomely – beef up their own energy independence, the Biden administration has done it again.

  

  Last week the regime confirmed that it will cancel seven controversial oil and gas leases in an area of Alaska known as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), which were legally awarded from a 2021 sale.

  “On day one of this administration, President Biden directed us to look at the oil and gas leases sold in the refuge by the previous administration,” said Interior Secretary Deb Haaland in a Wednesday call with reporters. “What we have found in our analysis is that the lease sale itself was seriously flawed and based on a number of fundamental legal deficiencies.”

  Biden, in a written statement, said that the move will “help preserve our Arctic lands and wildlife, while honoring the culture, history, and enduring wisdom of Alaska Natives who have lived on these lands since time immemorial.”

  “As the climate crisis warms the Arctic more than twice as fast as the rest of the world, we have a responsibility to protect this treasured region for all ages,” the statement continues, adding “My administration will continue to take bold action to meet the urgency of the climate crisis and to protect our lands and waters for generations to come.”

  The administration also proposed a rule on Wednesday that would protect 13 million acres in a different part of Alaska.

  In short, NIMBYism (or something more nefarious) meets National Security…

  China currently holds 96% of global copper inventories, 75% of global aluminum, 70% of corn, 54% of wheat, 30% of soybeans and 22% of crude oil: JPM

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 24, 2023

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

  In response, Fox Business host and former Trump administration official Larry Kudlow blasted Biden, saying that this latest energy policy aides Russia, Iran and Venezuela, and is “sheer insanity.”

  “Biden is … playing into the hands of some of the worst actors in the world. I’ve never seen anything… and damaging, obviously, consumers and businesses here at home,” said Kudlow, adding “This is insanity. Sheer insanity.”

  “Who is Biden working for?” asked one X user in response to Kudlow’s segment.

  Watch:

  West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin also slammed the Biden administration over the move, calling the decisions an attempt to weaken American energy security.

  “This is yet another example of this administration caving to the radical left with no regard for clear direction from Congress or American energy security,” said Manchin. “Let’s be clear — this is another attempt to use executive action to circumvent a law to accomplish what this administration does not have the votes to achieve in Congress.”

  

  “Canceling valid leases, removing acreage from future sales, and attempting to reduce production in Alaska while taking steps to allow Iran and Venezuela to produce more oil — with fewer environmental regulations — makes no sense and is frankly embarrassing,” Manchin concluded.

  As Jack Gist opines in The Western Journal,

  Why would the Biden administration make such a move? I’m not the only one who thinks it’s crazy.

  “These decisions are illegal, reckless, defy all common sense, and are the latest signs of an incoherent energy policy from President Biden,” Alaska GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski declared in a news release.

  Murkowski is an on-again-off-again Republican who is often courted by Democrats for her vote. For her to sound off against the Biden administration is telling.

  In the same news release, Dan Sullivan, Alaska’s other Republican senator, said, “Not only is this an affront to the rule of law, it’s also a grave injustice to the Inupiat people of the North Slope, especially the people of Kaktovik — the only village in ANWR.”

  According to Politico, Sullivan told reporters on Capitol Hill that Biden officials “love to talk about racial equity, racial justice, environmental justice, taking care of people of color, but one big exception — the Indigenous people of Alaska. They screw ’em every time.”

  Sullivan is spot-on except for one point. The Indigenous people of Alaska are not the only ones getting the shaft.

  Progressives have made a concerted effort to appropriate the word “justice” in an effort to subvert its meaning. They claim the moral high ground while at the same time disdaining morality. For progressives, there is no justice and therefore no morality. There is only power.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 15:00

• "See You In Court": Gun Owners of America Sues Tyrannical New Mexico Governor
  “See You In Court”: Gun Owners of America Sues Tyrannical New Mexico Governor

  Submitted by Gun Owners of America,

  New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham declared gun violence a “public health emergency” in response to recent deadly shootings in Albuquerque.

  While the anti-gun lobby and their allies in the corporate media have long championed the idea that gun violence constitutes a public health emergency, this is the first time after the COVID-19 pandemic that public health has been used as a guise to limit law-abiding citizens Second Amendment rights unconstitutionally.

  We staunchly oppose the tyrannical decision of @govMLG to suspend the constitutional rights of law-abiding New Mexico citizens.

  The right to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed and her actions constitute a significant infringement on your Second Amendment rights.

  — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) September 9, 2023

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

  While the public health order may stop law-abiding citizens from carrying firearms to defend themselves in Albuquerque, it certainly will not deter criminals, who often do not have permits to carry firearms, whether open or concealed in the first place.

  In fact, concealed carry permit holders are some of the country’s most “law-abiding” citizens. For example, those who hold concealed carry permits in Texas are 14 times less likely to commit a crime than an average person.

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

  At risk of stating what should be obvious, deliberately violating the Constitution is next-level illegal.

  How soon can this person be removed from office?

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 9, 2023

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

  So why would Gov. Grisham issue a tyrannical order like this? Well, it’s simple. Because this is a trial run for something much larger.

  Since the landmark decision in NYSRPA v. Bruen, which affirmed that the Second Amendment extends outside the home, anti-gun politicians nationwide have had to resort to drastic measures to Americans’ right to a firearm.

  Using emergency orders to suspend constitutional rights in response to a tragedy is backward thinking at its finest. It leaves law-abiding citizens more vulnerable to the criminals who committed those violent acts in the first place.

  The Governor of New Mexico has just declared the 1st & 2nd Amendment “does not exist” due to an “emergency.”

  Under this legal theory *all* of our “rights” are essentially eliminated.

  Watch the most evil & tyrannical 60 seconds you’ve ever heard from a politician: pic.twitter.com/xLpMSTbyi2

  — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) September 9, 2023

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

  These unconstitutional actions taken by Governor Grisham are unacceptable and will undoubtedly cause more violence and harm to the public. 

  We urge Gov. Grisham to reverse course immediately and if she doesn’t then we will be seeing her in court. 👏

  — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) September 9, 2023

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

  Gun Owners of America has officially filed a lawsuit against the tyrannical governor. 

  🚨BREAKING🚨⁰⁰GOA and @GunFoundation have officially filed our lawsuit against NM Governor Grisham and her tyrannical executive order banning firearm carry.

  See you in court! 🔥

  — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) September 10, 2023

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

   See you in court, Governor Grisham.

  *   *   * 

  We’ll hold the line for you in Washington. We are No Compromise. Join the Fight Now.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 14:30

• Austrian Economics Vs. CBDC, ESG, UBI, And Other Newfangled Socioeconomic Gimmicks
  Austrian Economics Vs. CBDC, ESG, UBI, And Other Newfangled Socioeconomic Gimmicks

  Authored by Jakub Bożydar Wiśniewski via the Mises Institute,

  The Austrian school – on account of the logical, deductive character of its theories and their realistic applicability to the actual economy – is the only economic tradition that consciously aspires to the discovery of timeless, universally relevant truths that govern the realm of human action. Thus, it should come as no surprise that its analytical apparatus is naturally suitable for the evaluation of all the recent newfangled socioeconomic phenomena.

  

  For example, in view of its reflection about the logical essence of the sound means of exchange, the Austrian school sends serious warning signals regarding the notorious concept of CBDCs (central bank digital currencies). More specifically, it points out that CBDC is nothing else but fiat money on steroids, which allows for an unprecedented redistribution of monetary purchasing power in the direction of special interest groups, as well as for immediate monetization of public debt. Worse still, the establishment of a global CBDC platform would be a major step in the direction of eliminating currency competition, which, as the Austrians suggest, is the best among imperfect anti-inflationary buffers in a world deprived of market-chosen money.

  Successful implementation of CBCDs would lethally infect the lifeblood of the global economy, causing unprecedentedly ruinous business cycles, endlessly distorted monetary calculation, and eventually a worldwide disintegration of indirect exchange. Nothing should be less surprising, especially to the Austrians, since the abovementioned situation would be the exact opposite of the monetary stability and predictability afforded by the classical gold standard.

  Similarly, in light of its considerations on the crucial role of economic calculation in the process of rational allocation of resources, the Austrians are naturally wary of the aggressively pushed “ESG standards”. This is because these standards, while parading around in the costume of “good business practices” are a major factor that disrupts business calculation with arbitrary, ideologically charged obstructions manufactured by the global bureaucratic-corporate oligarchy. As such, far from being a form of genuine social capital that builds trust on the part of customers, they are a potent source of ideological confusion and bureaucratic uniformization that hamper the process of generating authentic goodwill by socially proactive companies.

  Nevertheless, the ubiquity of such arbitrary pseudo-market standards can plunge the economy into an abyss of legal uncertainty, especially if some political regimes decide to enforce them as part of their “sustainable development” agenda. And it is precisely in such scenarios, as the Austrian school stresses repeatedly, that the entrepreneurial capacity for long-term planning becomes particularly hobbled.

  Finally, so-called UBI (“universal basic income”) is easily identified by the Austrians as the most comprehensive and audacious form of Frederic Bastiat’s “great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody” – i.e., the ultimate incarnation of universal parasitism. More specifically, given their sound reflection on the logic of human action and the resulting incentive structure, the Austrians realize full well that large-scale introduction of UBI would result in immediate capital consumption and catapult the global economy back to at least the preindustrial stage.

  In other words, the Austrian school is uniquely positioned to point out that UBI-ism would be a singularly destructive form of communism, since classical Soviet-style communism, even though supremely wasteful, was at least committed to diligence rather than idleness. Thus, it unwittingly nourished the spirit of dedication which, when combined with the spirit of defiance, brought about its eventual collapse. However, nothing similar can be said about UBI-ism, which eliminates the spirit of defiance by promoting universal shiftlessness and indolence.

  In view of all the preceding remarks, it becomes obvious that the convergence of all the abovementioned phenomena would be particularly capable of sealing the fate of the world economy. More specifically, what I mean here is a situation in which UBI would be paid out in CBDC to those who qualify in virtue of their total acceptance of the ESG agenda. Or, to put matters somewhat differently, a situation in which universal parasitism converges with completely cashless monetary totalitarianism and complete submission to contrived ideological whims.

  It goes without saying that such a scenario would be utterly dysfunctional on so many levels and in so many aspects that it would descend into total economic and social chaos in a very short time. However, even if we can rightly regard it as a highly unrealistic or indeed outright absurd contingency, we might at the same time treat it as a hypothetical anti-ideal against which all conceivable forces of resistance – conceptual and practical, academic, and entrepreneurial, and individual and collective – should be proactively rallied. And when it comes to coordinating such forces of resistance and serving as their fail-safe intellectual guide, there is no better candidate than the scholarly edifice of the Austrian school.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 13:30

• Lavrov Gloats: West Failed To "Ukrainize" G20 As Global South Triumphed
  Lavrov Gloats: West Failed To “Ukrainize” G20 As Global South Triumphed

  Previously we noted how despite the best efforts of Washington and its Western partners, the G20 summit was unable to produce a statement condemning Russia and its invasion of Ukraine. Biden clearly failed to rally allies especially among BRICS and global south countries.

  Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who is at the G20 in New Delhi representing the absent President Vladimir Putin, is gloating over the Western allies’ failure at “Ukrainizing” the summit’s agenda, according to his remarks published in Russian media and Reuters.

  He told a Sunday press briefing that the Russian delegation had stood firm “to protect their legitimate interests,” and were thus able “to prevent the West from once again Ukrainizing the entire agenda”. He hailed the summit as a “success”. 

  

  Lavrov then pointed to the G20 agreed upon declaration which merely “mentions the Ukraine crisis, but only in the context of the need to resolve all conflicts” – which he said is language in line with the principles of the UN Charter.

  He further suggested that the US didn’t get its way of turning the Group of 20 into a “politicized club” – but instead the final declaration that was adopted “highlighted the human suffering and negative added impacts of the war in Ukraine with regard to global food and energy security, supply chains, macro-financial stability, inflation and growth.”

  The top Russian diplomat explained that this agenda was thwarted largely through the collective efforts of developing nations and the interests of the global south, led especially by India, the host country. Per Reuters:

  The Global South’s position in the talks helped prevent the G20 agenda from being overshadowed by Ukraine, he told a press conference. “India has truly consolidated G20 members from the Global South.”

  And more via The Moscow Times:

  “The text doesn’t mention Russia at all,” Russia’s veteran diplomat said.

  “The Indian presidency has really managed to coalesce G20 members from the global south,” he added, suggesting that Russian allies like Brazil, South Africa, India and China had made their voices heard.

  CNN had also observed Saturday, “Diplomats had been working furiously to draft a final joint statement in the lead-up to the summit but hit snags on language to describe the Ukraine war.” The mainstream publication then presented it as a defeat for the White House’s hopes: “The eventual compromise statement amounted to a coup for the summit’s host, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, but still reflected a position far softer those the United States and its Western allies have adopted individually.”

  The section of the G20 declaration where the US, UK and Europe hoped to include more teeth indeed failed to so much as mention Russia at all. “All states must refrain from the threat or use of force to seek territorial acquisition,” it reads. And the declaration added more mutedly: “there were different views and assessments of the situation.”

  Some pundits noted that the final declaration’s language was very favorable to Moscow’s view of the conflict…

  🔹And then we removed all wordings such as ‘Russian aggression’ & ‘condemn’ from the G20 resolution! 😂

  🔹Wait, it’s even better. It’s now called “war IN Ukraine” and not “war AGAINST Ukraine.”😂😂

  Modi and Lavrov at #G20Summit2023

  Big win for Putin. Big L for Sleepy Biden. pic.twitter.com/odh4BTnCJy

  — S.L. Kanthan (@Kanthan2030) September 10, 2023

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

  French President Emmanuel Macron tried to salvage it as in no way a diplomatic victory for Russia, telling a press conference, “This G20 confirms once again the isolation of Russia. Today, an overwhelming majority of G20 members condemn the war in Ukraine and its impact.”

  But at the same time, Japan’s Prime Minister Fumio Kishida underscored the fractured perspective and disunity on sensitive issue. “Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is something that could shake the foundation of cooperation at G20,” he admitted.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 09/10/2023 – 13:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Scientists Create Human "Entity" That Has No Mother Or Father
  Scientists Create Human “Entity” That Has No Mother Or Father

  Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse Blog,

  Scientists all over the world continue to “play God”, and we are all going to have to live with the consequences. 

  

  Every single day, incredibly bizarre experiments are being conducted in secret laboratories all over the planet.  I have frequently warned my readers about the very deadly diseases that are being developed in such laboratories, but other types of extremely sick experiments are happening as well.  For example, it is being reported that one team of researchers has now been able to create a human “entity” that does not have a mother or a father.  In fact, it was created “without using sperm, an egg or a womb”…

  Scientists report they have grown the early stages of a human embryo-like entity without using sperm, an egg or a womb.

  The ’embryo model’ even releases hormones that triggered a positive pregnancy test.

  This is like something out of a science fiction novel.

  Why in the world would they even consider doing something like this?

  They are telling us that using such “entities” will make medical research easier, and frankly that makes me want to vomit.

  There is no way that doing this sort of thing should be legal.

  But it is.

  This team of researchers was able to create a human “entity” without a mother or a father by starting with naive stem cells…

  Instead of a sperm and egg, the starting material was naive stem cells which were reprogrammed to gain the potential to become any type of tissue in the body.

  According to the BBC, chemicals were used to encourage these stem cells to develop into four unique cell types that are involved in the earliest stages of human embryo development…

  • epiblast cells, which become the embryo proper (or foetus)
  • trophoblast cells, which become the placenta
  • hypoblast cells, which become the supportive yolk sac
  • extraembryonic mesoderm cells

  Those cell types were then “mixed in a precise ratio”, and what happened next is extremely alarming…

  A total of 120 of these cells were mixed in a precise ratio – and then, the scientists step back and watch.

  About 1% of the mixture began the journey of spontaneously assembling themselves into a structure that resembles, but is not identical to, a human embryo.

  Professor Jacob Hanna of the Weizmann Institute is the leader of the team that conducted this research, and he claims that the “entity” which was produced “is really a textbook image of a human day-14 embryo”…

  ‘This is really a textbook image of a human day-14 embryo, [which] hasn’t been done before,’ said Professor Hanna.

  If such an entity can survive to that stage, could it go all the way and actually become a full-blown baby?

  Now that this breakthrough has been achieved, it is just a matter of time before someone tries to do that.

  And just imagine the implications if this eventually starts happening on a widespread basis.

  Babies could literally be grown on a massive scale all over the globe.

  Instead of having children the natural way, parents could just order a baby that meets certain specifications.

  And any babies that came out with “defects” would inevitably be discarded.

  Alternatively, it is easy to imagine entire armies being “grown” by tyrannical rulers just like we have seen in certain science fiction movies.

  Would such “entities” be truly human?

  Would they even have souls?

  There is so much that we don’t know, and hopefully this sort of work will be banned so that we will never find out.

  Unfortunately, there is very little holding the scientific community back at this point.

  Most of the general population has no idea what is going on in these secret labs, and most of our politicians don’t seem to care.

  And so “science” will continue to advance all over the globe with very little resistance at all.

  In addition to experiments that are creating new life, researchers are also searching for ways to cheat death.

  In recent years, swapping blood with the young has become a very hot trend among America’s billionaires.  Here is just one example…

  Until recently, Bryan Johnson was paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to infuse one litre of his teenage son’s youthful plasma into his own ageing blood stream every month. “I’ve never paid more attention to what he’s eating … because that was going into my body,” the 46-year-old American tech entrepreneur says on new podcast The Immortals. He also pumped his own plasma into his 70-year-old father’s body to help improve his declining physical and cognitive health: “It was one of the most meaningful moments in his entire life. And it was the same for me.” Johnson continues to pay $2m a year for a research team to investigate how we can live longer – and he is certainly not the only rich guy in Silicon Valley dedicated to the search for eternal life.

  Guys like Johnson have more money than they will ever need.

  But they know that their days are limited.

  So in a desperate attempt to “buy more time”, they are literally injecting the blood of young people into their own veins.

  This is another thing that shouldn’t be done.

  And it is probably dangerous.

  But nobody is going to stop them.

  In fact, the pace of scientific change will continue to march forward at an exponential rate.

  Given enough time, our world would be transformed into something stranger than anything that Hollywood has ever dreamed up.

  But our scientists won’t have enough time to do that, because the truth is that time is running out for our society.

  Our self-destructive tendencies will soon absolutely overwhelm us, and no amount of “research” will be able to turn things around at that point.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 23:30

• Triggered: Woke Alabama School Suspends 6-Year-Old Over 'Finger Guns' During Cops And Robbers Game
  Triggered: Woke Alabama School Suspends 6-Year-Old Over ‘Finger Guns’ During Cops And Robbers Game

  A six-year-old Alabama boy was suspended from school and had his “permanent record” threatened for making ‘finger guns’ during a game of cops and robbers.

  

  “They labeled my six-year-old as a potentially violent and dangerous student because he was being a little boy and playing cops and robbers with another student (who was also suspended) and using his fingers like a gun,” said the boy’s father, Jarrod Belcher, in a statement released on Friday, Sept. 8.

  According to the Epoch Times, a Jefferson County Board of Education “Due Process Referral for Class III Infractions” form released by Gun Owners of America (GOA) reads that Belcher’s son was “using gun fingers to shoot at another student.”

  The boy was subsequently suspended from school pending a hearing with his parents.

  According to the letter, on Sept. 1, 2023, two boys were playing “cops and robbers” during recess at Bagley Elementary School.

  “During the course of their play, the children reportedly extended their index fingers and thumbs and said ‘bang-bang’ at each other,” the letter reads.

   

  The child, identified as J.B., was suspended and accused of committing a Class III infraction. This is the district’s most serious infraction. According to the Jefferson County School District’s Student Parent Handbook, Class III infractions include possession of guns or explosives, sexual battery, battery of a school district employee, and robbery, among others.

  The boy would only be allowed back in school after a hearing with his parents and the district. -Epoch Times

  Following a complaint from the Belchers, the disciplinary action was downgraded to a less severe Class II infraction, however Belcher is still calling BS.

  “It should be noted that punching or hitting a student would have only been a Class II violation, so in the eyes of these school administrators, a finger gun is more serious than punching a classmate in the nose,” said Mr. Belcher, adding that his son shouldn’t be punished for something in which no harm was done.

  “Many noses have been broken by fists, but in the last 600 years since the invention of firearms, not a single person has been so much as bruised by a ‘finger gun,’” he wrote.

  Both GOA and Freeland Martz Attorneys of Oxford, Mississippi are backing the Belchers in demanding that the Jefferson County School District clear the boy’s record.

  “This incident just goes to show how embedded the anti-gun mindset is in so many communities, including in red states like Alabama. I imagine most men … can recall having played in a similar fashion in their own youth,” wrote GOA senior VP, Erich Pratt, in a Friday statement. “We will continue to demand action until a full apology is made and all disciplinary records tied to this incident are permanently destroyed.”

  In a demand letter on behalf of the belchers, attorney M. Reed Martz wrote: “Candidly, I thought the story may be a hoax until I reviewed the paperwork generated by the school.”

  We’re sure Russian and Chinese schools are just as proactive in eliminating masculinity among their future fighting forces.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 23:00

• Pfizer, J&J Pressured South Africa Into Shielding Companies From COVID Vaccine Injury Claims: Documents
  Pfizer, J&J Pressured South Africa Into Shielding Companies From COVID Vaccine Injury Claims: Documents

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

  

  Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson pressured South Africa into implementing provisions that shielded the companies from claims over COVID-19 vaccine injuries, newly disclosed documents show.

  Pfizer made the implementation of indemnification and a compensation fund part of its COVID-19 vaccine contract with South Africa, according to documents obtained by the Health Justice Initiative.

  One document states that South Africa was agreeing to “indemnify, defend, and hold harmless” Pfizer and its partner BioNTech, as well as their representatives, “from and against any and all suits, claims, actions, demands, losses, damages, liabilities, settlements, penalties, fines, costs and expenses” arising from claims resulting from the vaccine, including injuries.

  The only exceptions were for a breach of confidentiality or fraud.

  The component was “a non-negotiable” part of the agreement between the parties, the Health Justice Initiative said in an analysis of the documents.

  Johnson & Johnson, meanwhile, also secured indemnification and the introduction of the compensation scheme in its contract with South Africa.

  In a Feb. 23, 2021, letter, South Africa’s ministers of health and finance said that Johnson & Johnson requested the no-fault compensation scheme “to address adverse events that are suffered as a result of the administration of the vaccine.”

  “It has been noted in discussions with J & J, and acknowledged by J & J, that a no-fault compensation scheme for vaccine related adverse events does not exist in South Africa, and that the available legislative mechanisms for establishing a scheme would require some time to undertake, even if the most expeditious processes available are pursued,” they wrote.

  In an exhibit attached to Johnson & Johnson’s contract, officials said that the scheme would compensate people who prove a causal link between the vaccination they received and their injury, as decided by a panel of experts. Among outcomes ripe for compensation were death, injury, and disability. The level of compensation, officials said, “should be sufficient to provide long-term relief to victims.”

  Officials later promulgated (pdf) regulations on April 22, 2021, establishing the scheme.

  The scheme would “provide expeditious and easy access to compensation for persons who suffer harm, loss or damage as a result of vaccine injury,” the regulations stated.

  Like similar schemes in other countries, including the United States, the schemes shield vaccine manufacturers from lawsuits and compensate victims with taxpayer money.

  Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson did not respond to requests for comment.

  “I wouldn’t say we were bullied, but we were in a catch-22 situation to save lives of South Africans against all odds,” Foster Mohale, a spokesperson for South Africa’s Department of Health, told Al Jazeera. “The department entered into these agreements to secure vaccine doses to protect the lives of South Africans against the deadly virus which claimed more than hundred thousand lives in South Africa.”

  Matthew Kavanaugh, an assistant professor at Georgetown University who analyzed the contracts, said that South African officials “were at the whims of each of these companies who really exploited that opportunity.

  “No kind of contract that I’ve ever signed in my life says at some point will you deliver something to us, but in whatever amount and on whatever timeline you think works for you, and in the meantime, we will agree to fully indemnify you,” added Mr. Kavanaugh, speaking on INXPrime.

  Just a handful of vaccine injury claims have been paid out so far, South African Health Minister Joe Phaala said in June.

  A number of side effects of the shots have been confirmed or are suspected, including blood clotting and heart inflammation. Some people have died from vaccine-induced injuries.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 22:30

• Where Do International Students In The U.S. Come From?
  Where Do International Students In The U.S. Come From?

  When it comes to higher education in the United States, the proportion of international students attending US institutions has jumped from 1.5% in the 1960s to 5.5% in the early 2020s.

  According to a visualization from the International Education Exchange, one can se exactly where most of these students hail from.

  

  As Visual Capitalist‘s Ehsan Soltani notes,

  The International Student Population

  The United States has always attracted students seeking quality education at its many world-class universities and opportunities in the country’s job market.

  After a drop in recent years due to COVID-19 restrictions, American institutions registered a 3.8% increase in international student participation in 2022.

  There were 948,519 international students at U.S. colleges and universities last year.

  Asian students represent 75% of the total, with Chinese (30%) and Indians (21%) adding up to over half the count. Oceania is the place of origin with the fewest international students enrolled in the U.S., making up only 0.6% of the total.

  

  According to Open Doors, for the first time in a decade, there were more graduate students (41%) than undergraduates (36%) studying in the United States in 2022.

  

  Since the COVID-19 pandemic, many colleges and universities have started to offer online courses. Still, the vast majority of students attended classes in person last year.

  A Billionaire Business

  International students continue to be a priority for the U.S. higher education sector, contributing $32 billion to the country’s economy in 2022.

  With the demographic decline in U.S. domestic higher education enrollment, many colleges and universities are strategically focusing on international students.

  According to IIE, 89% of U.S. colleges and universities indicated that 2023/24 applications are up or have stayed the same as the previous year.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 22:00

• Americans Divided As Mask Mandates Make Comeback Amid COVID-19 Surge
  Americans Divided As Mask Mandates Make Comeback Amid COVID-19 Surge

  Authored by Joe Gomez via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  

  Several schools and private companies have reinstated mask mandates as COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations continue to increase across the country, causing divisions in communities over how to limit the spread of the coronavirus.

  COVID-19 hospitalizations have increased by nearly 16 percent over the past week alone, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

  In Alabama, Kinterbish Junior High School issued a mask mandate in late August for students, staff, and visitors due to COVID-19 and just this week, Rosemary Hills Elementary School in Silver Spring, Maryland, issued a mask mandate for 10 days, after three people at the school tested positive for the virus.

  “It always starts the same way, as a temporary mandate ‘15 days to [slow the spread],’” Kyle Wilkens, a parent in Silver Spring, told The Epoch Times. “I can’t go through this again, my child is not wearing a mask to school.”

  Ms. Wilkens believes the mandate will be extended, though it is set to expire by Sept. 15.

  “The media is already doing its part to fear monger. Now, they are trying to soften us up with scattered mask guidance and requirements here and there. We know from before it will escalate.”

  Others in the area believe the temporary mask mandate is a good idea to prevent transmission of the coronavirus in the community.

  “It’s better than getting stuck at home for 10 days or feeling miserable and getting stuck at home,” Marlene Tay of Montgomery County, Maryland, told The Epoch Times.

  “We all got COVID last year after some school cases. It was awful because of course our daughter was fine while we felt sick. I expect to get sick soon. Our neighbors just had their third case a few weeks ago. All the kids are getting fevers and sore throats even though it’s not usually COVID, (yet).”

  In other parts of the country, mask mandates have also been issued and lifted. Morris Brown College in Atlanta, Georgia, ended its mask mandate after two weeks. As did Lionsgate film studios and Kaiser Permanente in California after briefly putting a mandate in place.

  “Thank god I live in Florida,” Tammy Contreraz of Tampa Bay told The Epoch Times. “I don’t have to deal with all these confusing rules on mandates.”

  Health Officials Split on Masking

  The CDC has issued some recommendations for masking by county based on hospital admission rates, categorizing admission levels as green, yellow, and red (low, medium, and high).

  Advertisement – Story continues below

  If hospitalization rates for COVID are at the yellow (medium) or red (high) level, when there are 10 to more than 20 new admissions per 100,000 people in a county, the CDC recommends wearing a mask while indoors or in a public space.

  “I think it’s smart guidance, masks are effective at limiting any airborne pathogen but only if worn consistently, especially in crowded spaces and close contact areas,” Santiago Mercado, an Emergency Room Nurse at Elmhurst Hospital in Queens, New York, told The Epoch Times.

  “I don’t know how well people will comply with the guidance, but it can absolutely protect the public and improve preventable deaths.”

  Mr. Mercado worked at intensive care units in hospitals across the New York City area during the pandemic in 2020 and has seen how quickly COVID can spread—inundating healthcare facilities.

  “It was like a brush fire; so many people were dying every day. Anything we can do to prevent that again, I support,” he said.

  

  Healthcare professionals on the other side of the issue disagree and say masking has no significant benefit to avoiding infection by the coronavirus.

  “The CDC’s own data reveals that those who wear masks get infected with COVID at the same rate as those who don’t,” according to an analysis from Americas Frontline Doctors posted on their website.

  “85 percent of those infected with COVID wore masks some or all of the time before their infection. The countless jurisdictions that mandated masks actually saw an increase in infections during the mandate. A key randomized, controlled study of mass masking during the COVID outbreak, concluded that wearing a mask had no significant effect on viral spreading.”

  The organization goes on to report that even if masks were effective, there are negative impacts of continuous mask-wearing, such as a “decrease in the levels of oxygen intake, headaches, Mask-Induced Exhaustion Syndrome (MIED), reduced immunity germ load and skin reactions.”

  Governors on Mask Mandates

  There are no statewide mask mandates across the country so far, though in New York, Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) unveiled a plan to distribute N-95 and KN-95 masks to schools this fall but is not mandating their use.

  “Thanks to the hard work of New York schools, teachers, and parents, we have come a long way to ensure students can safely return to the classroom,” Ms. Hochul said. “Frequent testing for COVID-19 is an important part of keeping our kids safe and preventing an outbreak, and I will continue working to ensure our school districts have the resources they need to provide a safe, in-person learning environment for our students.”

  

  A discarded face mask is pictured on the sidewalk in Long Beach, Calif., on Aug. 22, 2020. (Apu Gomes/AFP via Getty Images)

  In Mississippi, Gov. Tate Reeves (R) has made his opposition to masking abundantly clear, stating there will be no mask mandates in the near future.

  “There are some on the left that still want COVID restrictions… Let me say it again – there will be no mask mandates, COVID vaccine mandates, or lockdowns in Mississippi,” Reeves posted on Facebook.

  “Mississippians will not and should not submit to fear again … If you want to take extraordinary measures to protect yourself from getting sick, God bless you. That is your right and you should do what you think is best. Maybe you’re the smartest of all of us. But we are never going back to 2020.”

  Fight Over Mandates on Capitol Hill

  The split over mask mandates has spilled into politics in the nation’s capital, as some Republicans in Congress introduced legislation to ban a mandate of any kind.

  Senators JD Vance (R-Ohio), Mike Braun (R-Ind.), and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) have cosponsored a Senate bill called the “Freedom to Breathe Act” which would ban federal mask mandates in the United States.

  “We tried mask mandates once in this country. They failed to control the spread of respiratory viruses, violated basic bodily freedom, and set our fellow citizens against one another,” said Vance.

  “This legislation will ensure that no federal bureaucracy, no commercial airline, and no public school can impose the misguided policies of the past. Democrats say they’re not going to bring back mask mandates – we’re going to hold them to their word.”

  The White House issued a “100 Day Masking Challenge” in 2021, where President Joe Biden implemented a mask mandate on federal property, but the administration has not issued a new nationwide mandate since.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 21:30

• Visualizing The 25 Best Stocks By Shareholder Wealth Creation Since 1926
  Visualizing The 25 Best Stocks By Shareholder Wealth Creation Since 1926

  Out of 28,114 publicly-listed U.S. companies analyzed over the last century, the 25 best stocks have created nearly a third of all shareholder wealth.

  Put another way, as Visual Capitalist’s Jenna Ross and Joyce Ma detail below, just 0.1% of stocks have added over $17.6 trillion to investors’ wallets.

  In this graphic, we use data from Henrik Bessembinder of Arizona State University to show the best stocks of the last century.

  

  How is Shareholder Wealth Creation Calculated?

  Bessembinder took three steps to measure lifetime shareholder wealth creation:

  1. Considered U.S. stocks in the Center for Research in Security Prices database from 1926 (or when the stock was first listed) until 2022 (or when the stock was delisted).

  2. Measured share price changes as well as cash flows to/from shareholders including dividends, spinoffs, share buybacks, and new share issuances.

  3. Calculated the excess wealth generated compared to investing in one-month Treasury bills over the same time period.

  If a company exited the database during the period, Bessembinder calculated its delisting return based on any proceeds from mergers or acquisitions as well as estimates of any remaining value after delistings for negative reasons.

  GM is the only company within the top 25 to be delisted prior to December 2022. Its second IPO in 2010 was considered a new company and not continuous wealth creation.

  The 25 Best Stocks in Modern History

  With this definition in mind, here are the best stocks since 1926.

  

  Apple takes the top spot, having created nearly 5% of all shareholder wealth. From the iPod to the iPhone, Apple’s ability to keep innovating has helped it gain a loyal fan base and given the company pricing power. Notably, Apple is America’s most profitable company.

  ExxonMobil is the only non-technology company among the five best stocks. When Exxon and Mobil merged in 1999, it was the biggest merger in history and ExxonMobil temporarily became the world’s largest public company by market capitalization. More recently, the company experienced record profits in 2022 due to high oil prices.

  The list also shows how wealth-generating patterns have changed over time. While energy and consumer staples are more frequent among older companies in the ranking, the stocks that have created massive wealth in recent years are more likely to be technology or financial companies.

  Finding the Next Winners

  Given that the names on this list account for 0.1% of all public U.S. stocks, picking out one of the next long-term winners could be a difficult task. In fact, 95% of actively-managed large cap funds—which aim to beat the market through stock picking—underperformed their benchmark over a 20-year period.

  Investing in index funds is one possible way to get exposure to top performers. For instance, Apple has been part of the S&P 500 since 1982, about a year after it went public.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 21:00

• Megyn Kelly Reveals Possible Vaccine Injury, Regrets Getting COVID Shot
  Megyn Kelly Reveals Possible Vaccine Injury, Regrets Getting COVID Shot

  Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  

  Megyn Kelly, a veteran journalist and podcaster, said Wednesday that she deeply regrets getting the COVID-19 vaccine because she believes she may have suffered a vaccine injury.

  Ms. Kelly said that she regrets getting vaccinated and then boosted, saying she doesn’t think it was necessary—and that a doctor told her that an autoimmune condition she developed after getting the shot may be related to the vaccine.

  “I regret getting the vaccine even though I’m a 52-year-old woman because I don’t think I needed it,” Ms. Kelly said during a Sept. 6 episode of her podcast “The Megyn Kelly Show.”

  “I think I would have been fine. I had got COVID many times, and it was well past when the vaccine was doing what it was supposed to be doing,” she added.

  “For the first time, I tested positive for an autoimmune issue at my annual physical. And I went to the best rheumatologist in New York, and I asked her, do you think this could have to do with the fact that I got the damn booster and then got COVID within three weeks? And she said yes. Yes. I wasn’t the only one she’d seen that with,” Ms. Kelly said.

  Her current vaccine regret stands in contrast to remarks she made in April 2021, when she said she had “zero qualms” about getting the shot.

  “Am getting the [Johnson & Johnson] vaccine this [weekend]. Have zero qualms [because] have spent a life immersed in a media obsessed with fear-mongering that is often irresponsible and untrue. Do what your doctor tells you to do and ignore everyone else,” she said in a post on X, formerly Twitter.

  Ms. Kelly’s expression of regret at getting the shot comes amid reports linking spike protein-based COVID-19 vaccines to skin problems, a dull ringing in the ears known as tinnitus, visual impairments, blood clotting, and even death.

  Studies have also revealed a number of issues affecting vaccinated children. For example, one recent study, published in the journal Frontiers in Immunology, shows that the mRNA-based vaccine for COVID-19 reduced children’s immune responses to other infections, making them more prone to getting sick after coming into contact with other pathogens.

  Another study published by Circulation showed that some children who experienced heart inflammation after COVID-19 vaccination had scarring on their hearts months later.

  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) continues to recommend that people of all ages receive a COVID-19 vaccine despite the risk of heart inflammation and other side effects.

  Also, documents show that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the CDC hid data showing a spike in COVID-19 cases among the vaccinated.

  Former President Donald Trump told former Michigan gubernatorial candidate Tudor Dixon in a recent conversation on her podcast that pharmaceutical companies have an “obligation to be honest” about vaccine side effects and should disclose all relevant data on vaccine harms.

  President Trump and Ms. Dixon discussed a range of issues in an episode on the Tudor Dixon Podcast last week. At one point in the discussion, Ms. Dixon asked about President Biden’s announcement to fund a new COVID-19 vaccine.

  “He wants everyone to get this vaccine,” Ms. Dixon said. “And we’re hearing about a lot of complaints from vaccine injured. To say a lot is an understatement.”

  She then asked President Trump about vaccine data transparency, citing reports of various adverse events, including heart inflammation and blood clots.

  “Numerous pharmaceutical companies have refused to release their data on vaccine side effects,” she said. “But we’ve seen cases of myocarditis, blood clots, and heart attacks; they’re all increasing. The research has never been released.”

  She asked if President Trump would “demand that the vaccine companies, that the pharmaceutical companies release their vaccine data to the public so that we can see what they’re actually seeing about the side effects of this vaccine?”

  President Trump replied by saying that pharmaceutical companies “should do that,” adding that “we’re all in this together, and they should be doing that.”

  In context of President Biden’s remarks about funding a new COVID-19 vaccine, the former president said that “anything new has got to be looked at very carefully.”

  President Trump then reiterated the point that pharmaceutical companies should release any data on vaccine side effects.

  “They should be made public immediately. People should understand that, and they should know what research is showing,” President Trump said.

  He added that pharmaceutical companies would be wrong to withhold any information on vaccine injuries.

  “They have to be honest with the numbers, the facts, and they have an obligation to be honest,” he said, “And if they are going to hold back, that means they’re holding back something that’s not good.”

  “We’ll stand for them in many ways,” President Trump said of people who suffered vaccine injuries.

  Meanwhile, the FDA has been ordered to accelerate the pace at which it releases to the public data it relied on to license COVID-19 vaccines.

  In May, a federal judge in Texas ruled that the FDA must hurry up with disclosing data that underpinned its decision to license COVID-19 vaccines, ordering all documents to be made public by mid-2025 rather than, as the FDA wanted, over the course of about 23.5 years.

  “Democracy dies behind closed doors,” is how U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman opened his order (pdf), which requires the FDA to produce the data on Moderna’s and Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccines at an average rate of at least 180,000 pages per month.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 20:30

• How Much Does It Take to Be Wealthy In America?
  How Much Does It Take to Be Wealthy In America?

  What does it take to be wealthy in America? It depends, of course, on where one lives.

  According to the 2023 Modern Wealth Survey by Charles Schwab (see below), you need a net worth of at least $1.7 million to be “financially comfortable” in San Francisco, and $4.7 million to be considered “wealthy.”

  And in Houston? $606k is “financially comfortable,” while $2.1 million is “wealthy.”

  

  As Visual Capitalist‘s Dorothy Neufeld notes:

  Wealthy in America: A Closer Look

  Overall, the net worth that Americans say that is needed to be “wealthy” in the United States is $2.2 million in 2023.

  Here are the average wealth numbers indicated by respondents across 12 major U.S. cities, based on a survey of 1,000 people between 21 and 75:

  

  In San Francisco, respondents said they needed $4.7 million in net worth to be wealthy, the highest across all cities surveyed, and more than double the national average.

  This figure dropped from last year, when it stood at $5.4 million. The vast majority of people in San Francisco say that inflation has had an impact on their finances, and over half say that living in the city impedes their ability to reach their financial goals, citing steep costs of living.

  In Los Angeles and San Diego, it takes $3.5 million to be wealthy, the second-highest across cities surveyed. In New York, it takes $3.3 million in net worth to reach this target. It is home to over 345,000 millionaires, the highest worldwide.

  Houston, where the cost of living is less than half of San Francisco, respondents said a net worth of $2.1 million is needed to be wealthy. The average salary is $67,000 in Houston, while in San Francisco it falls at $81,000.

  The Wealth Paradox

  Separately, the survey asked whether respondents “feel wealthy” themselves.

  Overall, 48% of all respondents said they feel wealthy, and those people had an average net worth of $560,000. This is a considerable divergence from the $2.2 million benchmark they said was needed to be wealthy.

  Here’s the breakdown for major cities, illustrating the paradox:

  

  Millennials were most likely to feel wealthy, at 57% of respondents, while 40% of boomers felt wealthy, the lowest across generations surveyed.

  Explaining the Divergence

  When digging deeper, it becomes clear that wealth is not simply a number.

  In fact, the survey indicates that many Americans place greater importance on non-monetary assets over monetary assets when they think of wealth.

  For instance, 72% said having a fulfilling personal life was a better descriptor of wealth than working on a career, which was only chosen by 28% of respondents. Meanwhile, enjoying experiences (70%) was a better reflection of wealth compared to owning many nice things (30%).

  Interestingly, there was a narrower margin in choosing between the importance of time (61%) over money (39%).

  Beyond monetary figures, these findings illustrate the layers that influence what it means to feel financially healthy today, and how this affects an individual’s overall quality of life.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 20:00

• Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Wants His Party Back
  Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Wants His Party Back

  Authored by Jeff Louderback via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  

  On a steamy summer morning, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. strode into a hotel conference room in Columbia, South Carolina, amid a barnstorming town hall tour of a state where Joe Biden won close to 49 percent of the vote in the 2020 Democratic primary.

  Mr. Kennedy spoke about his 2024 presidential campaign. Democrat pundits say he is a fringe candidate who spreads conspiracy theories. Polls show him with the highest favorability rating of any presidential candidate.

  There is no path for Mr. Kennedy to defeat President Biden, critics claim, despite questions about President Joe Biden’s age and mental fitness, low approval ratings, and surveys showing that Americans are concerned about the economy.

  Earlier this year, the Democratic National Committee voted to give its full support to the president.

  Mr. Kennedy agrees that unseating an incumbent president in the same party is a daunting challenge but disagrees with doubters who say he has no chance of securing the nomination.

  The 2024 presidential nominee will be announced during the Democratic National Convention in Chicago next summer. Until then, Mr. Kennedy intends to continue to press his case.

  “The DNC has around $2 billion, and they’re spending that money generously to try to marginalize me in many ways, but I think most Democrats care about one thing more than anything else, which is to beat Donald Trump,” Mr. Kennedy told The Epoch Times. “I think President Biden cannot do that. I can.”

  

  Mr. Kennedy is the nephew of President John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated in 1963; and the son of Robert F. Kennedy, who was shot and killed after a campaign speech while running for president in 1968.

  During his town halls and meet-and-greets, Mr. Kennedy tells stories from time spent with his uncle and father and connects them to his presidential campaign.

  He wants to continue his father’s legacy of uniting Americans from all economic classes and ethnic backgrounds.

  

  “I think we do that by telling the truth to people. My dad did it that way. He talked about uncomfortable issues but talked about the truth. I think people are tired of being lied to by the government, by the media,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “My dad ran against an incumbent president in his own party (Lyndon B. Johnson) during a divisive time. I’m running against a larger challenge because I am facing an entire infrastructure that is against me, from my own party and Big Tech and the pharmaceutical industry.”

  An environmental attorney and the founder of Children’s Health Defense, Mr. Kennedy is widely known for being outspoken about the health risks of vaccines. His stand on these and other issues has drawn support from voters who are not left-leaning.

  

  The candidate, however, has said that he won’t do that, reiterating that stance over the last month in town halls and meet-and-greets in South Carolina, Virginia, and New York City.

  “I’m a Democrat. This is my identity, but I want my party back,” Mr. Kennedy said. “I’m running for president because the Democratic Party has lost its way. I want to remind the Democratic Party of what we are supposed to represent.”

  “A focus on the middle class and labor, the well-being of minorities, a focus on the environment, civil liberties, and freedom of speech.“

  

  He frequently talks about “unity” and “healing the divide.”

  “I intend to bridge this toxic polarization that is really destroying our country and tearing us apart,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  He called his campaign a “peaceful insurgency” that he hopes will appeal to conservative Republicans, independents, moderates, and liberal Democrats.

  “During the 35 years I spent as one of the leaders of the environmental movement in our country, I was the only environmentalist who was regularly going on Fox News. I went on Sean Hannity repeatedly—Bill O’Reilly, too,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “I want to talk to media members and voters who share differing opinions than mine, because how else are you going to persuade?

  

  “I think we have a lot more in common than what the media portrays. What keeps us apart are things that are rather trivial. We let them feed this toxic polarization. We need to talk. We need to have conversations with people from a wide range of views.”

  Days after a House hearing on censorship in July that saw Democrats attempt to block Mr. Kennedy from testifying, a Harvard-Harris poll showed that he has a higher favorability rating than any other 2024 presidential candidate.

  Mr. Kennedy saw a favorable rating of 47 percent and an unfavorable mark of 26 percent, according to a survey of 2,068 registered voters, conducted July 19–20 and released on July 23. Former President Trump carried a favorability rating of 45 percent compared with an unfavorability number of 49 percent. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis had a 40 percent favorable rating and 37 percent unfavorable, and President Biden’s rating was 39 percent favorable and 53 percent unfavorable.

  Mr. Kennedy also had the highest net favorability of all 2024 presidential candidates in a June poll from The Economist/YouGov.

  Kennedy campaign manager Dennis Kucinich is a former Democratic congressman from Ohio who ran for president in 2004 and 2008. He believes Mr. Kennedy can “rebuild and save” the country and that there is a path to victory over Biden.

  “He is the only Democrat who can reach across the political spectrum, which means he can win in 2024,” Mr. Kucinich told The Epoch Times.

  “Conservatives, liberals, independents, and libertarians are responding to this campaign because of the unique qualities of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and because there is an understanding he stands for unity, freedom, truth, and authenticity. That is what’s resonating with people.”

  

  When asked about President Biden and former President Trump, Mr. Kennedy is measured in his responses.

  “I’m not going to attack other people personally,” Mr. Kennedy said. “I don’t think it’s good for our country. And what I’m trying to do in this race is bring people together, is try to bridge the divide between Americans.”

  ‘Poison, Hatred, and Vitriol’

  Mr. Kennedy stands for “de-escalating” what he called “poison, hatred, and vitriol.”

  Mr. Kennedy has repeatedly expressed his disapproval of President Biden’s job performance, but he has refrained from personal attacks about the 80-year-old’s mental fitness.

  “If there’s a policy I disagree with—like the war, like censorship, the lockdowns—I’m going to criticize those, but I’m not going to attack him as a man,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “I will say, whether he’s up to it or not, whether he’s making his own decisions—the decisions that are coming out of the White House are bad decisions.”

  President Biden is not scheduled to appear in Democrat primary debates, a decision Mr. Kennedy believes the president should reconsider.

  “I think it would be better if we have a democracy where every candidate debates,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “I suppose he is making a strategic decision that’s based upon his own interest, but I think we’re living in a period when people have lost faith in the democratic process, and they think the system is rigged.”

  President Joe Biden and President Trump should take the debate stage as a sign of respect for American voters, Mr. Kennedy said.

  

  “Americans shouldn’t feel like we live in the Soviet Union, where the party picks the candidates. I think it would be much better for our democracy, and we’d be a better example for the world and improve our credibility with the American people if we actually allowed democracy to function and all the candidates participated in debates, and town halls, and retail politics.

  “It is important for the Democratic Party that there is a primary debate. Ultimately, a Democrat will debate a Republican, and the Republican will likely be Trump. He is probably the most successful debater in this country since Lincoln Douglas,” said Mr. Kennedy, noting how President Trump defeated a crowded pool of Republican primary candidates in 2016.

  “He has his own technique that people like. It’s like going into a prize fight. You need practice, and that usually happens in the primary,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “Asking the president to not debate in the primary is like asking a prizefighter to practice by sitting on the couch.”

  In South Carolina, Virginia, and New York City, Mr. Kennedy talked to voters about the economy and issues on which he disagrees with President Biden.

  

  In Charleston, he criticized the president for continued financial support to Ukraine.

  “One of the big problems we have in our federal government is the addiction to war,” Mr. Kennedy said. “President Biden went to Congress and asked for another $24 billion for the Ukraine War.

  “We’ve spent $8 trillion dollars on wars since 9/11. If we kept that money home, we would’ve had child care for every American. We would have free college education for every American. We’d be able to pay for our Social Security system.”

  He believes that he, and not President Biden, is the candidate who will best represent Democrats in 2024 and beyond.

  “I am the only choice that is going to end the war machine, that is going to really focus on rebuilding the American middle class, taming inflation,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  

  About gun control, Mr. Kennedy said, “I do not believe that, within that Second Amendment, there is anything we can meaningfully do to reduce the trade and the ownership of guns.”

  “Anybody who tells you that they’re going to reduce gun violence through gun control at this point, I don’t think is being realistic,” he said. “I think we have to think about other ways to reduce that violence.”

  Mr. Kennedy did note that he would sign an assault weapons ban if he were president and the legislation was placed on his desk.

  A vocal opponent of the pharmaceutical industry, Mr. Kennedy vowed at a town hall in Brooklyn on Sept. 1 that he would ban pharmaceutical advertising.

  He is outspoken about the dangers of the COVID-19 vaccine for some in the population who were coerced to take them, but he told the Epoch Times that he is not “anti-vaccine.”

  “I’ve never been anti-vaccine,” he said. “I’ve said that hundreds and hundreds of times, but it doesn’t matter because that is a way of silencing me. Using that pejorative to describe me is a way of silencing or marginalizing me.”

  Mr. Kennedy has said that, initially, he was not in favor of former President Trump’s border wall. But after seeing the border firsthand in Arizona in July, he changed his mind. He said there is a need for increased infrastructure and technology at the border, including more segments of a physical wall, and sensors in areas where a wall isn’t feasible.

  Until the United States can seal the border, he said he doesn’t think it is possible to get an immigration reform package through Congress.

  

  Mr. Kennedy visited the Arizona–California border with Mexico in early June and met with illegal immigrants, Border Patrol agents, and other stakeholders.

  “The Democratic Party thinks our function should be welcoming all immigrants into the country no matter what, and to basically open the borders. And the experiment has been a disaster, a humanitarian catastrophe,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “I watched it firsthand. I watched 300 people come across the border and then be processed and sent to locations all over the country with court dates seven years down the road.”

  “There’s now seven million people who have come across illegally and have no legal status in this country. Those people are very vulnerable now to unscrupulous employers who are paying them $5 and $6 an hour,” he said.

  Mr. Kennedy called the Biden administration’s open border policy “a way of funding a multibillion-dollar drug and human trafficking operation for the Mexican drug cartels.”

  “As president, I will secure the border, which will end the cartel’s drug trafficking economy. I will build wide doors for those who wish to enter legally so that the U.S. can continue to be a beacon to the world where diversity and culture make us great,” he said.

  “Immigration is good for our country, but this kind of immigration is unfair to everybody,” he said.

  Ending the Ukraine War

  Mr. Kennedy has called for de-escalating the war in Ukraine. He explained that he is sympathetic to the Ukrainian cause and added that Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded the country illegally, but he chastised the United States for its role in the conflict.

  “We have neglected many, many opportunities to settle this war peacefully,” he said. “We have turned that nation into a proxy war between Russia and the United States.”

  

  Mr. Kennedy has urged President Biden to negotiate a peaceful end to the Russia-Ukraine war, which started when Russia invaded the neighboring nation in February 2022.

  “Russia is not going to lose this war. Russia can’t afford it,” Mr. Kennedy said. “It would be like us losing a war to Mexico.”

  As part of his reasoning for ending the Ukraine war, Mr. Kennedy referenced his uncle, President John F. Kennedy.

  “My uncle Jack said that the primary job of an American President of the United States is to keep the country out of war. He kept out of Vietnam. He sent only 16,000 military advisers there—mainly Green Berets,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “In October 1963, he learned that one of his Green Berets had died, and he asked his aide to give him a combat casualty list, and the aide came back and said 75 had died so far. He said: ‘That’s too many.’”

  The American Dream

  When it comes to supporting labor unions, Mr. Kennedy’s ideas are similar to President Biden’s.

  “In my administration, you can expect vigorous action by the Justice Department and the Department of Labor to enforce laws against union-busting and unfair labor practices,” Mr. Kennedy said.

  “We will also raise the minimum wage so that unions have a higher floor from which to bargain. We will negotiate trade treaties that don’t pit American workers against low-wage foreign workers in a race to the bottom.”

  At his campaign stops. Mr. Kennedy likes to talk about the flourishing economic period the nation experienced after World War II.

  “I grew up during the heyday of American economic prosperity. It was in the 1950s and 1960s that the archetype of the American Dream was born. It was not something available only to a lucky few; it was within the reach of most Americans,” he said.

  Read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 19:30

• CNN Political Director Admits Biden In Danger From "Troublingly Low" Approval Ratings
  CNN Political Director Admits Biden In Danger From “Troublingly Low” Approval Ratings

  A new poll from CNN conducted by SSRS found that President Biden’s reelection campaign is already in trouble, with 46% of voters, overall, saying that any GOP candidate would be preferred over Biden – including former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley.

  

  According to CNN political director David Chalian, Biden’s approval ratings are “troublingly low.”

  Amontg those polled, 58% say Biden’s policies have made economic conditions worse, and 70% say things in America are going badly. Just 33% of those polled described Biden as someone they’re proud to have as their president.

  CNN POLL: 70% of Americans say things are going badly in the country today pic.twitter.com/lGwoCvaThU

  — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) September 7, 2023

  “Look at that approval number over time. Since the spring, he’s been hanging out in this very low, troubling approval rating for him and It really has not fluctuated for him all that much,” said Chalian. “Take a look by party. You noted among Democrats, his approval rating is down a bit from where it was in July. He’s at 74% among his own party faithful. Independents, holding troublingly low for the president at 36%. Obviously, single digits among Republicans.“

  A recent Wall Street Journal poll also spelled bad news for Biden, with former President Donald Trump leading Biden by 11 points on the question of who had a better record. Trump also led Biden by 10 points in perceived mental fitness to hold office. Fifty-eight percent of those polled said the economy has gotten worse over the past two years, with a majority of those polled disapproving of Biden’s handling of the economy. -Daily Caller

  Watch the whole clip (via the Daily Caller),

  “And look at how Biden stacks up against all of his modern-era predecessors at this point in their presidency. Going to draw a line here to show he’s hanging out in this category with Trump and [Jimmy] Carter. Something about Trump and Carter, they lost their reelection efforts,” he continued.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 19:00

• New Mexico Lawmakers Call For Governor's Impeachment Over 2A Overreach
  New Mexico Lawmakers Call For Governor’s Impeachment Over 2A Overreach

  Update (1848ET):

  New Mexico State Representatives Stefani Lord (R-22) and John Block (R-51) called for the impeaching of Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) after she issued a public health emergency to strip the right away for law-abiding citizens to carry firearms in public in and around Albuquerque, the state’s largest city. 

  “This is an abhorrent attempt at imposing a radical, progressive agenda on an unwilling populous. Rather than addressing crime at its core, Governor Grisham is restricting the rights of law-abiding gun owners,” Lord wrote in a press release shared on X. 

  🚨PRESS RELEASE: @RepBlock & I are calling for the impeachment of @GovMLG. New Mexicans won’t stand by as she disregards her oath to uphold our Constitution.

  Read the full press release below! 👇 pic.twitter.com/r5kt9nOSvI

  — Rep Stefani Lord (@Lord4NM) September 9, 2023

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

  While impeachment calls grow, Erich Pratt, Senior VP of Gun Owners of America, told us: “The Governor’s actions are evil and tyrannical. GOA’s attorneys are already preparing a complaint. So heads up to the Governor: ‘We will see you in court.'”

  *   *   * 

  On Friday evening, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) issued an emergency order suspending the right of law-abiding citizens to open and conceal carry firearms in crime-ridden Albuquerque and the surrounding county for at least 30 days, after declaring a public health emergency in response to a spate of recent gun violence.

  

  Grisham, who apparently thinks criminals will follow her orders, says she expects legal challenges, but was ‘compelled to act’ following recent shootings, AP reports.

  The Governor of New Mexico has just declared the 1st & 2nd Amendment “does not exist” due to an “emergency.”

  Under this legal theory *all* of our “rights” are essentially eliminated.

  Watch the most evil & tyrannical 60 seconds you’ve ever heard from a politician: pic.twitter.com/xLpMSTbyi2

  — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) September 9, 2023

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

  “Today I issued a 30-day ban on the open & concealed carrying of guns in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. Gun violence is killing between 2 and 3 children every month in NM – every single one of these deaths is unconscionable and they must stop,” Grisham posted on X. 

  Today I issued a 30-day ban on the open & concealed carrying of guns in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. Gun violence is killing between 2 and 3 children every month in NM – every single one of these deaths is unconscionable and they must stop. https://t.co/KJdXUMBVaG

  — Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (@GovMLG) September 9, 2023

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

  Grisham declared in a statement, “As I said yesterday, the time for standard measures has passed. And when New Mexicans are afraid to be in crowds, to take their kids to school, to leave a baseball game—when their very right to exist is threatened by the prospect of violence at every turn—something is very wrong.”

  Yes governor, now law-abiding citizens won’t be able to match force with criminal threats while in public, after failed progressive policies transformed Albuquerque into a crime-infested metro area with soaring violence.

  According to a recent report by the Major Cities Chiefs Association, Albuquerque had one of the highest homicide rates in the country.

  

  Constitutional law attorney Jonathan Turley said the move by Grisham is “flagrantly unconstitutional under existing Second Amendment precedent.” 

  Turley continued, “Democratic leaders have increasing turned to a claim used successfully during the pandemic in declaring a health emergency to maximize unilateral authority of governors.” 

  “The taking away of individual rights as an emergency measure is hardly new. For centuries, governments have claimed that the suspension of individual rights is necessary for the good of citizens,” he said. 

  You thought the “public health emergency” power grab was a one and done with COVID?

  Do not comply. https://t.co/PXLzgt280e

  — Sean Agnew (@seanagnew) September 9, 2023

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

  According to Erich Pratt, Senior VP of Gun Owners of America, “The Governor’s actions are evil and tyrannical. GOA’s attorneys are already preparing a complaint. So heads up to the Governor: ‘We will see you in court.’“

  According to @erichmpratt, Senior VP of Gun Owners of America said:

  “The Governor’s actions are evil and tyrannical. GOA’s attorneys are already preparing a complaint. So heads up to the Governor: ‘We will see you in court.’” https://t.co/2Xj0b4QSv7

  — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) September 9, 2023

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

  Trial Balloon?

  Grisham’s move signals a new attack strategy by Democrats on the Second Amendment. We must remind readers ever since the ‘defund the police’ movement began several years ago, many Democratic-led cities have faced soaring crime rates. Failed social justice reform only sparked more violence, which may have been intentional to create a crisis and then offer a novel solution with even more gun control. 

  This “Public health order” is a trial balloon for things to come. The moment we allowed them to do this with COVID, we opened the door. https://t.co/FFSiwDHPzk

  — Nick Short ‎‎ (@PoliticalShort) September 9, 2023

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

  And this… 

  The 2nd amendment isn’t a recommendation. It’s a right.

  Friendly suggestion to @GovMLG on how to *actually* reduce violent crime in your state: focus on sealing your own state’s southern border & stop the virtue signaling elsewhere. https://t.co/RgzpFZAPs8

  — Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) September 9, 2023

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

  Democrats have faced gun control roadblocks ever since the US Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen in 2022, which hindered their ability to pass expansive laws restricting guns ever since.

  Now, the tactic is to use emergency orders to suspend rights – which police chiefs for both Albuquerque and Bernalillo Counties have said might be civil violations.

  Social media users on X weren’t pleased with the governor:

  Every law enforcement officer in your state should unite & ignore you.
  So should the citizens of NM. Do not comply.

  Because criminals will undoubtedly ignore you & this unconstitutional order empowers them. https://t.co/UCmavZwsJb

  — Sean Parnell (@SeanParnellUSA) September 9, 2023

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

  Given the real problem of crime in some places, and that people carrying for self-defense are not the perpetrators, the appropriate response is to refuse to comply. https://t.co/7XVqMYvfs1

  — J.D. Tuccille (@JD_Tuccille) September 9, 2023

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

  These guys respect emergency declaration orders. They’ll voluntarily disarm just like in old Mexico where gun possession is illegal, I’m sure….. https://t.co/OXE2pUAtxI pic.twitter.com/QkT84WfQtZ

  — Randy Clark (@RandyClarkBBTX) September 9, 2023

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

  Tyrants always trample on rights under the false guise of safeguarding the public. https://t.co/MhrHjY5FhE

  — Justin Amash (@justinamash) September 9, 2023

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

  Literally treason. You’re not a dictator. You do not have the authority to disregard the US Constitution. The US Constitution cannot be altered via EO. You do not get to disregard your oath of office. Your days in office are numbered. https://t.co/msp9ufnSVu

  — Alex Shepard 🇺🇸 (@Sinnersaint39) September 9, 2023

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

  Albuquerque for the next 30 days: https://t.co/aRvnMo8L5C pic.twitter.com/bVIdTweBaN

  — Julio Rosas (@Julio_Rosas11) September 9, 2023

  How many of those murders, or any murders, are by people with CCW permits?

  Will you be personally reimbursing the taxpayers after the inevitable legal challenges result in the government having to pay plaintiffs’ legal fees under 42 U.S. Code § 1988? https://t.co/rp66l6Rdji

  — Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) September 9, 2023

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

  Remember the past.  

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

  In New Mexico, Governor @GovMLG‘s capricious gun ban in the name of “public health” serves to remind us that history doesn’t always repeat itself but it often rhymes. https://t.co/7NL0No9235 https://t.co/7NL0No9235 pic.twitter.com/loqjzf9EfG

  — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) September 9, 2023

  Any bets on which Democrat governors will follow suit?

  pic.twitter.com/fGih3Czg6h

  — Natalie F Danelishen (@Chesschick01) September 9, 2023

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

   

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 18:58

• The Art Of The Lose-Lose Deal
  The Art Of The Lose-Lose Deal

  Authored by MN Gordon via Economic Prism,

  

  Has there ever been a worse time to be a lowly American wage earner?

  First, Washington spewed out $6 trillion in printing press money.  This pushed consumer price inflation to a 40 year high.  At the same time, it diluted wages from a standard lager to a pilsner light.

  Now, at this very moment, the demand for higher wages through union organization is leading to the mass culling of payrolls.  The higher wages go.  The less jobs will remain.

  Just last month, for example, Yellow Corp., a trucking company, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.  Yellow CEO Darren Hawkins blamed the International Brotherhood of Teamsters for driving the company out of business.

  Teamsters General President Sean O’Brien pointed the finger at, “Yellow’s dysfunctional, greedy C-suite” for the company’s demise.  Adding, “They shamelessly pin their corporate incompetence on working people.”

  Who’s right?  Who’s wrong?  Who knows?

  What we do know is that some 30,000 workers are now looking for jobs.  For some of these truckers, losing their jobs at Yellow will be the best thing that ever happened to them.

  Maybe they’ll be compelled to learn a new skill.  One that demands higher compensation without the need for union strongarming.

  With some hard work and perseverance, they’ll come out far ahead of where working at Yellow ever got them.  They may be rewarded with fatter paychecks and greater satisfaction in their new endeavors.

  Others, however, will fall further behind.  Maybe they’ll take a job with a competitor at reduced income.  Maybe they’ll find themselves on the unemployment dole.

  Regardless, for millions of U.S. workers something’s got to give.  Incomes and the cost of living are at a significant mismatch.  And squaring the difference via credit cards is a dreadful solution.

  Expect the Unexpected

  The challenge for wage earners is that everything’s so doggone expensive these days.  The average gross annual wage income per full time employee in the U.S. is roughly $75,000.

  That may sound like a lot.  But it really doesn’t cut it.

  After factoring in federal and state income tax, social security and Medicare, $75,000 is eroded to about $57,000.  Then subtract 4 percent of gross (or $3,000) for 401k contribution and another 6 percent of gross (or $4,500) for health insurance premiums.  The $57,000 of after-tax income drops to just $49,000 in actual take home pay.  That comes to $4,125 per month.

  Now, subtract $2,000 for rent, $400 for a car payment, $100 for cell phone charges, $200 for gas, $300 for utilities, $800 for food, and you’re left with $325 to get through the month.  Buy the kids a pair of shoes and a couple of Happy Meals – or a round of puberty blockers – and the money is long gone.

  We recognize these numbers are gross generalizations.  In some American cities the costs will be more.  In others they will be less.  The point is a $75,000 income doesn’t get you very far these days.  That’s the reality Americans are facing.

  According to a recent study by SecureSave, 67 percent of Americans don’t have enough money saved to cover an unexpected expense.  However, unexpected expenses, as based on a broad spectrum of empirical evidence, should be expected.

  Inevitably a head gasket blows, a crown breaks, or the washer goes on the fritz.  Having savings set aside for expenses like these is essential.

  Work Less, Make More

  When wages fall short of expenses, the options for getting though the month are lacking.  The difference can be made up with credit card debt, which leads to bigger problems down the road.

  Another option available to wage earners is to take on a second job to boost their incomes.  Still, there are only so many hours in the day.

  Alternatively, families can downsize their lifestyles.  They can go on a beans and rice diet.  They can move into smaller apartments in seedy parts of town.

  If needed, several families can pile into the same residence.  The quality of life suffers.  But at least the bills are paid.

  Again, these options are lacking.  This is why promises of working less and making more are so, so appealing.

  Have you ever heard of Shawn Fain?

  We hadn’t heard of him until the Wall Street Journal published a special Labor Day article titled, Meet the Man Who Has Detroit on Edge.

  Fain, as we learned, is the 15th president of the United Auto Workers (UAW).  He recently took out incumbent Ray Curry and assumed office in March.

  Fain, a fan of ‘90s hip hop who carries one of his grandfather’s Chrysler pay stubs from 1940 in his pocket, has an incredible idea.  He wants auto workers to have a shorter, 32-hour workweek and a 46 percent wage increase.

  In fact, this is the deal he recently put forth as part of his negotiations of new labor contracts for about 146,000 hourly workers at General Motors, Ford Motor, and Stellantis (the global car company that now owns Jeep, Ram and Chrysler).

  The Art of the Lose-Lose Deal

  The existing contracts expire on September 14 – in less than a week.  According to Fain, if a deal isn’t reached by then, he’s ready to strike all three automakers at the same time.

  “‘How far are you willing to go to get the contract you deserve?’  Fain yelled to a roaring crowd at a recent rally, after walking on stage to Eminem’s ‘Not Afraid.’”

  Clearly, Fain knows exactly what he is doing.  Though, he may not get his intended result for the 146,000 hourly workers he represents.  He may get something much, much different than what he’s bargaining for.

  About a month ago, as part of his negotiating strategery, Fain made a public spectacle of throwing Stellantis’s bargaining proposals in the trash.  Fain said Stellantis was making “lowball” demands that are “a slap in the face” to union autoworkers.

  Two weeks later, UAW Vice President Rich Boyer revealed that Stellantis has threatened to relocate production of their Ram 1500 pickup trucks from its location in metro Detroit to a facility in Mexico.  Stellantis has yet to confirm or deny the move.

  As the clock ticks forward, the September 14 deadline is rapidly approaching.  With a unified strike of all three automakers, Fain and Boyer may get the ‘work less, make more’ deal they’re proposing.  They may even tout this as a big win.

  But who ultimately wins?  Not the UAW.  Not General Motors, Ford Motor, and Stellantis – at least initially.  But, rather, laborers in Mexico.

  Such are the sort of shabby lose-lose deals that union bosses and corporate executives must come to following an episode of extreme currency debasement.  An episode that is now only partially contained.

  At this rate, Detroit autoworkers – the ones that still have jobs – will soon find a 46 percent wage increase will be woefully insufficient.

  What will Fain and Boyer demand then?  What sort of discord and discontent will prevail?

  [Editor’s note: Is the Pentagon secretly provoking China to attack Taiwan?  Are your finances prepared for such madness?  Answers to these important questions can be found in a unique Special Report.  You can access a copy here for less than a penny.]

  Sincerely,

  MN Gordon
  for Economic Prism

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 18:30

• Watch: A Confused Biden At G20 Butchers Saudi Crown Prince's Name
  Watch: A Confused Biden At G20 Butchers Saudi Crown Prince’s Name

  At the G20, The Associated Press and others took note of President Biden’s “hearty handshake” with Mohammed bin Salman after the lesser and more ambiguous fist bump ​​​​​​of over a year ago, which at the time was supposed to represent some degree of greater distance between the US and the Saudi crown prince, who has long stood accused of ordering the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018.

  “Biden warmly greeted Saudi Arabia’s de facto leader, Mohammed bin Salman, after they appeared together along with several other leaders at the Group of 20 summit Saturday in New Delhi. The leaders had gathered to announce an ambitious plan to build a rail and shipping corridor linking India with the Middle East and Europe,” the AP wrote. Smiles and warmth all around, as India’s Modi also draped his hand over the pair…

  

  But what the mainstream press has so far been largely silent about is the deeply awkward moment where Biden stumbled through the names of world leaders, and struggled to speak coherently while mumbling through some brief written remarks.

  While it would perhaps be funny and ironic if done on purpose (to shame Riyadh at a moment of continued tensions with Washington over oil output), he specifically butchered the name of Mohammed bin Salman.

  Watch as the US president—who is often dubbed in international press “the leader of the free world”—messes up not only the Saudi prince’s name but also mispronounces European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s name.

  JOE BIDEN: “The Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salam, excuse me, Mohammed bin Salman … and since he’s not speaking today, I wanted to — well maybe he is speaking today. I had a note he wasn’t speaking. Any rate, I’m gonna stop there.”

  We Pity You America. pic.twitter.com/rkeHgoRymi

  — The Jaipur Dialogues (@JaipurDialogues) September 9, 2023

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

  One might say MbS certainly deserves it, but again it didn’t appear purposeful, and a flummoxed Biden soon after just seemed to give up in saying, “I wanted to… well maybe he is speaking today. I had a note he wasn’t speaking. Any rate, I’m gonna stop there.”

  Never mind the 2024 presidential election which is just around the corner, but how will Biden get through this G20 summit weekend in New Delhi? Things are off to a rough start.

  Meanwhile, The Daily Beast actually has this one correct (blind squirrel, nut etc)…

  Jamal Khashoggi was brutally killed and dismembered on the orders of Mohammed bin Salman in 2018.https://t.co/Awu5VsXniA

  — The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) September 9, 2023

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

  Another important development has been the G20’s inability to produce a statement condemning Russia and its invasion of Ukraine. This was somewhat expected, but Biden has so far failed to rally allies especially among BRICS and global south countries.

  “Diplomats had been working furiously to draft a final joint statement in the lead-up to the summit but hit snags on language to describe the Ukraine war,” CNN observed Saturday. “The eventual compromise statement amounted to a coup for the summit’s host, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, but still reflected a position far softer those the United States and its Western allies have adopted individually.”

  The section of the G20 declaration where the US, UK and Europe hoped to include more teeth failed to so much as mention Russia at all. “All states must refrain from the threat or use of force to seek territorial acquisition,” it reads. And the declaration added more mutedly: “there were different views and assessments of the situation.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 18:00

• Trump Explains Why He Didn't Fire Fauci
  Trump Explains Why He Didn’t Fire Fauci

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  

  Former President Donald Trump responded to questions about why he did not terminate the employment of former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director Anthony Fauci amid the early onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

  During an interview with radio host Hugh Hewitt, President Trump was asked about Dr. Fauci, who had been on the Trump pandemic response force, in 2020.  “First of all, you’re not allowed,” the former president said when asked why he didn’t fire him, which Mr. Hewitt said was the “biggest knock” on his presidency.

  “No, no, no, Dr. Fauci was there. First of all, he’s civil service, and you’re not allowed to fire him. But forget that because I don’t necessarily go by everything … but Dr. Fauci would tell me things, and I wouldn’t do them in many cases. But also, he wasn’t a big player in my administration,” President Trump said. “Dr. Fauci became a big player in the administration of Biden. He’s a very big player in Biden’s administration.“

  The former president has received some criticism—namely from Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis—for not firing Dr. Fauci, who ultimately became a controversial figure during the pandemic for his often dire predictions about the course of the virus. The former public health official also often recommended people wear masks, get the vaccines, and defended COVID-19-related lockdowns and stay-at-home orders.

  In response to President Trump’s comments this week, Mr. DeSantis dismissed the former president’s arguments that he couldn’t fire him. He said that President Trump’s comment differs from the ones he gave about Dr. Fauci in the past.

  “It’s important to point out for a long time that was not his excuse,” Mr. DeSantis told the Rubin Report on Wednesday. “His excuse had been that if you fired Fauci, both the Democrats and the media would have pitched a fit, which, of course, is 100 percent true.”

  “But that’s the price of leadership. You got to stand up and do what’s right,” the governor continued to say. “Clearly, he could have been fired from the White House Task Force. There was no obligation to run him out at press conference after press conference, have him doing media interviews.”

  During the pandemic, Mr. DeSantis grew a national profile for ending COVID-19 lockdowns early and reopening businesses while also backing laws that would prevent vaccine or mask mandates, or any new lockdowns. However, like other governors around the United States, Mr. DeSantis in March 2020 ordered a statewide lockdown due to the virus before he rescinded it several months later.

  “During the height of the COVID stuff in 2020, Fauci would do local hits in Florida media attacking me for having schools open and some of these other stuff,” he told the Rubin Report. “So, there was no obligation to do that. I think you could have also fired him from NIH because he had basically committed misconduct with the gain of function [research].”

  

  But President Trump said that Mr. DeSantis “shut down Florida,” and the state “was tight as a drum.” He added: “He had vax lines. He was vaxxing everything. Now, he talks about the vaccinations this and that.”

  “And let me tell you the other thing. I will send you, after this conversation, five articles about how much he loves Dr. Fauci,” he continued. “‘I do what Dr. Fauci says. This is Ron DeSantimonious. I do what Dr. Fauci says.’ That’s what he says. And I’ve got the articles here. But he doesn’t like to go back.”

  The spat over Dr. Fauci, who stepped down from his federal government positions in late 2022, comes as some hospitals, schools, and businesses have reinstated mask mandates. In a Thursday news conference, the Florida governor announced that there won’t be any new mandates in his state, reiterating a prior stance he has taken.

  The former president added: “To every covid tyrant who wants to take away our freedom, hear these words: we will not comply, so don’t even think about it. We will not shut down our schools; we will not accept your lockdowns; we will not abide by your mask mandates; and we will not tolerate your vaccine mandates.

  “Even today, parts of our country are forcing children to wear masks in the classroom,” Mr. DeSantis told the news conference. “Those mandates are [dead on arrival’ in Florida, and we will protect parents and children from this perpetual COVID hysteria.”

  As for President Trump, he released a video several days ago saying that Americans should “not comply” with any lockdowns, mandates, or other COVID-19 rules.

  “The left-wing lunatics are trying very hard to bring back COVID lockdowns and mandates with all of their sudden fearmongering about the new variants that are coming,” he said. “Gee whiz, you know what else is coming? An election.“

  The former president continued: “To every COVID tyrant who wants to take away our freedom, hear these words: we will not comply, so don’t even think about it. We will not shut down our schools; we will not accept your lockdowns; we will not abide by your mask mandates; and we will not tolerate your vaccine mandates.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 17:30

• Rand Paul Blasts Pentagon For Role In Niger, Demands To Know How Many Boots On Ground
  Rand Paul Blasts Pentagon For Role In Niger, Demands To Know How Many Boots On Ground

  Sen. Rand Paul has sent a letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin demanding to know more about the Pentagon’s role in Niger, which recently underwent a coup wherein Niger’s US-trained military overthrow the democratically elected US-backed president. 

  Naturally, the senator from Kentucky has some questions. The letter was sent Tuesday and subsequently obtained by Politico. Among Paul’s chief aims is to assess just how many American troops are still in Niger, which is now being ruled by a junta, which includes Brig. Gen. Moussa Salaou Barmou, who received training by elite US forces.

  “Under what authorities, and or what purpose did U.S. forces provide training to Moussa Salaou Barmou or any other Nigerien forces and coup leaders who overthrew President Mohamed Bazoum,” Paul asked in the letter.

  

  He’s further demanding to know which specific Niger forces were beneficiaries of US security aid and support, and where US-supplied equipment went.

  “Is the Department of Defense concerned that any current recipients of funds, training, equipment or other kinds support … is currently engaged in human rights violations or engaged in human rights violations in the last ten years,” Paul wrote.

  The stakes couldn’t be higher, given the potential for broader regional war with foreign forces (including the French) in the middle, as Responsible Statecraft’s Kelly Vlahos points out:

  There are 1,016 U.S. troops still in Niger — a virtual powderkeg of political and military unrest since an armed junta overthrew its president and locked him and his family in the basement of the government palace in late July.

  As a result, regional governments under the banner of ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) is threatening to intervene militarily until the still-imprisoned leader is restored to office. The coup leaders have responded by rallying the people to their cause, as well as other armed juntas in the region.

  Below are a couple more pointed questions from the letter, which seem to allude remotely to the recent Afghan pullout fiasco:

  How many countries is the U.S. military operating in under the 2001 AUMF? How many are operating under Sections 333 and 127e of the U.S Code, and who specifically is receiving aid and training in those countries? How much money went to Niger?

  Aside from the tragic deaths of four American soldiers in October 2017 in an ambush, how many service members have come under fire in Niger since 2013? Under what authorities are being used to keep a U.S. military footprint there now?

  It should be noted that coup leaders like Brig. Gen. Barmou weren’t just trained by the Pentagon in Africa, but in his case he attended military schooling at Fort Benning, Georgia and the National Defense University in Washington, D.C.

  “As citizens of a Constitutional republic,” Sen. Paul concluded in his letter, “Americans must be informed of hostilities involving the Armed Forces so that the people can participate in national debates over war and peace.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 17:00

• ICC Lead Prosecutor: We Will Prosecute Cyber 'War Crimes'
  ICC Lead Prosecutor: We Will Prosecute Cyber ‘War Crimes’

  Authored by Connor Freeman via The Libertarian Institute, 

  In an article published last month in Foreign Policy Analytics, Karim Khan – the lead prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC), based in the Hague – declared that his office will now be investigating and potentially prosecuting “war crimes” committed in cyberspace. This comes after Joe Biden ordered his administration to begin sharing evidence of alleged Russian war crimes committed in Ukraine with the ICC.

  Khan wrote that his office will investigate cyber crimes that possibly violate the Rome Statute. “Cyber warfare does not play out in the abstract. Rather, it can have a profound impact on people’s lives… Attempts to impact critical infrastructure such as medical facilities or control systems for power generation may result in immediate consequences for many, particularly the most vulnerable. Consequently, as part of its investigations, my Office will collect and review evidence of such conduct.”

  

  On Thursday, Washington and London sanctioned 11 people allegedly affiliated with Trickbot, a Russian hacking group accused of targeting businesses and government infrastructure, as well as hospitals, during the coronavirus pandemic. A US Treasury statement describes the individuals as “key actors involved in management and procurement” for Trickbot, which is claimed to be connected with Russian intelligence.

  Lindsay Freeman – the director of technology, law, and policy at Berkely’s Human Rights Center – explained that the ICC’s remit extends beyond hackers themselves to the command structure above them, which could lead to charges against higher level military officers or Russian President Vladimir Putin himself. The ICC issued an arrest warrant for Putin, he has been accused of kidnapping, and unlawfully deporting to Russia, thousands of Ukrainian children as well as teenagers.

  According to a report in Wired, Khan’s office confirmed the new cybercrime mandate with the outlet. “The Office considers that, in appropriate circumstances, conduct in cyberspace may potentially amount to war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and/or the crime of aggression.” The spokesperson continued, “…such conduct may potentially be prosecuted before the Court where the case is sufficiently grave.”

  Disinformation, vaguely defined, is listed as one of Khan’s concerns in his article, “We are likewise mindful of the misuse of the internet to amplify hate speech and disinformation, which may facilitate or even directly lead to the occurrence of atrocities.” He suggests the ICC could prosecute people for leaking confidential information as well, writing “disinformation, destruction, the alteration of data, and the leaking of confidential information may obstruct the administration of justice at the ICC and, as such, constitute crimes within the ICC’s jurisdiction that might be investigated or prosecuted.”

  It is noted, in the Wired report, that Kiev is currently conducting its own investigation into Russian “war crimes carried out via cyberattacks.” Evidence collected as part of the Ukrainian government’s investigation could also be provided to the ICC’s prosecutors to assist with their cases.

  Regarding the legal precedent, Bobby Chesney – director of the Strauss Center for International Security and Law at the University of Texas Law School – says “I don’t think anyone who’s serious about international law would dispute that there are at least some circumstances in which intentional harm to civilians can be carried out through cyber means in a way that qualifies as an attack” that violates the Rome Statute’s principle that warring parties distinguish between military targets and civilians. Neither Russia, Ukraine, nor the United States, are parties to the Rome Statute.

  Last June, Gen. Paul Nakasone, the head of US Cyber Command, revealed to Sky News that Washington has been aiding Ukraine by conducting “offensive” cyber-attacks against Russia. Nakasone said the US has “conducted a series of operations across the full spectrum; offensive, defensive, information operations” aimed at Russia, without offering more details.

  Ukraine formally joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s Cyber Defense Center earlier this year. Biden has previously warned that cyber conflicts are liable to start a real war with Russia and China. “If we end up in a war, a real shooting war with a major power, it’s going to be as a consequence of a cyber breach of great consequence.”

  As with the United States, Russia is not a member of the ICC and does not recognize the court. In 2002, President George W. Bush signed into law the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act, also known as the “Hague Invasion Act.” The bipartisan legislation goes as far as to authorize military action against the Netherlands – a fellow founding member of NATO – to prevent US officials and military personnel accused of war crimes from facing accountability before an international tribunal.

  During the Donald Trump administration, the US sanctioned ICC officials for attempting to investigate American war crimes committed in Afghanistan. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo charged the court is an “unaccountable political institution masquerading as a legal body.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 16:30

• Fired NYC Teachers Who Refused Vaccine To Be Reinstated With Back Pay: Judge
  Fired NYC Teachers Who Refused Vaccine To Be Reinstated With Back Pay: Judge

  A New York state judge on Wednesday ruled that 10 employees fired by the NYC Department of Education for refusing the Covid-19 vaccine must be reinstated with back pay.

  

  In his ruling, State Supreme Court Judge Ralph J. Porzio found that the city acted illegally when it denied religious exemptions to certain city teachers – who went to Children’s Health Defense to sponsor a lawsuit against the department following failed attempts to claim religious accommodation for the mandate.

  “This Court sees no rational basis for not allowing unvaccinated classroom teachers in amongst an admitted population of primarily unvaccinated students,” wrote Porzio, adding “As such, the decision to summarily deny the classroom teachers amongst the Panel Petitioners based on an undue hardship, without any further evidence of individualized analysis, is arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable. As such, each classroom teacher amongst the Panel Petitioners is entitled to a religious exemption from the Vaccine Mandate.”

  Porzio also slammed the city’s assertion that allowing teachers religious exemptions would place undue hardship on the city, calling the claim “arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable.”

  In the order, he granted relief to 10 plaintiffs who completed the administrative steps to request an exemption. He denied relief to six plaintiffs because they did not complete the administrative process.

  As part of his ruling, Judge Porzio made reference to Mayor Eric Adams’s lifting of a vaccine mandate for some private employees in 2022, notably celebrities and athletes. He said the decision was evidence that the mandate for public workers was done on an arbitrary basis.

  New York City imposed a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for all Department of Education workers that started on Oct. 1, 2021, and lasted until Feb. 10, 2023. Reports indicated that thousands of workers, teachers, and other staffers lost their jobs for not adhering to the mandate. –Epoch Times

  An attorney for the plaintiffs, Sujata Gibson, said that they have been “fighting for this since August of 2021 for these 10 people specifically. And we won and we won big for them,” adding “They were reinstated with back pay, with no break in service, and attorneys’ fees. That’s huge.”

  “The judge’s ruling yesterday, while not everything we wanted, is a precedent-setting victory, and a watershed moment in the teachers’ fight,” she added, noting that thousands of other unvaccinated workers were similarly denied a religious exemption, and can now sue the city based on this new precedent.

  Gibson added that another class action lawsuit may be in the cards.

  “The court’s ruling on class certification still leaves the door open to future relief for thousands of teachers negatively affected by the vaccine requirement,” she said, adding “We intend to file a motion of reconsideration on a narrower basis.”

  It comes months after a lawyer for another group of fired, unvaccinated New York City teachers claimed that Mayor Eric Adams’s administration blacklisted employees who refused to get the vaccine with a special code.

  “Loosely speaking, it is like a scarlet letter,” lawyer John Bursch told the New York Post earlier this year. “The employee’s personnel file shows a [generic] problem code that could just as easily be [for] committing a crime as declining to take a vaccine for religious reasons. In some instances, when plaintiffs tried to obtain employment elsewhere, they were told that they were red-flagged because of the problem code,” he said. -Epoch Times

  NYC Mayor Eric Adams rescinded the vaccine mandate for workers earlier this year, allowing some 1,700 fired workers to reapply for their jobs (without back pay or retroactive full benefits).

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 16:00

• Zelensky On Starlink-Gate: Musk "Committing Evil" & Driven By "Big Ego"
  Zelensky On Starlink-Gate: Musk “Committing Evil” & Driven By “Big Ego”

  Update(1640ET): Amid the continuing controversy over Elon Musk having previously made the decision to block Kiev from utilizing Starlink satellites to attack Crimea, Zelensky’s office has lashed out in what we might call a “bite the hand that feeds you” moment.

  Musk “committed” and “enabled evil” by denying the ability of Kiev to launch massive drone attacks on Crimea last year, Mikhail Podoliak, a senior aide to President Zelensky said Friday. Somewhat ironically, he wrote this charge on the Musk-owned platform X. Here’s what he said, framing the most hard-hitting lines suggesting Musk is doing “evil”… awkwardly in the form of a question (likely fearing Musk could at any time switch off Ukraine’s Starlink comms altogether):

  “Sometimes a mistake is much more than just a mistake,” Podoliak wrote. “By not allowing Ukrainian drones to destroy part of the Russian military (!) fleet via Starlink interference, Elon Musk allowed this fleet to fire Kalibr missiles at Ukrainian cities.”

  “As a result, civilians, children are being killed. This is the price of a cocktail of ignorance and big ego. However, the question still remains: why do some people so desperately want to defend war criminals and their desire to commit murder? And do they now realize that they are committing evil and encouraging evil?”

  Sometimes a mistake is much more than just a mistake. By not allowing Ukrainian drones to destroy part of the Russian military (!) fleet via #Starlink interference, @elonmusk allowed this fleet to fire Kalibr missiles at Ukrainian cities. As a result, civilians, children are…

  — Михайло Подоляк (@Podolyak_M) September 7, 2023

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

  To recount, Musk has pointed out amid an avalanche of mainstream media “outrage” that—

  “The obvious intent being to sink most of the Russian fleet at anchor,” he wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter.

  “If I had agreed to their request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation.”

  But to Zelensky and his aides, this is “evil” apparently. We wonder what’s next in this saga. Some online are going so far as to call for the US government to “nationalize” SpaceX’s systems which pertain to Ukraine…

  This guy’s assets, the ones pertaining to national security, should be nationalized. When the balloon goes up in the PACOM AOR we can’t have this idiot’s thumb on the scales for the enemy. https://t.co/otQTChm4PT

  — Jack Murphy (@JackMurphyRGR) September 8, 2023

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

  * * *

  Since Elon Musk has apparently become Donald Trump – in that any lie/twist/gaslighting will do to further the narrative, no matter how false it is known to be – last night saw the mainstream media overwhelmed with circle-jerk-justified accusations that Musk meddled in the Ukraine-Russia war to stop a Zelenskyy-driven offensive (that likely would have turned the war and hailed victory ticker-tape parades up and down Kiev’s streets).

  

  Ok, admittedly that last bit was out hyperbole; but given a quick read of headlines from CNN and NBC, we could be forgiven for this view.

  Elon Musk secretly ordered his engineers to turn off his company’s Starlink satellite communications network near the Crimean coast last year to disrupt a Ukrainian sneak attack on the Russian naval fleet, according to an excerpt adapted from Walter Isaacson’s new biography of the eccentric billionaire titled “Elon Musk.”

  As Ukrainian submarine drones strapped with explosives approached the Russian fleet, they “lost connectivity and washed ashore harmlessly,” Isaacson writes.

  NBC led with the following headline: Ukraine is furious with Elon Musk for thwarting an attack on Russia’s navy

  Tech billionaire Elon Musk has come under fire from Ukraine after it emerged he thwarted a major attack on the Russian navy.

  According to excerpts published by CNN, a soon-to-be-released biography of the SpaceX CEO claims that Musk secretly ordered his engineers to turn off his Starlink satellite network over Russian-occupied Crimea last year in order to prevent a Ukrainian drone attack on Russia’s naval fleet.

  Elon Musk last year secretly ordered SpaceX engineers to switch off the Starlink satellite communications network near the Crimean coast in order to thwart a Ukrainian surprise attack on Russia’s naval fleet, according to Walter Isaacson’s upcoming Musk biography. pic.twitter.com/uPto8hm1pW

  — The Recount (@therecount) September 7, 2023

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

  The mainstream media did not have to look too far to find someone willing to denigrate Musk:

  Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, blasted the tech billionaire on X, formerly Twitter, which Musk owns.

  “Sometimes a mistake is much more than just a mistake,” Podolyak wrote.

  “By not allowing Ukrainian drones to destroy part of the Russian military (!) fleet via #Starlink interference, @elonmusk allowed this fleet to fire Kalibr missiles at Ukrainian cities,” he added.

  “As a result, civilians, children are being killed,” Podolyak said.

  “This is the price of a cocktail of ignorance and big ego. However, the question still remains: why do some people so desperately want to defend war criminals and their desire to commit murder? And do they now realize that they are committing evil and encouraging evil?”

  Isaacson quotes Musk at the time as questioning “How am I in this war?”

  “Starlink was not meant to be involved in wars. It was so people can watch Netflix and chill and get online for school and do good peaceful things, not drone strikes.”

  Couple quick questions – how would Musk know – pre-emptively – of the attack, and choose to disable Starlink? Is his intel better than Putin’s; better than the CIA’s?

  The spin here is utterly mind-blowing.

  In fact, according to Musk – who responded to the accusations on X, the details are the exact opposite to how CNN described them…

  In fact, Musk NEVER turned Starlink on in those controversial border zones – for exactly this reason, as he feared using this technology near borders could prompt an escalation in the war.

  The Starlink regions in question were not activated. SpaceX did not deactivate anything.

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 7, 2023

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

  In fact, Musk did not ‘turn Starlink off’ but refused to ‘turn Starlink on’ for Ukraine’s offensive.

  There was an emergency request from government authorities to activate Starlink all the way to Sevastopol.

  The obvious intent being to sink most of the Russian fleet at anchor.

  If I had agreed to their request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and…

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 7, 2023

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

  Which makes more sense to you – the richest man in the world unilaterally switching off internet access to pre-emptively thwart a secret attack by Ukraine on Russia in a Blofeld-esque move? Or the CEO of a major communications company refusing to enable his technology to be used to escalate a war that could well lead to armageddon?

  Both sides should agree to a truce.

  Every day that passes, more Ukrainian and Russian youth die to gain and lose small pieces of land, with borders barely changing. This is not worth their lives.

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 7, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 15:55

• Rail Volumes Fall For Third Straight Month In August
  Rail Volumes Fall For Third Straight Month In August

  By Carolina Worrell of Railway Age

  “August was the third straight month in which total year-over-year U.S. rail carloads have fallen,” Association of American Railroads (AAR) Senior Vice President John T. Gray reported on Sept. 6. Total combined U.S. traffic for the first 35 weeks of 2023 was 16,173,208 carloads and intermodal units, a decrease of 4.9% compared to last year.

  

  Gray said that a major reason why is that “other than automotive manufacturing, the industrial economy, in recent months, has not been doing as well as other areas of the economy. Until industrial activity, and especially manufacturing recovers, rail volumes in many key markets could remain constrained.”

  According to AAR, U.S. Class I railroads for the first eight months of 2023 hauled a total of 7,852,770 carloads, up 0.0%, or 3,625 carloads, from the same period last year; and 8,320,438 intermodal units, down 9.2%, or 838,829 containers and trailers, from last year.

  U.S. railroads originated 1,133,375 carloads in August 2023, down 2.0%, or 23,323 carloads, from August 2022. U.S. railroads also originated 1,239,290 containers and trailers in August 2023, down 6.3%, or 83,717 units, from the same month last year. Combined U.S. carload and intermodal originations in August 2023 were 2,372,665, down 4.3%, or 107,040 carloads and intermodal units from August 2022.

  In August 2023, nine of the 20 carload commodity categories tracked by the AAR each month saw carload gains compared with August 2022. These included: motor vehicles and parts, up 9,374 carloads or 13.6%; petroleum and petroleum products, up 5,567 carloads or 12.9%; and primary metal products, up 1,792 carloads or 4.6%. Commodities that saw declines in August 2023 from August 2022 included: grain, down 22,064 carloads or 22.9%; coal, down 9,754 carloads or 2.8%; and pulp and paper products, down 2,334 carloads or 10.2%.

  Excluding coal, carloads were down 13,569 carloads, or 1.7%, in August 2023 from August 2022. Excluding coal and grain, carloads were up 8,495 carloads, or 1.2%.

  Week 35 (Ending September 2, 2023)

  Total U.S. weekly rail traffic was 476,851 carloads and intermodal units, down 5.4% compared with the same week last year

  

  Total carloads for the week ending September 2 were 231,113 carloads, down 1.6% compared with the same week in 2022, while U.S. weekly intermodal volume was 245,738 containers and trailers, down 8.7% compared to 2022.

  

  North American rail volume for the first 35 weeks of the year (ending Sept. 2) on 10 reporting U.S., Canadian and Mexican railroads totaled 337,338 carloads, down 0.1% compared with the same week last year, and 328,232 intermodal units, down 9.9% compared with last year. Total combined weekly rail traffic in North America was 665,570 carloads and intermodal units, down 5.2%. North American rail volume for the first 35 weeks of 2023 was 22,675,055 carloads and intermodal units, down 4.1% compared with 2022.

  Five of the 10 carload commodity groups posted an increase compared with the same week in 2022. They included motor vehicles and parts, up 2,274 carloads, to 16,073; metallic ores and metals, up 1,968 carloads, to 22,786; and chemicals, up 1,889 carloads, to 32,942. Commodity groups that posted decreases compared with the same week in 2022 included coal, down 4,408 carloads, to 68,598; grain, down 4,403 carloads, to 14,961; and nonmetallic minerals, down 1,219 carloads, to 32,305.

  

  Canadian railroads reported 89,904 carloads for the week, up 2.2%, and 72,134 intermodal units, down 14.6% compared with the same week in 2022. For the first 35 weeks of 2023, Canadian railroads reported cumulative rail traffic volume of 5,519,818 carloads, containers and trailers, down 3.3%.

  

  Mexican railroads reported 16,321 carloads for the week, up 9.2% compared with the same week last year, and 10,360 intermodal units, down 3.5%. Cumulative volume on Mexican railroads for the first 35 weeks of 2023 was 982,029 carloads and intermodal containers and trailers, up 5.1% from the same point last year.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 09/09/2023 – 15:30

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The New Authoritarian Agenda Revealed (Globalism Rebranded)
  The New Authoritarian Agenda Revealed (Globalism Rebranded)

  From Brandon Smith

  In July of last year as the hype surrounding the Covid pandemic was finally dying out, I came across a video promoting a barely publicized project called the “Council for Inclusive Capitalism.”

  The group, headed by Lynn Forester de Rothschild, is the culmination of decades of various globalist agendas combined to represent the ultimate proof of conspiracy.

  Remember when people used to say that global governance by elitists was a paranoid fantasy?

  

  Well, now it’s openly admitted reality.

  The CIC is intimately tied to institutions like the World Economic Forum (WEF), the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), but it is primarily an attempt to link all these organizations more closely to the corporate world in an open display of cooperation. The group pushes the spread of what they call “Stakeholder Capitalism.” This is the notion that international corporations are obligated to engage in social engineering. That’s another way of saying that corporations are required to manipulate citizens and governments with economic punishments and rewards.

  We witnessed this agenda in action during the Covid lockdowns and the rush to enforce vaccine passports. These efforts would not have been possible without the cooperation of major corporate chains working hand-in-hand with national governments. Luckily, the strategy failed as local governments and the public fought back.

  We have also seen stakeholder capitalism on display in the push for Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) guidelines among major companies. Most readers are probably familiar with ESG at this point, but keep in mind, the public was oblivious to the terminology until the past 2 years. Globalists have been developing ESG rules since 2005. As Klaus Schwab of the WEF notes in his book Stakeholder Capitalism:

  The most important characteristic of the stakeholder model today is that the stakes of our system are now more clearly global. Economies, societies, and the environment are more closely linked to each other now than 50 years ago. The model we present here is therefore fundamentally global in nature, and the two primary stakeholders are as well.

  …What was once seen as externalities in national economic policy making and individual corporate decision making will now need to be incorporated or internalized in the operations of every government, company, community, and individual. The planet is thus the center of the global economic system, and its health should be optimized in the decisions made by all other stakeholders.

  The carrot and the stick

  ESG was intended to be the tool that globalists and governments would use to force companies into the stakeholder capitalism model. It is a kind of social credit system, but for companies. The higher a company’s ESG score, the more access to capital and lending they would have (easy money).

  Modern ESG started out in 2005, initially focused on climate controls – influencing corporations to participate in the carbon credit marketplace or face additional taxation.

  But, by 2016 it became something else. ESG widely adopted woke politics including Critical Race Theory, feminism, trans ideology, various elements of Marxism, etc.

  This was the modern ESG that all of us are aware of today. It was an attempt to incentivize the business world to bombard the populace with woke messaging 24/7, and it worked, for a little while anyway.

  The exposure of ESG is perhaps one of the greatest triumphs of the alternative media. It was proof that the “woke-ification” of our economy and society was not the result of some grassroots activist movement or the natural evolution of civilization. No, everything woke was a product, forced into existence by corporate and globalist interests.

  It is with some disappointment I’m sure that Lynn Forester de Rothschild admitted the defeat of ESG at the B20 Summit in India recently. Though, as is usually the case, Rothschild admits that the goal will be to replace the term “ESG” with something else that the public is not as privy to while continuing to institute social credit scoring for companies as a means to dominate them.

  It is typical for globalists to re-brand their projects whenever they get exposed. It’s merely a way to throw the public off the scent. However, I don’t think this tactic is going to work anymore. Researchers are locked on to the ESG dynamic and changing the name will not help the establishment avoid scrutiny.

  Globalists go on the defensive

  I want to point out here that there has been a dramatic shift in globalist circles towards a defensive posture, rather than the offensive posture they held a couple years ago. Apparently, something went very wrong for them during Covid. They were brazen with their rhetoric not long ago, basically admitting their intentions to establish a global authoritarian system. Now they are sheepish and much more careful in the things they say.

  To this end, most of the honest discussion on globalism is no longer found in the statements of the WEF or the halls of the Davos forums. Rather, the true agenda is discussed at less prominent climate change events such as B20 in India or the Summit for a New Global Financing Pact in Paris which I covered in July. These are the events where globalists now feel increasingly free to talk about what they really want.

  Another admission by Rothschild at B20 should be noted as she suggests that Biden’s “Inflation Reduction Act” is one of the best representations of incentivizing climate controls.

  This just confirms what we already suspected; the Inflation Reduction Act had nothing to do with inflation. Rather, it was a way to divert taxpayer funds into government subsidies for carbon taxation and green tech. Taking money out of your pocket and handing it over to corporations who toe the ESG line.

  The CIC wants to dictate global mandates that force companies to adopt ESG-like policies using trillions of dollars in climate funds ($7 trillion per year, to be exact).

  Think of it this way:

  1. Any company that “volunteers” to use less efficient green tech and to promote climate ideology gets access to government funds – they get rewarded.

  2. Any company that refuses to go along with the plan will ultimately face heavy taxation while trying to compete with their subsidized peers – they are forced out of business.

  Sound familiar? It’s not your imagination…

  This is, essentially, the early stages of a global communist/collectivist economic regime.

  “Inclusive capitalism” is a hoax

  And here we get to the crux of the issue.

  • There is no “inclusive capitalism.”

  • There is no “stakeholder capitalism.”

  • There is no “ESG.”

  • Climate change is not an existential threat.

  • Covid was never as severe as they wanted you to think.

  What do these things have in common? All of these issues represent smoke and mirrors, a way to distract the populace from the root intent to create total centralization in the hands of a select few elites. The prize for them is to convince the public to embrace economic micromanagement. This is what ESG was all about. This is what Inclusive Capitalism is all about.

  The globalists want to hand-pick winners and losers. Worse still, they want to use your money to reward the faithful and punish the skeptical. Their goal is to build a global economic panopticon, an unescapable prison where every transaction is monitored, evaluated, authorized or denied and (of course) recorded.

  A central bank digital currency (CDBC) is a crucial milestone in their progress toward this goal. Just imagine how much easier this will be when the 100 or so largest, most influential corporations in the world are on-board and enthusiastic about such a development…

  I wrote about this not long ago:

  All privacy in trade will be gone, except for those people engaging in barter, black markets and commodity-based transactions. This is one of the main reasons global central banks have persistently killed the idea of intrinsically-sound money, like physical gold and silver, for the last 50 years. Remember, barter and black markets are more or less by definition off the books. Untaxed, unregulated and untrackable.

  But don’t be misled – this is much more than an issue of privacy.

  Implementation of CBDCs would also mean that ownership of money and the ability to transact, to participate in the economy, will become privileges, not rights.

  In communist China, use of digital payments is tied to a social credit system. Want access to your checking and savings accounts? Better not say anything critical of the Party, or you could be reported by a neighbor (or a stranger) using the tattletale function on their smartphone. Digital money can disappear in seconds. Want your money back? Prove that you are “loyal” to the Party. There are many subtle levels between “upstanding citizen” and “outlaw,” though, and the CCP adjust their citizens’ financial statuses constantly. Bad social credit might mean taxis won’t even stop for you. That you’re prevented from purchasing from upscale shops. (Insufficiently healthy? Your e-yuan won’t even let you buy junk food at 7-11. Seriously!) The citizen is guilty until proven innocent.

  Once the economy is locked into an ideological prison and access to private trade can be denied by a handful of bureaucrats working with corporations, the establishment then has the means to dictate all of society.

  Our behaviors, our beliefs, our principles, our morals.

  For if the government has the power to determine whether you and your family eat or starve, they have the power to compel you to do anything.

  This is why owning untraceable, intrinsically valuable physical precious metals is crucial to your own personal liberty. Today, now, while you still can, diversify your savings with an alternative form of money that will always be accepted, without question, anywhere in the world.

  There’s a reason the globalists hate gold and silver. They’re virtually the only financial assets you can own that are “off the books.” Just as untrackable as cash (they hate cash, too, but not as much) and, better yet, uninflatable, unhackable and free from central bank meddling.

  Fight the globalist agenda every step of the way. And make sure that, no matter what, you and your loved ones can endure their tyranny without compromising your beliefs.

  *  *  *

  High inflation means your 401(k) or IRA will be worth less, potentially much less, when you retire. Personally, I recommend a Gold IRA for the ultimate retirement security. To see why, Click here to get a FREE info kit from Birch Gold Group about Gold IRAs. (This comes with NO obligation or strings attached.)

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 23:40

• The World Behind Bars
  The World Behind Bars

  El Salvador has the world’s highest prison population rate, according to data collected in the World Prison Brief by the Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research (ICPR).

  The Central American country had 1,086 people serving jail sentences per 100,00 inhabitants in May 2022.

  

  As Statista’s Florian Zandt shows in the chart below, most countries with a high prisoner-to-inhabitant ratio are small and could be considered developing economies – with one major exception.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  This exception is the United States, which boasts a prison population rate of 531.

  Technically, the U.S. is featured not only once but thrice in the top 8, with American Samoa and Guam being unincorporated territories.

  Other big economies mainly feature drastically lower on the ICPR’s list.

  Notable exceptions to this rule include Turkey, Brazil and Russia, placing 12th, 13th and 26th, respectively.

  When looking at the data from the perspective of the overall prison population, the picture is markedly different. By this indicator, the United States comes first, followed by China, Brazil, India and Russia.

  Interestingly, all five current BRICS nations but only one G7 member are featured in the top 15.

  While the ICPR’s dataset allows comparisons between countries, the reporting timeframes for the official figures often differ wildly from nation to nation. Given this caveat, the data doesn’t support showing the situation at one specific set date.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 23:20

• House Education Chair Says Groups Like Moms For Liberty Face Daunting Task
  House Education Chair Says Groups Like Moms For Liberty Face Daunting Task

  Authored by Ben Sellers via Headline USA,

  Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., the chair of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, said that despite recent victories in the clash against wokeness within the public education system, a daunting road lay ahead for grassroots groups like Moms for Liberty that have risen to combat the encroaching threats of classroom indoctrination and grooming.

  

  Foxx touted the House’s passage in March of the Parents Bill of Rights Act, which currently sits stalled in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions under chairman Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.

  The committee, stacked with firebrand progressives and wishy-washy RINOs, leaves the bill’s fate uncertain for the foreseeable future.

  However, in the event that the socialist Sen. Sanders were to bring it to the floor as written, the bill would mandate a newfound level of transparency, requiring that school boards provide clear information on their curricula and materials; budget and revenues; safety concerns; enrollment and transfer options; and a litany of red-flag behaviors related to staff, counselors and contractors.

  That, according to Foxx, is when the real work would begin.

  “All of this is going to entail tremendous involvement at the local level,” she said during an exclusive interview with Headline USA along with Brooke Weiss, the chair of the Mecklenburg County Moms for Liberty chapter. “… It’s going to be a sustained and focused kind of thing.”

  Friends and foes alike could count on Moms for Liberty to “keep showing up because we know we are fighting for the survival of America,” Weiss said in response to Foxx’s call to action.

  “[Y]ou can bet we aren’t going anywhere,” she tweeted following the interview.

  “Moms for Liberty is 2½ years old, growing every day, and making major progress in restoring parental rights and improving public education,” she added. “We are successful because our mission is focused on a singular issue (education) & because we are able to mobilize people into real action.”

  I am so grateful to have had the opportunity to meet w/ @virginiafoxx today.
  You can bet we aren’t going anywhere. @Moms4Liberty is 2 1/2 years old, growing every day, & making major progress. 1/ https://t.co/hghFhRvLL0

  — Brooke Weiss, instapot insurrectionist (@BrookeWeiss) September 6, 2023

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

  Although the tendency among some—even conservatives—is to look to the government for solutions to solve the mess that decades of subversive Marxist influence and dark-money coercion have wrought in the school system, Foxx pointed out that this would be counterproductive at best.

  “Anytime somebody tells me ‘I want a national something,’ I tell them don’t do it,” she noted in response to a question about a national book-rating system, which Moms for Liberty has endorsed.

  “It is the wrong way to go,” Foxx continued. “You put power in the hands of people far away from you—it is the most dangerous thing to do.”

  Rather than pivot too far in either direction, though, Foxx, 80—an 18-year congressional veteran who spent time previously in the North Carolina state legislature and as a sociology professor at Appalachian State University—took a more pragmatic outlook.

  She signaled that she did not, in principle, oppose the idea of abolishing the federal Department of Education, as some conservatives have called to do.

  “If the Lord put me in charge, I’d get rid of everything,” she mused.

  Yet, she noted that when former President Ronald Reagan ran on a campaign of doing that very thing, he ultimately wound up strengthening it.

  The only solution, as she saw it, was to “devolve the money back to the states” and allow each individual jurisdiction to decide how best to spend its funding.

  Even so, that would not entirely addresss one of the biggest concerns facing schools, which is the influence of outside organizations seeking intentionally to politicize the local school agendas and infect them with controversial issues such as critical race theory and transgenderism.

  Foxx said she remained mystified by people—including the Democratic House colleagues with whom she is sometimes forced to find common ground—who would oppose common-sense measures like transparency and accountability for schools.

  “I don’t know what planet they grew up on,” she said. “… It’s truly amazing to me.”

  Nonetheless, it is citizen–watchdogs like Weiss, she said, who have both the power and the responsibility to do what the most powerful government in the world cannot.

  Moms for Liberty has only continued to grow in its renown following a national summit in Philadelphia over the summer that featured former President Donald Trump and other luminaries.

  While the biggest storyline from the event may have been the Left’s violent and destructive protests outside of it—shortly after the parent group was labeled a “hate group” by the Southern Poverty Law Center, in collusion with the Biden administration—Weiss said that exposing the true colors of left-wing extremists ultimately left M4L looking all the better.

  In June, M4L co-founders Tiffany Justice and Tina Descovich offered Headline USA a defiant statement via email in reaction to the SPLC’s insults.

  “Empowering parents continues to be our mission today and that has fueled our organization’s growth—like wildfire to now 45 states in the country,” said the statement.

  “Name-calling parents who want to be a part of their child’s education as ‘hate groups’ or ‘bigoted’ just further exposes what this battle is all about: Who fundamentally gets to decide what is taught to our kids in school—parents or government employees?” it continued. “We believe that parental rights do not stop at the classroom door and no amount of hate from groups like this is going to stop that.”

  Headline USA reached out to the group for additional reaction to Foxx’s recent remarks asking whether M4L was prepared for the “sustained and focused” fight ahead and will update with any response.

  Ben Sellers is the editor of Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/realbensellers.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 23:00

• Chinese Imports Of Iran Oil Soar To Near Record In Clear Breach Of US Sanctions
  Chinese Imports Of Iran Oil Soar To Near Record In Clear Breach Of US Sanctions

  Less than a month ago, we reported that according to Kpler estimates, China was expected to import as much as 1.5 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil from Iran in August, the most since at least 2013.

  

  On Thursday, the latest China trade data confirmed just that when customs data revealed that China snapped up Iranian shipments, and state-owned processors ramped up operating rates after a period of maintenance work, in clear breach of US sanctions, soft as they may be, on Iranian oil purchases.

  China nation imported 52.8 million tons of crude oil last month, equivalent to 12.5 million barrels a day, 21% more than July, according to Bloomberg calculations. The monthly volume was near a record set in June 2020.

  Chinese purchases were driven by a binge on Iranian crude supplies, said Viktor Katona, lead crude analyst with Kpler ahead of data release, as offers from the Persian Gulf producer was “by far the most price-competitive option”. Additionally, imports were also driven by Chinese refiners’ re-stockpiling activity, he added.

  Importers were keen to buy discounted barrels from Russia and Iran in order to maximize profit margins from domestic and overseas fuel sales. State refiners were running at record rates in August, according to OilChem. A bumper exports quota issued last week means plants will keep their runs and inflows elevated in support for growth.

  Meanwhile, as noted earlier, Chinese oil products exports rose 11% to 5.89 million tons in August, the highest since February, as China aggressively ramped up its refinery output, in the process grabbing market share from Western processors crushed by idiotic, green and “woke” policies and regulations that seek to crush US fossil fuel industries and hand the market to China on a silver platter.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 22:40

• Government Gave Millions To Top Reproductive Health Org To Promote COVID-19 Vaccines To Pregnant Women
  Government Gave Millions To Top Reproductive Health Org To Promote COVID-19 Vaccines To Pregnant Women

  Authored by Megan Redshaw, J.D. via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The premier professional membership organization for obstetricians and gynecologists accepted $11.8 million from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to promote COVID-19 vaccines to pregnant women, despite the exclusion of pregnant women from clinical trials and regulatory data showing the vaccine had not been tested for safety during pregnancy.

  

  To learn more about COVID-19 funding received by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) during the pandemic and what prompted the organization’s guidance on COVID-19 vaccines for pregnant women, Dr. James Thorp, a board-certified obstetrician-gynecologist and maternal-fetal medicine physician made a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in 2022 to HHS.

  “My request was simple: It sought only to obtain documents involving the three ‘Cooperative Agreement’ grants HHS/CDC made to ACOG during the pandemic, one of which was for $11.8 million, listed on a publicly accessible open data source for federal spending, USASPENDING.gov,” Thorp told The Epoch Times.

  Documents obtained by Dr. Thorp show ACOG, on Feb. 1, 2021, was awarded the first of three cooperative agreement grants by HHS and the CDC. The receipt of COVID-19 grant money was contingent upon ACOG yielding substantial control over projects funded by the CDC to the agency and ACOG’s full compliance with CDC guidance on COVID-19 infection and control.

  “This is a cooperative agreement, and CDC will have substantial programmatic involvement after the award is made. Substantial involvement is in addition to all post-award monitoring, technical assistance, and performance reviews undertaken in the normal course of stewardship of federal funds,” the documents state.

  ACOG also agreed to allow the CDC program staff to “assist, coordinate, or participate in carrying out effort under the award.”

  The contracts further provided for the return of funding to the HHS if ACOG did not adhere to the federal government’s messaging that COVID-19 vaccines were safe and effective for pregnant women and new mothers.

  HHS Funds ‘Trusted Messengers’ to Increase Vaccine Confidence

  HHS, on April 1, 2021, launched the “COVID-19 Community Corps,” a “nationwide, grassroots network of local voices and trusted community leaders to encourage vaccinations,” with more than 275 founding member organizations, including ACOG, that had the “ability to reach millions of Americans.” An archived HHS webpage states the program provides resources and fact-based public health information through HHS in partnership with the CDC.

  As part of the multibillion-dollar program, Vice President Kamala Harris and Surgeon General Vivek Murthy met with founding members to discuss the next phase of the “public education campaign from the White House” to encourage vaccinations and increase vaccine confidence.

  Members received weekly updates on the “latest scientific and medical updates, talking points about the vaccine, social media suggestions, infographics, factsheets with timely, accurate information, and tools to help people get registered for an appointment and vaccinated.”

  “As part of the COVID-19 Community Corps, HHS awarded billions of federal dollars to recruit what HHS referred to as ‘trusted community leaders’ who could push vaccines within our most private relationships,” Thorp said. “Much like modern-day trojan horses, these ‘trusted messengers’ would be unique in their ability to permeate all facets of private life.”

  ACOG Encourages Members to ‘Enthusiastically Recommend Vaccination’

  Former CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky, on April 23, 2021, announced for the first time during a White House COVID-19 briefing the agency was recommending all pregnant women get vaccinated despite limited data on the safety of the shot, as pregnant women were not included in COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials.

  Dr. Walensky said her decision was based on preliminary findings published in The New England Journal of Medicine on the use of COVID-19 vaccines during the first 11 weeks of the vaccine rollout.

  “We know that this is a deeply personal decision, and I encourage people to talk to their doctors and their primary care providers to determine what is best for them and for their baby,” Dr. Walensky said.

  ACOG, on July 30, 2021, along with the Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine (SMFM), began recommending COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy.

  ACOG, founded in 1951, is the leading organization representing physicians and specialists in obstetrical care, with over 60,000 members. ACOG sets the standard of care for pregnant women and obstetrician–gynecologists generally follow the recommendations made by ACOG, just as pediatricians follow the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

  The SMFM represents more than 5,500 individuals with additional years of formal training in maternal-fetal medicine, making them “highly qualified experts and leaders in the care of complicated pregnancies.”

  ACOG’s former president, Dr. J. Martin Tucker, in a statement on the organization’s website, encouraged members to “enthusiastically recommend vaccination” to their pregnant patients and to emphasize the “known safety of the vaccines and the increased risks of severe complications associated with COVID-19 infection, including death, during pregnancy.”

  “It is clear that pregnant people need to feel confident in the decision to choose vaccination, and a strong recommendation from their obstetrician–gynecologist could make a meaningful difference for many pregnant people,” Tucker added. “Pregnant individuals should feel confident that choosing COVID-19 vaccination not only protects them but also protects their families and communities,” he added.

  Dr. William Grobman, president of SMFM, said experts in high-risk pregnancy should “strongly recommend” pregnant women get vaccinated and that vaccination is “safe before, during, or after pregnancy,” despite the absence of clinical trial data.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 22:20

• Which US Cities Have The Highest Airbnb Densities?
  Which US Cities Have The Highest Airbnb Densities?

  With 3,329 Airbnb listings for an estimated 94,589 inhabitants, Asheville, North Carolina, has the highest Airbnb density out of all U.S. cities and regions analyzed by InsideAirbnb as of June 2023.

  The project, which scrapes publicly available data from Airbnb’s website, was founded by activist and artist Murray Cox and has seen contributions by data journalists and researchers.

  As Statista’s Florian Zandt shows in the chart below, based on InsideAirbnb data, popular tourist spots don’t always have the highest amount of rental listings per 1,000 inhabitants.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  As we detailed previously, New York City, for example, recently passed Local Law 18, which requires short-term rental businesses to register with the city, limits guests per property to two and requires the owners to live in the space they’re renting out. In practice, this scales back a booming business model rivaling hotels to an approximation of a paid version of traditional couch surfing.

  A lawsuit by Airbnb to prevent the law was dismissed in August. Interestingly, New York City only has a density of 4.9 Airbnb listings per 1,000 residents.

  

  Another hot spot for domestic tourists that recently made the news due to devastating wildfires, the island state of Hawaii, ranks much higher in comparison. On all of the islands combined, the ratio of listings by 1,000 inhabitants stands at 22.4. Other popular tourist destinations analyzed include Los Angeles (11.4 listings per 1,000 inhabitants), Broward County (9.1), San Francisco (8.5) and Clark County, which includes Las Vegas (6.9).

  While InsideAirbnb provides details of the prevalence of Airbnb listings in selected cities and regions, it can only show part of the whole picture. The overall importance of the U.S. market for Airbnb can be seen in the company’s financial results. In 2022, $4.2 billion of the vacation rental provider’s total revenue of $8.4 billion was generated in North America, $3.9 billion of which was in the United States. The EMEA region was responsible for $2.9 billion, while the company generated $643 million and $622 million in Latin America and Asia-Pacific, respectively.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 22:00

• A Deeper Dive Into The Role Of Spike Protein In Myocarditis And Blood Clotting After COVID-19 Vaccination
  A Deeper Dive Into The Role Of Spike Protein In Myocarditis And Blood Clotting After COVID-19 Vaccination

  Authored by Allison Kruig, MPH and Dr. Ram Durlseti via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  In this series, “Promise or Peril: Alarming COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Issues,” we explore how the introduction of mRNA technology lacked an adequate regulatory framework, setting the stage for serious adverse events and other concerns related to inadequate safety testing of lipid nanoparticles, spike protein, and residual DNA- and lipid-related impurities, as well as truncated/modified mRNA species.

  Previously: In Part 1, we introduced how the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) relaxed the rules for mRNA vaccines compared to mRNA therapies and discussed the available data regarding LNP distribution throughout the body based on animal testing, the fact that human testing was not done, and the lack of mRNA or spike protein biodistribution data. In Parts 2 and 3, we explored how the LNPs are constructed and how they behave in the body and affect health.

  

  Now we turn to another problem—the cargo contained in the LNP capsules: the mRNA and its encoded spike protein. We introduce the inflammatory response to the spike protein and one of its subunit proteins and how they may contribute to serious adverse events such as myocarditis and blood clotting.

  Rochelle Walensky, former director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), stated on “Good Morning America” in June 2021 that myocarditis cases are “really quite rare … minor, self-limited, they generally resolve with rest and standard medications.” However, this assertion was made based on a preliminary review of 300 cases and before conducting long-term follow-up.

  A study published on Aug. 1 followed 40 adolescents in Hong Kong for up to a year. Follow-up testing performed in 26 patients with initial abnormal findings revealed that 58 percent of those with vaccine-associated myocarditis had persistent heart muscle scarring. The authors concluded: “There exists a potential long-term effect on exercise capacity and cardiac functional reserve during stress.”

  This series demonstrates how exposure to the spike protein results in downstream cardiovascular issues. Given that vaccination causes the body to produce more spike protein, it is clear that additional research was needed to understand the health impacts of vaccination prior to licensure.

  Summary of Key Facts

  • The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and its S1 subunit have known impacts on the cardiovascular system, such as an increased risk of blood clotting.

  • The vaccine-induced spike protein and its S1 subunit have been found in the blood following vaccination.

  • In lab studies, the spike protein activates white blood cells and may trigger an inflammatory response or clotting.

  • Free spike protein was found in the blood of adolescents and young adults with post-mRNA vaccine myocarditis but not in healthy control subjects without myocarditis.

  • The S1 subunit can interact with ACE2, platelets, and fibrin and may be what leads to an inflammatory response driving serious adverse events, including clots, myocarditis, and neurological problems.

  • As discussed in Part 3, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) act as adjuvants, stimulating the immune system. This innate immune response peaks within six hours of vaccination and returns to baseline by about day nine, temporally corresponding to the onset of myocarditis, which typically occurs within the first seven days following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

  • Studies have not been done to evaluate how vaccination affects those who have already been infected with SARS-CoV-2.

  • The spike protein was implicated in small vessel microclots during COVID-19 illness; thus, postvaccination cardiovascular effects should have been anticipated.

  • The first deadline for FDA-mandated post-authorization safety studies has passed, yet to the best of our knowledge, the full report has not been made available to the public.

  The spike protein protrudes from the SARS-CoV-2 virus like a crown of sticky handles. The job of the spike protein is to grab onto the ACE2 receptor so the virus can enter the cell. The ACE2 receptor is found in many human cells in the lungs, kidneys, gut, heart, and the lining of the blood vessels.

  Spike protein is comprised of two parts: the S1 and S2 subunits. The S1 subunit protein sits at the tip of the spike protein and is responsible for attaching to the ACE2 receptor. Once bound to the receptor, the spike protein changes shape to allow the virus to enter. Having accessed the inside of the cell, the SARS-CoV-2 virus uses the cell’s own protein manufacturing process to make new viral proteins.

  Effective vaccines select recognizable antigens that induce a robust immune response. The spike protein was chosen for the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine because it is responsible for attaching to cells and gaining entry. However, research suggests that the spike protein and its S1 subunit may also be responsible for cardiovascular complications following both infection and vaccination.

  The S2 subunit may also interfere with tumor suppression, potentially explaining why COVID-19 can be more severe for cancer patients.

  

  Research shows that the spike protein is found in the blood following COVID-19 infection and vaccination. The spike protein modifies blood clotting and can stimulate an overactive immune response. A better understanding of these findings and the specific roles the spike protein and its S1 subunit play will help us determine who is most at risk for severe disease or vaccine adverse events.

  Cardiovascular Effects of Spike Protein Following Infection

  Although the studies are small, the spike protein has been found in the blood and clots of severely ill COVID-19 patients. The clinical evidence suggests a fingerprint of the spike protein’s cardiovascular effects.

  In a study of 41 patients published in Frontiers in Immunology, 30.4 percent of the 23 hospitalized were found to have significant levels of spike protein in their circulation. None of the remaining 18 uninfected or mildly ill individuals had circulating spike protein.

  A small case-control study detected the spike protein in clots retrieved from COVID-19 patients with acute ischemic stroke and myocardial infarction.

  Another study detected the S1 subunit in the plasma of 64 percent of COVID-19-positive patients, and S1 levels were significantly associated with disease severity. The nucleocapsid (N) protein, a marker for COVID-19 infection, was also detected. The authors speculated that the presence of S1 and N in plasma suggests that virus fragments enter the bloodstream, potentially due to tissue damage.

  The exact chain of events is not fully understood. Still, laboratory, clinical, and biopsy findings offer converging evidence suggesting a role for the spike protein and its S1 subunit in blood clotting and heart injury.

  Blood Clots Associated With Spike S1 Subunit

  In laboratory experiments like those performed in the Frontiers in Immunology study, the spike protein S1 subunit causes a chain reaction that sets up the right conditions for clots to form. In this chain reaction, the S1 protein binds to the ACE2 receptor on the cells lining the blood vessels. Binding to ACE2 then activates immune cells.

  This domino effect can also stimulate platelet binding, increasing clotting risk. Platelets are essential clotting agents that stop blood loss following injury by clumping together. The authors further noted that in vitro, “our group recently documented that exposing sera from severe COVID-19 patients to endothelial cells induced platelet aggregation.”

  In other words, the S1 subunit is of interest because, in vitro (in a test tube), it appears to cause changes to clotting mechanisms. If the S1 subunit can affect clotting agents like fibrin, complement 3, and prothrombin, this may be a mechanism through which SARS-CoV-2 can cause cardiovascular complications. Clotting causes changes in blood flow, potentially leading to thrombosis, stroke, and heart attack.

  Atypical Blood Clots

  Providing blood thinners to decrease the risk of clot formation did not appear to reduce the clotting risk in COVID-19 inpatients or outpatients. This may be because the clots formed after exposure to the S1 subunit may not be typical blood clots. Three findings suggest that the S1 subunit is important to clotting risk.

  1. Clots Resist Normal Breakdown

  First, when the S1 subunit was added to healthy blood in the lab, it created dense, fibrous clot deposits. These fibrous “amyloid” clots formed even when blood taken from healthy people was exposed to the S1 subunit.

  The S1 subunit appears to be associated with clotting resistant to fibrinolysis—the normal breakdown of clots necessary to restore blood flow after injury. These amyloid clots are shown in Figure 1 below.

  Amyloid clots occur when a protein is damaged and begins to fold abnormally on itself. When these abnormal amyloid proteins accumulate in the body, they can interfere with normal function.

  Figure 1. Amyloid Clots Formed in Response to Spike Protein S1

  

  2. S1 Subunit Can Induce Amyloid Substances

  Second, these dense clots may be caused by certain protein segments on the S1 subunit. The spike protein has seven protein segments (peptides) that can induce fibrous (amyloid) substances. While the fully intact spike protein (S1 and S2 subunits attached to form the full spike) did not form this amyloid, the S1 subunit did. This finding is interesting because it suggests that the subunits of the spike protein may have unique effects on cells.

  3. Spike Blocks Other Clot-Inhibiting Proteins

  Third, spike protein can outcompete other proteins, which prevent clots from forming. In another laboratory experiment designed to understand how this process plays out, scientists found that the spike protein blocks proteins important to breaking down clots.

  In summary, the in vitro (laboratory-based) research suggests that the spike protein subunit S1 can induce clot formation and impair clot dissolution. While we do not know precisely how this translates to processes in the body, Epoch Times’ Jan Jekielek explored clotting and the role of spike protein with pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole on June 3 and Dr. Paul Marik on May 23. In the interview, Dr. Cole explained that the spike protein persists in the body longer, inflames tissues wherever it lands, and acts as an irritant or toxin in the body.

  Spike Protein Found in COVID-19-Vaccinated Myocarditis Patients

  Studies of COVID-19-vaccinated patients diagnosed with myocarditis found spike protein in the patients’ blood and heart muscles but not in those without myocarditis.

  Found in Blood

  The full-length spike protein has been found in the blood of vaccinated adolescents with myocarditis but not in the blood of those without myocarditis.

  It is unclear why the spike protein was circulating freely or unbound by antibodies. The adolescents who developed myocarditis had similar immune markers to those who did not develop myocarditis. In other words, the group with myocarditis did not appear to have any immune problems.

  Rather, these adolescents may have had an overactive natural immune response. Strong natural (“innate”) immunity helps the body fight off disease without any prior exposure. However, the first responders (inflammatory cytokines) can sometimes be exuberant. If the innate immune response overreacts, it may trigger myocarditis.

  Found in Heart Muscle

  The spike protein coded by mRNA has also been found in heart muscle cells. An endomyocardial (heart muscle) biopsy study was conducted among 15 patients with myocarditis following vaccination. No other viral infection could be found that might have caused the myocarditis.

  The investigators found SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in nine of the 15 patients. Immune cells (CD4+ T) were also detected in the biopsy samples. These observations suggest an inflammatory reaction to the spike protein.

  The authors concluded: “Although a causal relationship between vaccination and the occurrence of myocardial inflammation cannot be established based on the findings, the cardiac detection of spike protein, the CD4+ T-cell-dominated inflammation, and the close temporal relationship argue for a vaccine-triggered autoimmune reaction.”

  A 2022 modeling study also suggests that the spike protein can cause an autoimmune response by mimicking human molecules, causing antibodies to bind to “self” proteins.

  Spike S1 Detected in the Blood of Vaccinated Adults

  Another study found that 11 of 13 adults vaccinated with Moderna’s mRNA-1273 had the S1 subunit in their blood as early as one day after vaccination.

  Plasma was collected from 13 participants at various times during the first month after each dose. The antigens S1 and spike were measured to estimate the amount of mRNA translation into protein products.

  After the first 100-microgram dose, S1 antigen was detected in the plasma of 11 participants. In contrast, the spike antigen was detected in three of 13 participants. The S1 antigen peak was detected on average five days after vaccination. Again, the timing of this peak for S1 seems to add to the clues suggesting an autoimmune response in the week after vaccination.

  mRNA Detected in the Blood and Lymph Nodes After Vaccination

  Vaccine mRNA, which encodes the spike protein and its S1 subunit, also persists in the blood and lymph nodes. Following vaccination, spike-encoded mRNA has been found in the blood for 15 days and in lymph nodes for up to 60 days. Spike-laden exosomes have been found circulating in the blood for up to four months. This finding is important because it refutes the CDC’s claim that the mRNA is so fragile that it dissolves quickly at the injection site (see Figure 2a in Part 1).

  The lymph nodes continue creating better-fitting antibodies after any viral infection. This is a critical way that our bodies prepare for new variants naturally. However, persistently high levels of vaccine-induced mRNA and spike protein may not be helpful when the immune system is asked to respond to future variants. In other words, if the immune system is tasked with continuing to pump out antibodies to a previous variant, it may be less nimble when asked to create a high-quality antibody for a new variant.

  Inadequate Clinical Trials Leave Unresolved Questions

  Given what we know about the harmful effects of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, we should not have assumed that the vaccine-encoded spike protein would be harmless.

  And, given what we know about clotting issues following COVID-19 infection, future studies should test whether the S1 subunit produced in response to vaccination can also cause clotting issues via the same pathway. These studies should include both lab experiments and human observations.

  In addition, we do not know the relative amounts of free spike protein in circulation following infection versus vaccination.

  In the case of the COVID-19 vaccines, the active ingredient was not studied prior to authorization. The manufacturers used mRNA that encodes for a substitute protein (luciferase) to test the safety and biodistribution of the mRNA vaccines.

  Pfizer submitted animal biodistribution data to regulatory agencies using the surrogate RNA encoding for luciferase, as discussed in Part 1 of this series.

  However, these studies were inadequate in describing how mRNA, the spike protein, its S1 subunit, and the LNP carrier would affect the human body.

  In this article, we described laboratory findings showing clotting associated with the S1 subunit. Studies like these reinforce why thorough preclinical studies are so crucial. The studies conducted by pharmaceutical companies were not sufficient to address these questions.

  We had very little information about how people would respond to vaccination depending on age, sex, immune status, overall health, or history of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. The original clinical trials did not enroll enough people who had already recovered from COVID-19; they were not designed to provide an understanding of how prior infection would affect a person’s response to vaccination.

  Required Pfizer Post-Authorization Safety Study Unavailable to Public

  Pre-authorization studies were clearly inadequate. Post-authorization, the FDA has only acknowledged that passive surveillance is insufficient to establish safety. The agency responded to adverse event reports by requiring Pfizer to conduct additional studies, with the first monitoring report due October 2022.

  On page 6 of the approval letter, the FDA acknowledges this fact (see Figure 2 below):

  “We have determined that an analysis of spontaneous postmarketing adverse events reported under section 505(k)(1) of the FDCA will not be sufficient to assess known serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis and identify an unexpected serious risk of subclinical myocarditis.

  “Furthermore, the pharmacovigilance system that the FDA is required to maintain under section 505(k)(3) of the FDCA is not sufficient to assess these serious risks. Therefore, based on appropriate scientific data, we have determined that you are required to conduct the following studies. …”

  Has the FDA received the monitoring report from Pfizer, which was due by Oct. 31, 2022? The next report, the interim report, will be due in October.

  Figure 2. FDA Postmarketing Safety Study Requirements

  

  Read Part 1: FDA Overhaul Needed for New Vaccines and mRNA Therapies

  Read Part 2:Health Implications of Poor COVID-19 mRNA Testing: Miscarriage, Vision Loss, Immunotoxicity

  Read Part 3: Pulling Back the Curtain: mRNA Lipid Nanoparticle Design Created Potential for Clotting and Triggering Immune Overdrive

  Next: In Part 5, we will discuss the mRNA manufacturing issues affecting contamination with double-stranded DNA and the potential for genome integration.

  For all references, click here.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 21:40

• 'Defund The Police' Democrat Politician Left With Broken Leg, Bloodied Face, After Violent Carjacking In Minnesota
  ‘Defund The Police’ Democrat Politician Left With Broken Leg, Bloodied Face, After Violent Carjacking In Minnesota

  Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The second vice chairwoman for Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, who previously vowed to “dismantle” the Minneapolis Police Department amid widespread Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests, is now calling for tougher crime laws after she was violently carjacked this week.

  

  In a lengthy Sept. 7 post on Facebook, Shivanthi Sathanandan claimed the carjacking incident took place in the driveway of her Minneapolis home in front of her children, who are aged 4 and 7.

  The incident left her with a broken leg, deep lacerations on her head, and bruising and cuts all over her body.

  Ms. Sathanandan shared a photo of herself with what appeared to be blood pouring down her face alongside the post.

  “Four very young men, all carrying guns, beat me violently down to the ground in front of our kids,” she wrote. “The young men held our neighbors up at gunpoint when they ran over and tried to help me. All in broad daylight.”

  “Look at my face in the picture. This is the face of a mother who just had the [expletive] beaten out of her,” she continued. “A mother whose only thought was, ‘let me run far enough and fight hard enough so that my kids have a chance to get away.’ This is the face of a mother who just listened to her four-year-old daughter screaming non-stop, her 7-year-old son wailing for someone to come help because bad guys are murdering his Mama in the back yard, her neighbors screaming in outrage… all while being beaten with guns and kicks and fists.”

  .@Shivanthi Sathanandan, the vice chair for the Democrat Party @MinnesotaDFL in Minnesota, virulently advocated for the dismantling of the Minneapolis Police Department even as neighborhoods in the city were burned to the ground by #BLM–#Antifa rioters.

  Now, she has come… pic.twitter.com/Plc4m2SSJO

  — Andy Ngô 🏳️‍🌈 (@MrAndyNgo) September 7, 2023

  Attackers Must be ‘Held Accountable’

  “These men knew what they were doing. I have NO DOUBT they have done this before. Yet they are still on OUR STREETS. Killing mothers. Giving babies psychological trauma that a lifetime of therapy cannot erase. With no hesitation and no remorse,” Ms. Sathanandan wrote.

  “I’m now part of the statistics. I wasn’t silent when I fought these men to save my life and my babies, and I won’t be silent now. We need to get illegal guns off of our streets, catch these young people who are running wild creating chaos across our city, and HOLD THEM IN CUSTODY AND PROSECUTE THEM,” she said.

  “Look at my face. REMEMBER ME when you are thinking about supporting letting juveniles and young people out of custody to roam our streets instead of HOLDING THEM ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS,” the Democrat wrote.

  A report from the Minneapolis Police Department obtained by KSTP states that Ms. Sathanandan’s vehicle was later abandoned by the suspects and recovered.

  It is not clear if any suspects have been arrested. The Epoch Times has contacted the Minneapolis Police Department for further comment.

  

  ‘Dismantle the Minneapolis Police Department’

  The alleged attack on Ms. Sathanandan and her subsequent comments come roughly three years after she accused police of having “systematically failed the Black Community,” and vowed to “dismantle the Minneapolis Police Department.”

   

  In a post on Facebook at the height of the BLM protests taking place throughout the country, sparked by the death of George Floyd while in police custody, Ms. Sathanandan wrote: “We are going to dismantle the Minneapolis Police Department. Say it with me. DISMANTLE The Minneapolis Police Department.

  “MPD has systematically failed the Black Community, they have failed ALL OF US. It’s time to build a new infrastructure that works for ALL communities,” she wrote. “If you are still disagreeing with that BASIC FACT, I’m not sure what to say to you.”

  In her post on Thursday detailing the alleged carjacking, Ms. Sathanandan vowed that the criminals would not win.

  “We need to take back our city. And this will not be the last you hear from me about this,” she said.

  The Democrat concluded the lengthy post by thanking the “incredible Minneapolis 4th Precinct Officers, Mayor Frey, Chief O’Hara, Paramedics, neighbors, friends and DFL family” who “all came to our aide during this terrifying experience.”

  “I’m so grateful for this community that wraps us in love,” she wrote.

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

   

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 21:00

• Doug Casey On The 2024 Election
  Doug Casey On The 2024 Election

  Authored by Doug Casey via InternationalMan.com,

  

  International Man: President Biden is running for reelection in 2024.

  However, many Americans are questioning Biden’s physical and mental faculties. He appears half asleep on many occasions—often forgetting his train of thought or stumbling on his words.

  Biden will soon be 81, making him the oldest president in US history.

  What’s your take?

  Doug Casey: The very fact that he’s supposedly even contemplating running in 2024 is further proof that he’s non compos mentis. He’s so far gone that he doesn’t even realize what an embarrassment he is. But it’s not a question of his age, per se.

  A lot of people in their eighties are sharp as a tack. Age slows you down, true. But if you’ve gained wisdom through many years of experience, you can still play the game. The problem with Biden isn’t so much that he’s decrepit and feeble—although those things are highly undesirable in a national leader. It’s that he lacks any semblance of ability, has no judgment, and is devoid of morality and ethics. The world is asking: How degraded are the American people that they could not just elect but are thinking of reelecting, such a pathetic shell?

  Trump is only four years younger, but he appears hale and hardy. All this should be academic, however. It should, ideally, make little difference who the president is.

  Switzerland is the most prosperous country in Europe, and nobody knows or cares who the president of Switzerland might be. It would be nice if the president of the US was nothing but a figurehead, someone respectable to set a moral tone and give a good example. Perhaps that’s the biggest reason Biden shouldn’t run. He’s almost the antithesis of a role model. Although admittedly superior to his thoroughly degenerate son, who he once identified as the most intelligent man he knew.

  International Man: Despite the countless indictments against him, Donald Trump is still the frontrunner for the Republican ticket with an enormous lead.

  What’s your perspective on Trump this time around?

  Doug Casey: I did an interview here in 2016 when he first talked of running—and nothing has changed.

  He has absolutely no philosophical core; he flies by the seat of his pants. Trump is popular because he’s a traditionalist and a nationalist. He wants the US to return to the values of a kinder and gentler era. However, he’s not a libertarian. He has no understanding of economics, as evidenced by the fact that he wants massive duties on imports. He has no fear of gigantic deficits. He’s fine with borrowing even more money. He’s quite willing to put on regulations when he arbitrarily thinks it’s a good idea.

  At a time when the US is collapsing in on itself, bankrupt, crime-ridden, and overtaken by crazy wokeness, I believe most people would prefer a traditionalist—at least someone who’s not a Jacobin looking to overturn the whole basis of society. I hasten to add that Biden himself isn’t even the real problem—as degraded as he is—it’s the people who manipulate the doddering old fool. His cabinet and top officials are an assortment of criminal personalities. They are, without exception, stupid, incompetent, and/or psychotic. That’s a radical statement, but I believe it’s factual. The overweight tranny sporting an admirals costume while masquerading as a woman is far from the worst of the bunch.

  At least Trump is something of an outsider. The people in the evil party hate him simply because he’s an outspoken traditionalist who resonates with the hoi polloi. They suffer from what’s known as “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

  I’m not really a fan of Trump, except for the fact that he’s a traditionalist. It’s interesting that the people who do hate him, hate him just because he’s a traditionalist. I see zero evidence that he’s a criminal. He is just a successful self-promoter, a celebrity who made some money in real estate and has genuine concerns about his country. Plus, he’s very entertaining—that actually counts for something.

  International Man: Now that actual libertarians seem to be running the Libertarian Party, do you see anything interesting coming from them in 2024?

  Doug Casey: I neither follow nor care about the Libertarian Party. It only counts because it’s registered to run candidates in all 50 states. None of them have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning more than a local race for dogcatcher. That said, the major parties will each try to use it to draw votes from the other party. That was the case in 2016 when Johnson/Weld got 4.5 million votes, 3.3% of the total. That’s a big deal in a close election.

  Except for Ron Paul and Harry Browne, who intelligently used the election as a bully platform to spread the philosophy, the Libertarian Party’s candidates have been non-entities. I’m sure that’ll be the case this year as well.

  In fact, they’re worse than just narcissistic non-entities. Their 2016 candidate, Gary Johnson, was just a good-natured pothead who somehow got elected governor of New Mexico. He picked William Weld, ex-governor of Massachusetts and a classic Deep State operative, as his VP. How did that ever happen?

  I understand the Libertarian Party has evicted the party-archs who promoted that ticket. I used to say, if you’re going to vote, at least vote Libertarian as a protest vote. But it really is a wasted vote from every point of view these days. Not that it really matters. I understand the arguments why you should vote, but the fact is that your vote counts about as much as a grain of sand on a beach, especially if the election is rigged.

  International Man: Trump’s former chief strategist, Steve Bannon, suggested a Trump/RFK ticket would win in a massive landslide.

  Presuming the DNC rigs the primary against RFK Jr., what role do you see him playing in the general election?

  Doug Casey: They’re both outspoken and very entertaining—90% of politics is entertainment. They mostly agree on Covid, which is wonderful. They’re both anti-war. They’re both anti-Deep State.

  It’s possible that Bannon’s right; the public would love two refreshing semi-outsiders. But it would probably be like taking a couple of cats and tying their tails together.

  Kennedy, as I explained before, is basically an old-style “reasonable” Democrat. He believes in a “safety net” (i.e. welfare), regulation, the green agenda, and the rest of it. So does Trump, to a great extent. It’s not that Bannon’s wrong; it’s just that the two of them would always try to overshadow each other. But at least they’re not woke Democrats…

  In my view, the Republicans are the stupid party, and the Democrats are the evil party. Given a chance between stupid and evil, you should probably go for stupid. They might be less destructive. Although perversely, since stupidity is amorphous, illogical, and unpredictable, they could be just dangerous in a different way. It’s a classic Hobson’s Choice.

  International Man: What sort of dirty tricks do you see occurring in the run-up to the 2024 election?

  Is it possible the Deep State will find a way to cancel the election if it isn’t going their way?

  Doug Casey: You may recall that in 2016, I placed a money bet that, against all odds, Trump would win. In 2020, I gave six reasons why the Democrats would win.

  So I’m foolishly starting to think I’m a handicapper of the how hoi polloi will vote. Or at least who’s best at fixing an election.

  The Democrats might win simply because the American electorate has become so corrupt; they accept socialism in principle. In addition, the Dems currently control the apparatus of the State and are aggressively using it to cement themselves in power.

  They’re actual Jacobins, Neo-Marxists, and will do anything to stay in office. Like the way, they’re prosecuting Trump in four different jurisdictions for scores of nonsensical, fabricated charges. They’re attempting to bankrupt him with legal fees, de-legitimize him with unthinking voters, and tie up his time so it’s impossible for him to campaign.

  This is the type of thing, like the extraordinary sentences handed down for the Jan 6 protests, that goes on in Third World countries. Serious MAGA people could go wild. It’s possible that we won’t even have an election in 2024, as outrageous as that sounds.

  The Dems can’t run Biden. It’s egregious elder abuse; the old criminal is just a shell of a man. Nor can they run the cackling, dim-witted Kamala, even though many black people will predictably cry racism in today’s environment. She’s a parody of herself.

  So, who can the Democrats run? Michelle Obama? She is way too much of a hot potato ultra-leftist. Another option is Gavin Newsom, who’s undistinguished by anything except being good-looking and running California into the ground. I don’t see anybody else with name recognition.

  There are several other huge X factors. Between now and the election, we’re very likely to have a financial and economic crisis. The Greater Depression could well up from under the surface and explode like a volcano, creating chaos. The military crisis in the Ukraine could spin out of control into an actual war against Russia. The US continues to antagonize China, a big wild card. And Washington seems to be plumping for a war in North Africa.

  Perhaps most important is the fact that the red people and the blue people in the US actually hate each other. It’s much more serious and widespread than any culture clash we had in the past, including the late 1960s and early 1970s.

  It could lead to something resembling a civil war. The US Government itself is losing legitimacy with wide swaths of domestic and foreign public opinion. I know it’s outlandish to consider seriously, but is it possible that we could wind up with a military government in the US?

  Although the US military has become corrupt and is also collapsing on itself, it’s about the only government institution that Americans still trust. In a time of chaos, when neither party can put forward a candidate, we could get a general as a (temporary) solution. Likely an opportunistic leftist like the recently defrocked Petraeus.

  It’s a reasonably safe bet that 2024 is not going to be just a bad year but one for the record books.

  *  *  *

  Disturbing economic, political, and social trends are already in motion and now accelerating at breathtaking speed. The risks that lie ahead are too big and dangerous to ignore. That’s exactly why bestselling author Doug Casey and his team just released a free report with all the details on how to survive an economic collapse. It will help you understand what is unfolding right before our eyes and what you should do so you don’t get caught in the crosshairs. Click here to download the PDF now.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 21:00

• FBI, HHS Stonewalling Congress Over Illegal Chinese COVID Lab In California
  FBI, HHS Stonewalling Congress Over Illegal Chinese COVID Lab In California

  The Chairman of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic has threatened to subpoena the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) after they refused to produce information on an illegal Chinese lab that was “caught red-handed conducting dangerous research related to COVID-19 and other deadly diseases without a license by FBI agents and California officials.”

  

  In Thursday letters to the agencies (FBI letter, HHS letter), Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) noted their failure to respond to prior requests for information, and says that if they fail to comply with oversight, “we will be forced to evaluate the use of the compulsory process.”

  The letter also puts the agencies on notice that the Subcommittee may request that employees sit for voluntary transcribed interviews.

  As we previously noted, the lab was found in what was thought to be a empty storage building in Reedley, California – located in the central San Joaquin Valley.

  

  It was only discovered after a local code enforcement officer noticed a garden hose poking out a back wall of the building, according to YourCentralValley.

  Public Health staff also observed blood, tissue and other bodily fluid samples and serums; and THOUSANDS of vials of unlabeled fluids and suspected biological material.

  Additionally they found 900 genetically engineered mice, engineered to catch and carry COVID-19, living in “inhumane” conditions.

  773 of the mice had to be euthanized, and officials found another 178 mice already dead.

  “This is an unusual situation. I’ve been in government for 25 years. I’ve never seen anything like this,” said Reedley City Manager Nicole Zieba.

  Even county health officials were left in shock.

  “I’ve never seen this in my 26-year career with the County of Fresno,” said Assistant Director of the Fresno County Department of Public Health Joe Prado.

  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tested the substances and detected at least 20 potentially infectious agents, including coronavirus, HIV, hepatitis and herpes, according to a Health and Human Services letter dated June 6.

  Agents also found thousands of package boxes – many with shipping labels from China. Below is a photo included in court documents in California.

  

  NBC News reports that an investigation found the tenant was Prestige BioTech, a company registered in Nevada and unlicensed for business in California. City officials spoke with Xiuquin Yao, who was identified as the company president, through emails included in the court documents.

  Yao told officials that Prestige BioTech moved assets belonging to a defunct company, Universal Meditech Inc., to the Reedley warehouse from Fresno after UMI went under. Prestige Biotech was a creditor to UMI and identified as its successor, according to court documents.

  Officials were unable to get any California-based address for either company except for the previous Fresno location from which UMI had been evicted.

  “The other addresses provided for identified authorized agents were either empty offices or addresses in China that could not be verified,” court documents said.

  Related:

  • Newsom Funded Chinese COVID Lab Known To Biden’s FDA

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 20:40

• Victor Davis Hanson: What Game Is Hunter Biden Playing?
  Victor Davis Hanson: What Game Is Hunter Biden Playing?

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

  What shameless act or felonious activity was not evidenced on Hunter Biden’s laptop?

  Racist attitudes toward Asians?

  Soliciting prostitution?

  Felonious use of drugs?

  Photographed nudity and perverse sex?

  Admissions to illicit foreign shakedowns?

  

  Hunter all but accused his own father, President Joe Biden, of also being on the foreign take:

  “I hope you all can do what I did and pay for everything for this entire family … Unlike Pop I won’t make you give me half your salary.”

  Hunter’s alleged felonies range from bribery to tax evasion. That he has not yet been prosecuted for anything is scandalous. His exemption is attributable only to Attorney General Merrick Garland’s likely weaponized directives to federal prosecutors to downgrade or forget altogether felony charges against Hunter.

  So given such wild behavior, why would not Hunter tone it down, stop the global grifting, cease the reckless behavior — and quit redirecting attention to the likely illegal acts of his father, the president?

  Why did not Hunter early on just settle the child support suit filed by his paramour Lunden Roberts? Why haggle over money for his own daughter?

  Hunter instead outrageously claimed near poverty. That excuse was hilarious given he flies on private jets and pays nearly $16,000 a month to rent a house in tony, celebrity-ridden Malibu.

  Why did Hunter ever get involved with a performance stripper in the first place after his past widely publicized liaisons with prostitutes? Why also with his own widowed sister-in-law?

  Given Hunter has little or no experience or training in high-stakes international finance and investment — and thus has no market value as an investor or broker. But he was infamous for translating that nothingness into millions in lucre due solely to his ability to monetize the influence of then-Vice President Joe Biden.

  So why now when under 24/7 scrutiny, would Hunter dare recreate himself as an “artist,” by blowing through straws in his mouth?

  His amateurish canvasses somehow have sold for up to $500,000 a pop. Both Biden donors and gamers saw their buys of such mediocre art as gambits either to meet with or profit from his father, Joe Biden.

  But would not his painting grift only bring greater prosecutorial scrutiny and greater embarrassment to the president?

  Hunter Biden’s attorneys sought to leverage federal prosecutors into agreeing to drop their charges — by threatening to call in as a pro-Hunter witness President Joe Biden himself and thereby likely invoke a constitutional crisis!

  In such a scenario, the president under oath would be forced to lie again that he had no knowledge of or involvement in Hunter’s illegal behavior. Or if he admitted the truth that he did, he would thus contradict years of his adamant denials.

  Why would Hunter put his father and president in such a publicity circus?

  Hunter has lost an incriminating laptop by abandoning it at a repair shop. He has forgotten his crack pipe in a rental car. His illegally registered handgun turned up in a trash dumpster near a school.

  So would not the carefree Hunter insist that all the Bidens in the spotlight remain extra careful never to abandon incriminating drugs — especially in the White House.

  Yet in a West Wing first, recently cocaine was found lost in an entrance vestibule. Various media outlets claimed it belonged to someone in the “Biden family orbit.”

  One of two things explain the continuous reckless behavior of wayward son Hunter Biden:

  • One, he is either still on drugs or so suffers from past addiction that he has lost all common sense and judgment, and simply cannot control his behavior.

  • Or, two, Hunter is an embittered, angry son. As the Biden bagman for foreign shakedown cash, he did the dirty work and most risked the legal exposure that made all the Bidens rich.

  Yet, instead of familial praise — or so the broke Hunter seems to whine on his laptop –Hunter gets no respect from those he enriched.

  And now he, not they, might first go to jail.

  As a result, does his continuous recklessness send a not so-subtle reminder to all the Bidens – his father the “Big Guy” especially?

  That is, Hunter is not going to take the fall.

  He will not end up in prison for decades while the other exempt Bidens continue to enjoy their ill-gotten riches, due to Hunter’s imaginative cons.

  No wonder the first family for months moved Hunter into the White House and put him on Air Force One.

  Is it now, “Keep Hunter close and self-important — or else”?

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 20:20

• "I Don't Give A F***": Top Maryland Education Official Caught Using Encrypted Msg App As Grade Scandal Deepens
  “I Don’t Give A F***”: Top Maryland Education Official Caught Using Encrypted Msg App As Grade Scandal Deepens

  Investigative journalist Chris Papst of Fox45 News’ Project Baltimore has been leading the charge in exposing a massive grade scandal and subsequent cover-up in the country’s fourth most funded school system. The corruption isn’t confined to the Baltimore City Public Schools level; it extends all the way up to the Maryland State Superintendent of Schools. 

  SCANDAL: #ProjectBaltimore can now confirm the Maryland Schools Superintendent @MdPublicSchools used an encrypted, auto-deleting, messaging App (Signal) to conduct state business. Add this to his hidden email account and the 98 deleted texts we uncovered.https://t.co/lgu2t7xNHP

  — Chris Papst (@chrispapst) September 7, 2023

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

  The latest report Papst shared comes weeks after his team found metadata for 98 text messages sent or received by Maryland Superintendent Mohammed Choudhury in the first quarter of this year — around the time the state changed grades that no longer can be seen. 

  Before

  

  After 

  

  And why would the state change the grades? Well, it’s alleged that Superintendent Choudhury needs good optics for the crime-ridden metro area after Papst’s team released this shocking report in February: ‘Education Crisis’: 23 Baltimore City Schools Have No Students Proficient In Math. 

  Papst believes these text messages hold the answer to why the state government made the statistical cover-up. His latest report includes “an encrypted cell phone app and never meant to be seen by the public are now shedding light on what’s happening at the Maryland State Department of Education,” according to the Project Baltimore report. 

  Here’s the report:

  The messages appear to support concerns over the state superintendent’s leadership, transparency, and creation of a toxic workplace culture.

  Project Baltimore asked Superintendent Mohammed Choudhury about the messages at the August 22 state board of education meeting.

  “Mr. Superintendent, have you ever used the Signal Application in commission of your job?” Project Baltimore’s Chris Papst asked.

  Choudhury replied, “I have no comment. For my job, no.”

  “You’ve never used Signal for your job?” Papst asked again.

  “No,” replied Choudhury.

  On record, Choudhury told Papst that Signal wasn’t used for work-related purposes. However, new screenshots from a senior employee in Maryland Public Schools (who wished to remain anonymous) suggest otherwise. 

  Project Baltimore obtained screenshots of conversations between Choudhury and high-ranking employees within the Maryland State Department of Education.

  Each one is a “Signal Message” sent by “Mohammed Choudhury” to at least one high-level employee at MSDE who asked not to be identified. Project Baltimore received multiple text threads, which the source says were sent between late 2021 and 2022.

  In the screenshots, Choudhury’s name and picture are visible. The phone number is also registered to the superintendent. In the messages, Choudhury certainly appears to be talking about work.

  In one screenshot, Choudhury “set the disappearing message timer to 1 hour”, which applies to select messages.

  Choudhury writes, “All of that teacher assignment stuff is too much.”

  In another Signal message, Choudhury tells an employee a project needs “A LOT of work.” He goes on to say, “as of now, I’m not even close to green lighting anything there”.

  In another instance, Choudhury appears to berate his employee, saying, “What feels like a waste of time is tell (sic) me last minute we are changing survey links when I told you I didn’t want to do this.”

  The employee responds, “I don’t understand what you see the issue to be”

  Choudhury writes back, “I’ll make it easy for you guys. Your (sic) not changing it. It’s staying as is. Don’t meet with me today. Done. That’s a directive.”

  “So cancel the Qualtrics license?” Asks the employee.

  Choudhury responds, “Yes, I don’t give a F*** about Qualtrics at this point.”

  

  What remains troubling is why the superintendent would use Signal on his personal phone, with some messages disappearing in one hour for work-related tasks. 

  “And if those messages are set to disappear, they can’t be accessed under open records laws. Parents and taxpayers cannot see what’s being said by their state superintendent about public schools,” Project Baltimore said. 

  Here’s more from Papst. 

  Papst asked Tina Williams-Koroma, founder and CEO of TCecure, a Baltimore cybersecurity company: “Does it concern you that the highest-ranking public education official in the state is using signal to conduct state business?”

  “Yeah, I think it’s concerning to me that some of the information in records may not be accessible and discoverable,” Williams-Koroma replied.

  Where is the national outrage? 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 20:00

• Biden Biography Bombshell: Hillary Violated Logan Act, Drew Rebuke From Ex-Crony
  Biden Biography Bombshell: Hillary Violated Logan Act, Drew Rebuke From Ex-Crony

  Authored by Ben Sellers via Headline USA,

  Once again, Hillary Clinton appears to have flagrantly violated federal law and faced no consequences for her actions, according to an inadvertent admission from a new biography of President Joe Biden.

  

  The book, Franklin Foer’s The Last Politician: Inside Joe Biden’s White House and the Struggle for America’s Future,” casts an otherwise rosy glow on Biden’s catastrophic tenure—perhaps as part of a last-ditch bid to rehab the flailing president’s popular support and legacy while making it appear as though his scripted policymaking has been carefully studied and scrutinized.

  But according to a report from the Associated Press on some of the key takeaways from it, the book reveals how Clinton, the former secretary of State under Barack Obama, took an active role in attempting to help Afghan women flee the Taliban after Biden’s botched military withdrawal plan went awry.

  Her efforts to assist the female refugees at first appeared noble—in particular due to the fact that they seemed so selflessly removed from Clinton’s thirst for money, power and acclaim.

  “She directed a group of them to wear white scarfs [sic] so they could be identified by U.S. Marines guarding the Kabul airport, and unilaterally contacted world leaders to find places for their eventual evacuation flights to land,” the AP reported.

  However, Clinton’s decision to “unilaterally contact” world leaders as a civilian also put her in direct violation of the Logan Act.

  The act prohibits any U.S. citizen “who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government… in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States…”

  Its punishment includes up to three years in prison, as well as a hefty fine.

  Specifically, after reaching out directly, without authorization, to Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy about the prospect of taking in Afghan refugees, Clinton drew a rebuke from her own former campaign policy adviser, Jake Sullivan.

  According to Foer’s book, Sullivan—who is currently the Biden administration’s national security adviser—told her “What are you doing calling the Ukrainian government?”

  Clinton, in turn, responded, “I wouldn’t have to call if you guys would.”

  While the stunning violation of protocol is likely to go unpunished by the Biden administration, it is easy to imagine the many ways that Clinton’s outreach to Zelenskyy might have undermined delicate negotiations already in progress over the likelihood of what would soon be a full-scale Russian invasion.

  Sullivan had undoubtedly been deeply involved, at that point, in laying the scaffolding for the proxy war—an extension of the CIA-backed color-revolution that began in the country during Obama’s presidency.

  Apart from any unspoken obligations the U.S. may have to aid in the country’s defense, the Biden administration’s peculiar interest in Ukraine spans an array of possible motives—from money-laundering to child-trafficking to blackmail to helping globalist oligarchs like BlackRock and George Soros to use the country as their sandbox for the Great Reset.

  Notwithstanding, it is clear that Clinton was the last person they wanted in the middle of those diplomatic discussions.

  Clinton, meanwhile, joined her own successor as secretary of State, John Kerry, in having egregiously violated the 1799 law.

  Kerry controversially inserted himself into foreign policy negotiations with Iran during the Trump administration, even having the chutzpah to tell the rogue regime that it should wait out Trump’s presidential term before taking any rash steps.

  He was not prosecuted for his actions.

  Ironically, the person closest to being prosecuted under the Logan Act may have been Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael Flynn.

  Members of the Clinton campaign team and the Obama intelligence community collectively strategized on how to ensnare Flynn in a legal trap after having illegally unmasked him for unsolicited phone calls he had received from a Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak.

  After Obama imposed sanctions against Russia for its alleged interference in the 2016 election, Kislyak sought—and received—Flynn’s assurances that the Trump administration would not continue with his predecessor’s policy.

  On Jan. 5, 2017, top Obama team members, including his top spies, seditiously plotted to use the Logan Act as the pretense to open a secret investigation into the incoming administration, giving them the ability to wiretap Trump and his top deputies, based on the false pretense—which they knew to be false at the time—that Trump was colluding with Russia.

  Shortly thereafter, FBI agents, led by Peter Strzok, interviewed Flynn in his office and snared him in a perjury trap for failing to remember the exact details of his conversations with Kislyak—which, unbeknownst to Flynn, they had been given a transcript of.

  The transcript of the calls was later leaked to the Washington Post for the purpose of embarassing the new administration, and it ltimately was what triggered the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel to investigate the Russia-collusion hoax.

  Fittingly, Jake Sullivan was deeply involved in both Kerry’s operation as “lead negotiator” in Iran, and in Clinton cover-ups such as her e-mail scandal and Benghazi cover-up.

  He also testified against Flynn during a House Oversight investigation of the Russia hoax—which he, himself, had helped to concoct and spread.

  Sullivan claimed before Congress that Flynn had “absolutely” colluded with the Russians in violation of the Logan Act.

  “lf l went out right now and started telling foreign officials, ‘Don’t worry, we’ll avoid some action the current government is taking,’ that would be a violation of the Logan Act,” Sullivan testified in response to a question from then ranking minority member Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif.

  “And I think what Flynn did here—I mean, I’m not an attorney, but just on the face of what the purpose of this act is, what he did ran directly contrary to it,” he added.

  Other highlights from Foer’s Biden biography:

  • Biden reportedly was angered when contronted by Chinese president Xi Jinping about the rumors of U.S.-backed bioweapons facilities in Ukraine, telling Xi: “You know better than that, this is crap. Stop mouthing nonsense Russian talking points: I know you know that, so give me a break,” the Daily Caller reported.

  • Despite having spent four decades as a political elite, Biden was resentful of Barack Obama’s Ivy League education and claimed he couldn’t even curse properly, the AP reported, saying Obama was unable to deliver a “f—- you” with “the right elongation of vowels and the necessary hardness of consonants; it was how they must curse in the ivory tower.”

  • Vice President Kamala Harris damaged her rapport with Biden by initially asking to be in charge of relations with Scandinavia because it was “away from the spotlight.” Biden, in turn, bestowed on her the “thankless” job of uncovering the “root cause” of immigration at the U.S. border.

  • Biden has privately admitted to feeling “tired” despite denying publicly that he is unfit to lead due to his advanced age.

  Ben Sellers is the editor of Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/realbensellers.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 19:40

• Walmart Pay Cuts For New Hires Indicates Economic Downturn Has Arrived
  Walmart Pay Cuts For New Hires Indicates Economic Downturn Has Arrived

  The latest jobs reports (read: here & here) have revealed the US labor market, while still adding jobs, shows signs of cooling. Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer, has noticed the slowdown and is cutting pay for new store hires. 

  According to documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, the retailer introduced a new payment structure for new employees that went into effect in mid-July. Anyone who is hired today receives less pay than someone who was hired three months ago. 

  The new payment structure means new hires who join the digital or stocking departments will make about a dollar an hour less than they would have if hired earlier this year. 

  

  “This will allow for better staffing throughout the store,” said one of the documents. Walmart has already raised hourly pay for 50,000 workers because their pay was below the new minimum. 

  On Thursday, a Walmart spokeswoman confirmed the pay structure change, adding it allows new workers to learn and improve on skills to climb the company ladder. 

  News of Walmart’s pay reduction for new hires comes as the labor market appears to be cracking:

  • Labor Market Implodes: Job Openings Crater, Prior Data “Unexpectedly” Revised Sharply Lower
  • Unemployment Rate Unexpectedly Surges As BLS Revises Payrolls For Every Month In 2023 Sharply Lower

  More importantly, David Bassuk, the global head of retail at AlixPartners consulting firm, noted that retailers are scrambling to cut costs ahead of a period of consumer weakness. 

  “This is one example of many where retailers are doing everything they can to try to head off increasing costs,” Bassuk said.

  Walmart’s moves “signal the industry where things are either headed or what they should be considering,” he said. “I think we are starting to see the pendulum start to swing back to a different set of priorities.”

  The retailer sees precisely what we’ve explained to readers in recent months: low/mid-tier consumers are tapped out after two years of negative real wages that forced them to deplete savings while boosting credit card spending to make ends meet. Now, student loan payments are kicking in and will serve as an even larger economic headwind. 

  Goldman’s take on all of this is that the wage-price spiral is over: 

  It is worth noting that the market ticked higher as soon as the WMT story hit about looking to lower labor costs. Keep in mind, they were among the very first large companies to make major wage investment announcements years ago so this does feel like a notable story. Even if not an immediate needle mover to numbers, it is likely to be a driver for sentiment given the market’s large focus on CPI. “Walmart is paying some new store workers less than it would have three months ago, a sign that employers are seeking to cut labor costs as the once-hot market for hourly staff cools.” This is the first story of this kind we have seen. Also, they are the keynote speaker on day 1 of our retail conference next Tuesday, the 12th.

  In a recent earnings call, Walmart’s CFO voiced concerns about “uncertainty in the economy during the rest of the year.” The decision to reduce pay suggests that America’s largest employer is already feeling downward pressure in the economy. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 19:20

• Power Vacuum: How The State Wants To Suck Electricity From The SUV You Are Required To Buy
  Power Vacuum: How The State Wants To Suck Electricity From The SUV You Are Required To Buy

  Authored by Thomas Buckley via The Mises Institute,

  A literal power vacuum – that’s what California Senate Bill 233 proposes.

  And what is to be sucked? Your electric car.

  The bill – which has passed the Senate and is now winding its way through the Assembly – states that all new electric vehicles to be sold in California after 2030 be “bidirectional.”

  

  Because the state has decided to essentially go all electric without having the ability to actually provide enough electricity, the climate warriors have gotten a bit creative and now see the millions of electric vehicles (EVs) in the state as tiny batteries to make up for their incompetence.

  Currently, not every EV can send power back to the grid (like home solar panels that ship excess power to their local utility.) The bill—almost certain to pass because this is California—would change that.

  The bill, however, is only the first step in the process of being able to drain your EV, as the technology to get the electricity back onto the grid does not actually exist. As with so many other Golden State climate-related projects, it is based on being able to do it someday . . . probably . . . maybe.

  While this approach allows solons and nabobs to tout their green-a-fides, set even more absurd future goals by assuming things will work eventually, increase state spending to fund such projects, and create an excuse to not actually do anything practical—like build natural gas generators—to shore up the state’s extremely wobbly grid, it does nothing to address California’s self-imposed “energy insecurity.”

  The idea becomes even more absurd when one considers that shortly after announcing all new vehicles sold in the state by 2035 must be electric, the state asked the public to not charge their EVs after work because the grid couldn’t handle it.

  In theory, this bill raises the specter of electricity being drained out of your full Tesla to power your neighbor’s empty Volt.

  Furthermore, the concept is extremely dangerous. Imagine an emergency situation in which you have to leave your home immediately but you cannot because the state drained your car. The implications for fire evacuations, earthquake response, etc. are terrifying.

  And its not terribly clear if you would get paid for your power and/or if you would have to buy it back.

  Beyond the impracticalities, the concept does shine a light, as it were, on how easily the electrical power supply can be controlled and—if the grid is your only power option (no gas cars, no gas stoves, no propane, etc.)—how easily the public can be controlled through it.

  From “The Psychology of Electricity”:

  Now, a person can go to a gas station, put solar panels on their roof, buy propane at the hardware store, use natural gas in their home, even cut down trees to burn for heat. In other words, there are options other than electricity; there are literally millions of ways to not need to use electricity.

  But imagine a literally all-electric world—you are reduced, confined, required to get the energy you need to live from one source, one centrally (by necessity) controlled source that everything you own runs on, one centrally controlled source that can cut the power to your specific home anytime it wants.

  Conceivably—see China/social credit systems/central bank digital currency/“you’ll own nothing and be happy” and smart city concepts—[the] reasons for the power being cut will move beyond just being bill-related but conduct-related.

  The power of energy as a social control lever is nearly limitless.

  And that’s another reason why this legislative initiative is a very bad idea.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 19:00

• Biden's New Campaign Ad Presents Him As Last Action Hero Entering Ukraine "Under The Cover Of Night"
  Biden’s New Campaign Ad Presents Him As Last Action Hero Entering Ukraine “Under The Cover Of Night”

  “He entered Ukraine under the cover of night. And in the morning, Joe Biden walked shoulder to shoulder with our allies in the war-torn streets,” the narrator of a new one-minute Biden campaign ad begins. “Standing up for democracy in a place where a tyrant is waging war to take it away.”

  Ahead of the 2024 presidential election, where he’ll likely face Trump as the Republican nominee, the Biden team is focusing the reelection campaign around his surprise visit to Ukraine which took place last February. It’s being touted as the first time in American history that a sitting president traveled to an allied nation at war. “In the middle of a war zone, Joe Biden showed the world what America is made of,” the narrator says. “That’s the quiet strength of a true leader, who doesn’t back down to a dictator.” Watch the one-minute ad below:

  So while his critics sarcastically refer to him as “sleepy Joe” – his supporters are envisioning him as some kind of last action hero being covertly whisked into a dangerous “war zone” in the dark of night. “Air raid sirens blared as the two men walked together,” the clip dramatically continues, showing Biden shoulder to shoulder with Zelensky.

  The video was timed to be released to coincide with Biden’s trip to the G20 summit in India, where he’ll likely have strong words for Putin, who will not be attendance. NBC writes of the spot entitled simply “War Zone”:

  The new, 60-second advertisement will air in battleground states this weekend during the prime-time broadcast of “60 Minutes” while Biden is due to attend the G-20 Summit here, a gathering of leaders of the world’s largest economies that won’t include two geopolitical rivals, Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping.

  This comes as he’s set to pour yet billions more of American taxpayer dollars into Kiev’s coffers. Yet war observers and analysts have of late expressed intensifying concern over uncontrollable escalation in what’s now obviously a US-NATO proxy war against Russia. But Biden is doubling or tripling down, showing the world “what America is made of”, apparently.

  

  At a moment Congress is mulling Biden’s latest request for more than $24 billion for Ukraine, one independent commentator has compiled a list of the mammoth aid sent so far. Again, the below is all “courtesy” of the American taxpayer, many of them unwilling of course…

  • 2/20/2023 $500 Million
  • 2/23/2023 $10 Billion
  • 2/24/2023 $2 Billion
  • 3/3/2023 $400 Million
  • 3/20/2023 $350 Million
  • 4/04/2023 $2.6 Billion
  • 4/19/2023 $325 Million
  • 5/08/2023 $1.2 Billion
  • 5/18/2023 $3 Billion
  • 5/19/2023 $375 Million
  • 5/19/2023 $40 Billion
  • 5/31/2023 $300 Million
  • 6/09/2023 $2.1 Billion
  • 6/13/2023 $325 Million
  • 6/16/2023 $205 Million
  • 6/20/2023 $6.2 Billion
  • 6/26/2023 $500 Million
  • 07/07/2023 $800 Million
  • 07/18/2023 $1.3 Billion
  • 07/21/2023 $400 Million
  • 08/13/2023 $13 Billion
  • 08/15/2023 $200 Million
  • 08/29/2023 $250 Million
  • 09/05/2023 $125 Million
  • 09/06/2023 $1 Billion
  • 09/07/2023 $600 Million

  …and these are just the publicly disclosed funds spent – never mind what’s likely a massive CIA black budget for Ukraine.

  Meanwhile, look how Huffington Post and the “never Trump” MSM is already framing the “issues” going into 2024… the GOP is supposedly “appeasing Putin”. According to the far left outlet, “As GOP Argues About Whether To Appease Putin, Biden Leans In On Support To Ukraine”:

  A new TV ad to run on “60 Minutes” highlights Biden’s February trip to Kiev, making a clear contrast with Trump and other Republicans’ statements on the invasion. https://t.co/arOQihw8ob

  — HuffPost (@HuffPost) September 8, 2023

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 18:40

• Reinventing Democracy
  Reinventing Democracy

  Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

  The whole point of democracy and free markets is to force competition on elites who are desperate to eliminate competition.

  What’s the point of discussing reforms that aren’t even possible in the current status quo? That’s a good question, as any discussion of major systemic changes can be dismissed as pointless (since they’ll never be adopted), and a distraction from the “real work” that can be managed within the current system.

  On the other hand, we might ask: what’s the point of discussing what is do-able in the status quo, i.e. superficial feel-good policy tweaks that change nothing in the power structure? In other words, everything is ultimately a superficial feel-good policy tweak if it doesn’t change how power, “money,” credit and resources are amassed and distributed.

  

  The argument for discussing “impossible” systemic changes is this: we must ponder other ways to structure who has power for two reasons: 1) to validate how far we descended into neofeudalism and neocolonialism, and thus how desperately we need to re-arrange the power structure, and 2) to explore different models of governance and economic incentives, with an eye on the value of competition between ideas and systems.

  Richard Bonugli and I discuss ways to restore or reinvent democracy in our recent podcast, The Roundtable Insight Vision Series: Democracy (29:36).

  Although this sounds cynical, it isn’t: democracy is not really about self-rule, it’s about keeping an elite-run system stable by institutionalizing a safety valve and a governor on elite greed, corruption and mismanagement.

  Democracy gives the rabble a restricted voice as a means of limiting elite misrule, which is the natural path taken by elites everywhere, in all eras. The elite echo-chamber is: we’re entitled (by birth, rights granted by the gods, superior intelligence, merit, etc.) to rule, and therefore whatever we decide is wise–even if it is self-serving and delusional.

  Other models of governance rely on competition between elites to keep whichever elite is currently dominant from destroying the whole arrangement via their hubris, narcissism, greed, corruption, stupidity, delusions of grandeur and all the other pathologies of power.

  These models tend to fail because the dominant elite tends to see eliminating competitors as a very good strategy for consolidating power–just like corporations always seek monopolies or cartel arrangements to eliminate the pesky risks of open competition–which as we all know, introduces the possibility of losing, which a bad thing. To eliminate the possibility of losing, eliminate competition: what an excellent solution!

  This is why “capitalism” isn’t really about free markets, any more than colonialism is about “civilizing the natives;” it’s all about eliminating competition and rigging markets. In this way, “capitalism” and democracy are a perfect partnership, as each claims a noble cloak to obscure the actual machinery of elite self-service.

  The strength of democracy in system terms is it introduces a feedback loop that serves to limit systemically dangerous extremes, for example, a dictatorship that requires everyone to wear their underwear on the outside of their clothing, or (ahem) a system like ours that has boiled away social mobility and financial security, leaving a rapaciously exploitive machine that feeds off persuading poor people to borrow even more money to convince themselves that they’re not poor and powerless.

  The wealthy own the income-producing capital, the poor “own” debt: the wealthy own the mortgage / auto loan / student loan, the poor owe the mortgage / auto loan / student loan. Funny how neofeudalism works: the financial aristocracy is in the castle, protected by the Central State, and the debt-serfs are toiling away down there, protected by, well, no one. But by all means, vote for your favorite actor on the tawdry side-stage erected to amuse the public: what flourishes, what emotion, what comedy.

  (Please pardon the outburst of “truthiness.” I’ll try not to let it happen again.)

  If democracy is boiled away, the only pressure-relief valve and governor-on-greed left is messy uprising or a messy uprising plus the wholesale abandonment of the status quo by the technocrat class that keeps the whole thing glued together (what I call opting out).

  

  The prime directive in governance is to always, always, always centralize power to extend the reach of the elite currently at the wheel, and to limit the number of grubby hands trying to reach the wheel. Centralizing political power makes life considerably easier for elites, as they only need to bribe, blackmail or persuade a handful of folks at the top to cement their power / monopoly /cartel.

  I discuss this in my book Resistance, Revolution, Liberation.

  Consider the difficulties of cementing a quasi-monopoly on banking if banking were restricted to the county level. The would-be cartel grifters would have to bribe, blackmail or persuade 3,000+ county councils, all of whom are far closer to voters and far more exposed to competition than federal regulators or the Federal Reserve or Congress-critters, who as we all know, are re-elected like clockwork except in a few cases that are basically signal noise.

  This illustrates the value of Subsidiarity in a democracy, with Subsidiarity defined as “the principle that a central authority should have a subsidiary function, performing only those tasks which cannot be performed at a more local level.”

  The Subsidiarity principle only works in a democracy if capital is also democratized. What’s conveniently forgotten or left unsaid is: capital always “votes” three times.

  1) Capital’s beneficiaries, allies and employees will vote to keep their gravy train running;

  2) Capital influences the public with ad campaigns and public relations, all of which are quite affordable;

  3) Capital influences the political / regulatory power players in private, a.k.a. lobbying, revolving doors between corporations and the political/regulatory agencies, junkets, farcically bloated speaking fees, etc.

  The only possible conclusion: if we don’t democratize capital, democracy is boiled away. I wish this could be sugarcoated, but it’s much like my other aphorism: if we don’t change the way money is created and distributed, we’ve change nothing.

  In other words, if we don’t change the money/credit system and democratize capital, then all we’ll ever have is more superficial feel-good policy tweaks: all sound and fury, signifying nothing.

  There are ways to re-structure the system to restore / reinvent democracy. Ellen Brown has made a persuasive case for public / community banking for many years, and the same idea can be applied to private-sector companies: How Community Companies Can Smash Monopolies (via Sadie).

  It seems impossible at this point to decentralize power and capital, but with the pressure-relief valve and governor-on-greed of democracy both disabled, the system is starting to shake apart at the seams. I’ve often discussed the various classes and elites jostling for power in the U.S., and it’s possible some elite might awaken to the necessity to restore the possibility that those with the vast majority of wealth and power might actually lose, i.e. restore real competition in the economy and our system of governance.

  This competition starts with the competition of ideas. That’s the point of our discussion on Democracy (29:36), which covers many other interesting ideas for decentralizing / reinventing democracy.

  Where to start? Here: the whole point of democracy and free markets is to force competition on elites who are desperate to eliminate competition.

  

  (via K.K.)

  *  *  *

  My new book is now available at a 10% discount ($8.95 ebook, $18 print): Self-Reliance in the 21st Century. Read the first chapter for free (PDF)

  Become a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 18:20

• BofA Warns Clients Detroit Auto "Strike Almost Guaranteed"
  BofA Warns Clients Detroit Auto “Strike Almost Guaranteed”

  The United Auto Workers are nearing the end of their negotiations with Detroit’s “Big Three” automakers – General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis, the producer of Chrysler – concerning a new four-year labor agreement for approximately 146,000 workers. The current labor contract expires next Thursday as the union has made demands that even the UAW’s own president calls “audacious.” 

  General Motors and Ford have already sent their proposal contracts to UAW earlier this week and last — only to get quickly rejected. On Friday, Stellantis made its first proposal on wages of around 14.5% — still well under UAW President Shawn Fain’s demand of 46% over four years. 

  The automakers’ underwhelming offers put President Biden in a tough spot ahead of next week. “Union Joe,” while relaxing at his beach house in liberal white-elitest Rehoboth Beach last week, said he ‘wasn’t too worried about potential strikes.’ 

  

  Fain has described the labor talk discussions with Detroit’s Big Three as a battle between billionaires and the working class. As the deadline looms, none of the proposals have met the union’s demands, which has led John Murphy, a senior auto analyst at Bank of America Securities, to warn clients on Friday: “Strike almost guaranteed” next week. 

  Murphy expects negotiations will result in a 25-30% increase in labor costs over the next four years with “sizable cash signing bonuses and adjustments to other benefits” once contracts are finalized. 

  He said the word on the street is “UAW may offer a counter-proposal to the OEM offers shortly” but warned, “We continue to believe a strike is very likely after the Master Agreement expires next Thursday, September 14.” 

  Murphy explained if a strike was to occur next Thur., then negative headlines could weigh down automaker stocks: 

  Should this occur, it could drive some headline-related downwards movement to the stocks, but our discussions with investors and the valuations for GM and Ford (with the stocks down – 15% and – 9%, respectively since 7/31 vs. – 3% for S&P 500) suggest the stocks largely reflect the risks of a material strike. The UAW’s strike with GM in 2019 lasted 6 weeks and a one – to two-month strike appears to be the likely outcome here, in our view.

  When BofA’s note was published, Stellantis had not disclosed their proposal to the union. Below is a comprehensive overview of the offers from Ford and GM and how they match up with UAW’s demands.

  

  Everyone is eagerly awaiting UAW’s counter-offer before the deadline next Thursday. Union Joe may care a little more this weekend. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 18:00

• The Rise Of Unapologetically Partisan News Reporting
  The Rise Of Unapologetically Partisan News Reporting

  Authored by Carl M. Cannon via RealClear Wire,

  The Huffington Post was envisioned from its inception as a progressive answer to conservative talk radio and various right-leaning voices being amplified by new technology. Most specifically, it was designed as a counterpoint to the Drudge Report, a widely read and highly profitable website with populist sensibilities. The players involved in planning the new venture belonged to a select clique of Hollywood liberals and political activists in Arianna Huffington’s orbit.

  

  Among the cast of characters were film mogul David Geffen, a prodigious Democratic Party donor, along with Democratic political consultants Peter Daou and James Boyce. Jonah Peretti, a 30-year-old marketing whiz kid (and future BuzzFeed founder), was present at HuffPo’s inception, as was Kenneth Lerer, a New York investor who secured most of the money for the new venture.

  The least likely member of the core group was Andrew Breitbart, a creative and energetic conservative blogger in his mid-30s who had worked on the Drudge Report himself. Although he passed muster with the group because he was relatively liberal on social issues, Breitbart’s real connection to the enterprise was that he had known Arianna Huffington since the 1990s — when she was still an outspoken conservative. The most charismatic collaborator, of course, was the eponymous founder herself.

  “Arianna,” as everyone called her, first attained prominence in California politics as the wife of one-term Republican Congressman Michael Huffington, heir to a family fortune made in oil and gas exploration. Michael Huffington lost his 1994 Senate campaign, and the couple divorced in 1997. By 1998, Arianna was rejecting party labels and asserting that conventional “left-right divisions are so outdated.” Her evolution was just beginning. In 2001 she joined forces with environmental activist Laurie David in an endeavor dubbed the Detroit Project, which sought to shame automakers (and the Bush administration) into phasing out gas-guzzling cars and trucks.

  By April 2004, Arianna was endorsing Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry on Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show.” In July of that year, when asked during an interview in her stylish Brentwood home what she wanted out of life, Arianna replied, “I want George Bush defeated.”

  Although this answer struck Los Angeles magazine writer Steve Oney as glib, it turned out to be sincere. When her wish didn’t come true — when Bush won reelection by defeating Kerry — Huffington pursued the online journalism venture that still bears her name. Meeting in that same house in the weeks after the 2004 presidential election, a new and overtly partisan outlet was fast-tracked. It launched on May 9, 2005.

  Many traditional reporters and editors were troubled by the new direction journalism seemed to be taking. It wasn’t only the creation of the Huffington Post. Veteran political writers at venerable news organizations complained privately how sneering at Republicans, President Bush in particular, had become commonplace in their newsrooms. The legacy media had been considered left-of-center for decades, but something was changing. Conservatives had long complained about their treatment in the press (while progressives simply denied the existence of “liberal bias”), but open partisanship in newsrooms had long been discouraged.

  The Huffington Post didn’t engage in any such charades. As it gained traction in the first decade of the new millennium, its editors made no pretense about which side of the ideological spectrum it occupied. Arianna certainly didn’t.

  “We are opposed to the war in Iraq,” she told Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz in 2007. “We think the troops should come home. [Huffington Post] headlines are going to reflect what is in the best interests of the country.”

  A handful of media critics considered this trend not just refreshing for its candor, but an improvement over the old journalism model. For starters, they found it more intellectually honest. Also, at a time when the old advertising foundation was cracking, Huffington Post’s ability to quickly attract a huge readership showed that the Fox News business model might translate to the Internet. “Attitude is a huge positive, not a negative,” Ken Lerer told Kurtz. “People don’t have to love you. Maybe people come to you because they don’t love you.”

  “Attitude” was only part of the Huffington Post formula. Initially, celebrity journalism was an ingredient of its secret sauce. Well-known Hollywood liberals such as Warren Beatty, Diane Keaton, Robert Redford and Julia Louis-Dreyfus graced its pages with their (typically liberal) takes. HuffPo gave space to prominent progressives ranging from Dennis Kucinich and Melinda Gates to Alec Baldwin and Bernie Sanders. Lefty activists Ralph Nader and Michael Moore were contributors, as were more traditional Democrats Gary Hart and John Conyers.

  Their work was supplemented by the hiring of respected journalists such as Thomas B. Edsall and Mickey Kaus. The success of the enterprise also depended on the sheer volume of the site’s content. This was accomplished by several additional strategies. One was aggressively appropriating other outlets’ work, a practice that gave way to the slightly more kosher ploy of doing quick rewrites of other journalists’ work. (“Lynn Sweet: Obama Reorganizing Campaign, Reinforcing Leadership Ranks”). Finally, traffic was also driven by an army of “citizen journalists” who reported and wrote for HuffPo without remuneration.

  All these efforts were overseen by a cadre of editors who carefully monitored readership traffic and changed headlines or swapped out stories that weren’t doing well. The site’s success inspired copycats, some of them on the right. Just as HuffPost was a response to Drudge, conservative properties such as the Daily Caller were launched as antidotes to what their founders considered a mostly liberal landscape, including Arianna Huffington’s new online powerhouse. (Once again, the ubiquitous Andrew Breitbart was in the middle of it.)

  For the most part, these imitators mimicked the ideological imbalance of HuffPo. This view of the press — as a weapon for political advocacy — has only gained traction in the ensuing years, among partisans on both sides of the political divide.

  “One reason conservatives hate the ‘mainstream media’ is that it pretends to be something it isn’t,” British columnist Nathan Robinson wrote in The Guardian. The editor of Current Affairs, an online socialist publication, Robinson suggested in his 2019 essay that readers are alienated by hypocrisy more than ideology. “The best course of action is to acknowledge where we’re coming from,” he wrote. “If we show an awareness of our own political leanings, it actually makes us more trustworthy than if we’re in denial about them.”

  Some conservatives arrived at the same conclusion. Amid the feeding frenzy accompanying the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court confirmation process, a headline in The Federalist gave voice to this view: “The Entire Media Is Biased: They Should Just Embrace It.”

  It’s a provocative point of view, but it raises other questions. Let’s start with one point raised by Nathan Robinson: “more trustworthy” to whom? Ideologues who agree with you already? Partisans who despise you, but give you credit for being honest? Perhaps. But what about moderates or political independents — or fair-minded partisans who crave a more fact-based diet of political news without the relentless spin? This cohort, which ranges from a significant minority to a plurality of the voting public depending on the issue, seems vastly underrepresented in the new landscape of political journalism.

  Yes, it’s true that Fox News’ regular viewers generally find the network credible. Ditto for devotees of MSNBC. But these audiences are, by design, self-selecting peer review panels. Fox News’ motto since 2017 has been “Most Watched. Most Trusted.” The logic here is circular. Fox is trusted by those who watch it precisely because they know they’ll see what they want, which is bashing of Democrats and liberal elites and reflexively defending conservative personalities, politicians, policies, and culture. MSNBC and an increasing bloc of legacy media companies are Fox’s mirror image.

  The original slogan at Fox News, coined by Roger Ailes when he and Rupert Murdoch launched the network in 1996, was “Fair and Balanced.” This claim, which has resurfaced recently, induced apoplexy among liberals, which was partly Ailes’ intent. But that’s not all it was meant to signify. Inside the network, the mantra was understood to represent an intention that wasn’t cynical at all. Operating in a predominately liberal media landscape, Fox was promising to be “fair” to Republicans and their voters by providing the “balance” conservatives found missing in the rest of the press.

  One prominent Fox News journalist told me that those who dismissed Fox programming as being targeted to “a niche” market revealed the problem — and the key to Fox’s success. “Quite a niche,” he quipped. “Half the country.”

  Profitability of a Partisan Press

  Modern journalism — or, at least, modern American journalism education — dates to 1908 at the founding of the journalism school at the University of Missouri. The “J-school” is situated in the heart of the sprawling campus, which is fitting because the program has long been a source of pride for Mizzou graduates as well as journalists who’ve never even visited the college.

  Walter Williams, the visionary who started the program and later became president of the university, wrote a “journalist’s creed” that has been etched in bronze at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., since 1958, the 50^th anniversary of the founding of Missouri’s journalism school. Some of its language sounds stilted today, but the larger question is whether the values of the creed are considered outdated in the 21^st century.

  Let’s consider three items memorialized by Williams’ creed:

  • A media property is “a public trust … and acceptance of a lesser service than the public service is betrayal of this trust.”
  • “Clear thinking and clear statement, accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism.”
  • “Suppression of the news, for any consideration other than the welfare of society, is indefensible.”

  Powerful forces in contemporary America are working to undermine those tenets. Financial considerations are one of them. In 2008, Fox News surpassed $500 million in annual profits. This was nearly as much as CNN ($410 million) and MSNBC ($148 million) netted combined — and a $200 million increase over 2007.

  What happened in the centennial year of America’s first journalism school that made a television network with a readily identifiable point of view so profitable? Here’s part of the answer: A national political campaign took place featuring two Democratic presidential candidates whom Bill O’Reilly and other Fox News commentators pilloried relentlessly. These attacks appealed to conservatives, who flocked to Fox for the nightly skewering of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Higher ratings translated into higher advertising revenues.

  Executives at rival networks noticed. Progressive commentators, too. One anchorman in particular had been seething over Fox’s influence for years. As Howard Kurtz noted, MSNBC anchorman Keith Olbermann had already consciously positioned his nightly program as “a liberal alternative” to O’Reilly’s show. Years before Donald Trump arrived on the political scene, Keith Olbermann conducted public discourse like a New York insult comic.

  Once, at a television award show, Olbermann gave O’Reilly a Nazi salute. When he wasn’t saying George W. Bush and Dick Cheney had committed impeachable offenses and should resign, Olbermann was accusing the president and vice president of being stupid, dishonest, cowardly, and hypocritical. Olbermann framed one segment on Bush thusly: “Pathological presidential liar or an idiot-in-chief?” On Valentine’s Day in 2008, he called Bush “a fascist,” and later that year urged John McCain to “suspend” his campaign. Most incongruously — and in an eerie foreshadowing of Trump’s own slurs against McCain — Olbermann declared that the acclaimed Vietnam War hero displayed a “disturbing lack of faith in America.”

  Periodically, the suits at NBC would give lip service to reining Olbermann in, but their hearts weren’t in it. For one thing, the feud he initiated with Bill O’Reilly led to skyrocketing ratings. Liberal audiences loved it, and his show was one of the few MSNBC ever aired that made money. And after his contract was not renewed in 2011, it was clear that MSNBC had found its own niche. Olbermann’s place was taken by Rachel Maddow, a colleague he had mentored. The new anchor was brainy and hard-working, but just as liberal in her commentary. MSNBC had moved on from Keith Olbermann’s style, but not his substance. By August 2012, New York Times media critic Alessandra Stanley wrote a story titled “How MSNBC Became Fox’s Liberal Evil Twin.”

  The context for Stanley’s essay was MSNBC’s coverage of the Republican National Convention that nominated Mitt Romney. Stanley wrote that the network’s “hyped up panelists” routinely dismissed Republican assertions as “lies,” while taking various cheap shots (Chris Matthews claimed that the GOP looks upon welfare recipients as “looters”). Stanley noted that in “recasting itself as a left-leaning riposte to Fox News,” MSNBC drew significantly more GOP convention viewers than CNN.

  “That’s because,” she added, “MSNBC offers counterprogramming, not coverage.”

  Four years later, Donald Trump’s victory pushed CNN into the MSNBC camp. The New York Times followed suit. What had once been known as the “mainstream media” began to feature entire platoons of Keith Olbermanns not only among commentators and anchors, but even among supposedly nonpartisan White House correspondents tasked with covering the news.

  In the runup to Trump’s reelection campaign, journalist Matt Taibbi wrote a book about this development called “Hate, Inc.” In it, Taibbi attributed much of the press partisanship to bottom-line concerns. I initially thought his book title was too strong and that what openly partisan journalists were selling was indignation and outrage — and fear, maybe — but not hate. The events of Jan. 6, 2021, and their aftermath revealed that this may be a distinction without a difference.

  Whatever one calls it, this much can be said: In contrast to New York Times owner Adolph Ochs’ 1896 vow that his newspaper would “give the news impartially without fear or favor, regardless of party, sect, or interest” (and unlike Walter Williams’ creed calling suppression of the news “indefensible”), 21^st century media outlets have a habit of hyping and inventing negative information harmful to the political faction they disapprove of, while downplaying or censoring facts detrimental to the side they favor. For much of the 20^th century, this wouldn’t have been considered journalism at all.

  Rationalizing Regression

  It’s not a cop-out to concede that the arrival of the digital age posed historic challenges to the economic model and cherished assumptions of traditional media. Amid the chaos, novel arguments were proffered. Many were simply acknowledgements of new realities. Some were conscious challenges to the status quo, while others sought to rationalize problematic behavior on the part of the media. Here are four such arguments:

  • Defenders of the new free-wheeling style of journalism point out, not inaccurately, that for much of America’s history the press was unabashedly partisan. Objective, non-biased reporting aimed at a mass audience was a post-World War I development that is no longer relevant to modern audiences, or even economically viable.
  • In an unfettered media landscape, news consumers can find a multitude of views and choose from among them. What could be more egalitarian? If you dislike Rachel Maddow, switch to Tucker Carlson. The old model was staid and boring, these advocates say — and elitist. If one disparages television or radio shows or podcasts with high ratings, isn’t one denigrating the American people?
  • Reprising a theme from the 1960s, another critique of the traditional model comes from those who attack the very concept of objectivity. Arguing from the standpoint of identity politics, these critics dismiss the term as a standard “that was dictated by male editors in predominately white newsrooms and reinforced their own view of the world.” In this school of thought, the exigencies of covering race, sexual identity — and even climate change — necessitate going beyond what’s disparagingly called “bothsidesism.”
  • The trend of conflating opinion and news was a defense mechanism to cope with a presidential candidate who arrived on the scene with no experience and no desire to tell the truth — and who used social media to circumvent the media’s traditional gatekeeper role. This point of view was notably offered in an influential August 2016 column by New York Times media critic Jim Rutenberg, who framed the dilemma this way: “If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies, that he cozies up to anti-American dictators and that he would be dangerous with control of the United States nuclear codes, how the heck are you supposed to cover him?” Although he posed the dilemma as a question — and pointed out the pitfalls of appearing partisan — Rutenberg suggested that reporters who found the idea of a Trump presidency a danger would naturally “move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional.” Many did just that.

  For purposes of this essay, let’s stipulate that those reasons are offered in good faith by people who care about the civic life of this nation. That does not make them right.

  Back to the Future

  Whatever one thinks of partisan journalism, those who say that it’s not a new phenomenon are correct. The first newspaper to cover politics on these shores, the New York Weekly Journal, is not only the publication that inspired the name of this series. A partisan organ, it helped foster the idea of a free press on this continent in 1735.

  It’s also true that a partisan press helped bring America into existence. In 1776, the American Colonies had 50 newspapers, many of them agitating openly for revolution. By the time George Washington completed two terms as president, this number had quintupled. The Colonial-era press took sides in the nation’s most fractious disputes: The Federalist Party we associate with Alexander Hamilton and John Adams (and the Democrat-Republicans of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison) were identifiable by the newspapers that supported them. Six decades later, partisan newspapers stoked the passions that led to civil war.

  “Editors unabashedly shaped the news and their editorial comment to partisan purposes,” Harvard historian William E. Gienapp noted in a study of 1850s American newspapers. “They sought to convert the doubters, recover the wavering, and hold the committed.”

  “Partisanship was extreme on both sides,” Lincoln scholar Richard Allen Heckman wrote a century after the Civil War ended. In what seems like a contemporary description, Allen added, “Republican and Democratic papers often arrived at opposite conclusions after witnessing the same event.”

  Does this sound familiar? It should. After Hunter Biden’s business partner Devon Archer testified before the House Oversight Committee, most of the legacy media issued a verdict: Nothing to see here. Echoing Democratic Rep. Dan Goldman, The New Republic put this headline on its story: “New Transcript: Star Hunter Biden Witness Refuted Every GOP Talking Point. Hunter Biden’s former business partner, Devon Archer, undermined all of Republicans’ claims in his testimony.”

  Meanwhile, Fox News had an entirely different take: The headline of its online story was “Devon Archer Transcript Shows How Democrat Rep. Goldman Spun ‘Illusion of Access’ Narrative.” Mind you, these are competing stories reporting on the very same transcript.

  Not everyone sees this as a problem. But the events of Jan. 6, 2021, show what happens in a hyper-partisan political environment when “red” America and “blue” America have fundamental differences of opinion on something as basic as whether a presidential election was honest or a sham.

  Americans of different races, creeds, generations, religions, geography, and political affiliation have always differed in their perceptions of politics and culture. But having a baseline set of shared facts turns out to be important. Political parties deliberately skew those facts for their own purposes. However, when journalists repeat those partisan narratives word for word — or, worse, amplify them — they are interfering with the prime directive.

  Earlier this year, political scientists David Broockman and Joshua Kalla released a study showing how many Americans dwell in media “echo chambers” that not only bolster their existing political biases, but deepen their level of partisanship.

  “Most people who tune in to Fox News lean to the right, but Fox draws them further to the right,” Broockman explained. “Likewise, MSNBC is pulling those to the left further left. And neither side almost ever watches the other.”

  This is the succinct rebuttal to those with laissez-faire attitudes about partisan news coverage. Americans can get the other side of the story, if they try, but don’t often do so. Ken Lerer’s expressed hope that conservatives might read the Huffington Post to know what the other side is thinking is not how most people consume media.

  It was always thus. In “The Press Gang: Newspapers and Politics, 1865-1878,” scholar Mark Wahlgren Summers wrote how common it was for publishers to knowingly print lies or simply ignore newsworthy events that reflected poorly on their party. “The truth was not suppressed,” Summers wrote. “It was simply hard to get in any one place.”

  Readers who wanted to know what was really happening in local as well as national politics had to read several newspapers, not just one. The problem is that this is not how most citizens consume news, and it never was. My point here is that journalists in this country haven’t always even attempted to provide their readers, listeners, and viewers with the complete story. They haven’t always tried to tell the truth. But this elusive quest is the implied promise that helped create the idea of a free press in the first place.

  ‘The Best Cause’

  Although rarely invoked today, the name John Peter Zenger still lingers in the recesses of American journalism’s institutional memory. The University of Arizona gives an annual award in his name. The National Press Club has a room named after him. A bronze plaque in New York City signifies the site of a local election, in 1733, covered by Zenger’s newspaper, The New York Weekly Journal.

  For the better part of three centuries, Zenger’s sacrifice was praised whenever freedom of the press was mentioned. Arrested in November 1734 on charges of “seditious libel” after his newspaper criticized the royal governor of New York, Zenger persisted in publishing from jail with help from his wife and sons — and the political provocateurs who wrote the offending material. Nine months later, Zenger was acquitted in a sensational jury trial. Fifty years after that, Gouverneur Morris, a signer of the U.S. Constitution, wrote: “The trial of Zenger in 1735 was the germ of American freedom, the morning star of that liberty which subsequently revolutionized America.”

  Although there is truth in this characterization, the story is not that tidy.

  Peter Zenger, as he preferred to be called, arrived in New York harbor in 1709 speaking little English and facing daunting prospects. The Zenger family — Peter, his parents and two younger siblings — were among the 2,200 German refugees from the Palatinate region who sailed in a 10-ship flotilla to America in search of religious freedom. The crossing was harrowing: Some 470 of the migrants perished, among them Peter’s father. At 13, the oldest Zenger child needed to find a trade to help support his family.

  The boy landed an apprenticeship with a publisher named William Bradford, a kindly Quaker who had followed his own father’s footsteps. In the early days of manual typesetting, publishing was an exacting, highly technical craft. There were other obstacles, too, including the scarcity of ink and paper. The biggest danger was running afoul of the authorities.

  “To understate the matter, the printing trade was not much encouraged in colonial America,” Pulitzer Prize-winning author Richard Kluger noted wryly in his authoritative 2016 book, “Indelible Ink: The Trials of John Peter Zenger and the Birth of America’s Free Press.”

  William Bradford knew this lesson well. He’d essentially been chased out of Pennsylvania for running afoul of William Penn and the Quaker elders who controlled every aspect of life in the colony. Bradford’s sins — for which he was fined, briefly imprisoned, and had his printing presses confiscated — included the mere mention of Penn’s name in an annual almanac and daring to reprint the colony’s official charter.

  But on both sides of the Atlantic, the most dreaded accusation was “seditious libel,” a felony. The American Colonies were ruled by Britain, where libel simply meant defaming or criticizing another person, especially someone associated with government. Under British common law dating to the notorious Star Chamber proceedings, truth was not a mitigating factor to the crime. “It is not material whether the libel be true or false,” the Star Chamber judges had ruled.

  That’s because the aim of libel law wasn’t to regulate civic discourse in a way that made it more honest. The law’s intent was to preserve order and prevent rabblerousers from riling up the populace. The controlling legal authority in British common law, and by extension in the Colonies, was titled “A Treatise of the Pleas of the Crown.” Written by an English barrister named William Hawkins, it held that printers and authors were guilty of defamation if they wrote or printed words that exposed any person, alive or dead, “to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule.”

  It did not matter if the defamed person already had a bad reputation. Taking Star Chamber logic to its ultimate, and ultimately perverse, conclusion, Hawkins explained “that it is far from being a justification of a libel that the contents thereof are true … since the greater the appearance of truth in any malicious invective, so much the more provoking it is.”

  Political factions were just getting started in New York, then a city of 10,000 souls. Newspapers were a rarity as well. The only two printers in the colony were Willam Bradford and his former apprentice, Zenger. Neither man was much interested in the news business. Mostly they reprinted religious tracts and government-approved legal notices and texts, much of Zenger’s in Dutch and German. Eight decades before the dawn of the great New York publishing houses, all books in New York were imported from London.

  This somnolent arrangement was disturbed by King George II’s 1732 appointment of a minor aristocrat and British military officer of little distinction named William Cosby to be the governor of New York and New Jersey. It was not an inspired appointment and Cosby’s preening nature and obvious greed immediately alienated the locals.

  His initial grift, which ignited the political fires in New York, was his insistence that the previous acting governor turn over the portion of his salary from the time Cosby was named to the job — even though he didn’t arrive in New York for many months. His predecessor, a well-connected Dutchman named Rip Van Dam, sued Cosby. When the colony’s chief justice, Lewis Morris, ruled against the new governor, Cosby simply replaced Judge Morris. A powerful and formidable lawyer with a habit of holding grudges, Morris used numerous machinations to fight back. One of them was teaming with his friend and ally James Alexander, another powerful lawyer, to persuade John Peter Zenger to publish a new newspaper.

  Appearing on Nov. 5, 1733 — 272 years before The Huffington Post — the first issue of the New York Weekly Journal carried the account of Lewis Morris’ political comeback: his election to the Assembly. For the next 10 months, in articles almost exclusively ghostwritten by James Alexander, the Journal published satire, limericks, and opinion pieces critical of Cosby, though never by name.

  Nobody was fooled, however, least of all Cosby, who variously ordered the newspapers burned, pressured the colony’s other printer to respond in kind, and finally had Zenger arrested and charged with a crime. In preparation for trial, Cosby tried to pack the jury with his allies and installed a crony named James De Lancey as chief justice in the colony. When lawyer William Smith and his co-counsel James Alexander (the anonymous author of the anti-Cosby material in Zenger’s broadsheet) made a pre-trial motion for De Lancey to recuse himself, the judge instead kicked them off the case — and disbarred them on the spot.

  This heavy-handed move backfired. Alexander sought the services of a Philadelphia lawyer named Andrew Hamilton. A native of Scotland, and not high-born, Hamilton had arrived in Virginia in his early 20s. He married into a Quaker family in Virginia, then moved to Maryland, where he helped write that colony’s laws and served in the legislature. After relocating to Pennsylvania in his 40s, Hamilton came to represent the family of William Penn, served as a member of the Pennsylvania Assembly, and supervised the construction of Philadelphia’s Independence Hall. Hamilton’s career signified the possibility of upward mobility in the New World. He was also considered the best trial lawyer on these shores. He would need to be.

  As expected, the prosecutor argued that the libel laws of England were the de facto libel laws of New York and that any defamation against the crown — or its agents — was merely a matter of proving the identity of the author. In other words, insofar as the jury was concerned, there was no real defense at all.

  Without exactly explaining why, Hamilton challenged this logic. He posited that the laws of England should not necessarily apply to New York. Judge De Lancey was utterly unpersuaded. “The jury may find that Zenger printed and published those papers and leave to the Court to judge whether they are libelous,” he responded. But the defense strategy was to talk past the judge — straight to the jury and, by implication, the wider court of American public opinion. Addressing his argument to Zenger’s peers, Hamilton was going for jury nullification: “I know that [the jurors] have the right beyond all dispute to determine both the law and the fact,” he intoned.

  In his summation, Hamilton went further: “The question before the court and you, gentlemen of the jury, is not of small or private concern. It is not the cause of the poor printer, nor of New York alone,” he said. “No! It may in its consequence affect every free man that lives under a British government on the main of America. It is the best cause. It is the cause of liberty.”

  The jury agreed with defense counsel. It returned quickly from its deliberations, and foreman Thomas Hunt called out the verdict: “Not guilty!” Hurrahs rang out through the courtroom, drowning out the demands of the judge for order. Something had been started that would be hard to quell.

  Skeptics

  As early broadcaster Westbrook Van Voorhis liked to say, time marches on. In the 1960s, a questioning era like our own, a slew of revisionist historians tossed cold water on the John Peter Zenger legend. For starters, he didn’t even write the material he was jailed for, they noted. And Gouverneur Morris, the Founding Father who eulogized the Zenger trial as “the germ of American freedom” and “the morning star” of liberty on these shores, was hardly an impartial chronicler: Lewis Morris was his grandfather.

  Pulitzer Prize-winning constitutional scholar Leonard Levy characterized the image of Colonial America as a society that cherished freedom of expression as “a sentimental hallucination.” Stanley Katz, a star Princeton historian, wrote that libel laws were reformed, in due time, but not because of anything James Alexander wrote, Peter Zenger printed, or Andrew Hamilton argued to a New York jury in 1735. It was, Katz claimed, “as if Peter Zenger had never existed.”

  Today, a more subtle kind of rethinking is taking place. Richard Kluger, who persuasively debunks the 1960s-era Zenger debunkers, gets to the heart of the matter. “William Cosby was almost surely an ignoble character during his 3½-year tenure in New York, but if he was in fact half the villain his colonial critics claimed, they failed to marshal firm evidence of it.”

  Moreover, after its inaugural issue, the New York Weekly Journal never covered another election after Lewis Morris’ return to the Assembly. Instead, its pages were used to compare Cosby to Nero, refer to the governor as “our affliction from London,” and accuse him of cluelessly escorting a French naval officer around the town so he could see the city’s defenses. Consorting with the enemy was a serious charge then, as it is today, but Zenger’s paper wasn’t calling Cosby a traitor. It was accusing him of being “but one degree removed from an idiot.”

  It was this kind of thing that prompted veteran newsman Bill Keller, in his New York Times review of Kluger’s book, to compare the New York Weekly Journal to the now-defunct gossip website Gawker. It was not intended as a compliment. More generally, ideologues on both sides invoke the style of America’s earliest newspapers to question the legacy, and even the virtue, of nonpartisan journalism and the striving for objectively.

  In an interview with “Frontline” in the early days of online journalism, Scott Johnson, co-founder of the conservative online outlet Power Line, put it this way: “The fact that the press was partisan and wild and outrageous during the Revolutionary era, during the era in which the Constitution was ratified, was not only true then; it really is the tradition of the American press up until the Progressive Era, essentially yesterday. The press was always partisan.”

  He’s not entirely wrong, but using this historic fact as an excuse to cover the news in a one-sided way today — trying to shape outcomes instead of merely to inform — misses the point of the jury’s verdict in the 1735 trial of Peter Zenger. His lawyer didn’t merely argue that government shouldn’t muzzle a free people. Andrew Hamilton compared a libel case in which a defendant couldn’t argue the truth of his statements to a murder trial in which the defendant couldn’t offer evidence that the victim was actually still alive.

  This gambit was a bluff. No witnesses could prove the truth of the contention that Gov. Cosby was “but one degree removed from an idiot” any more than Keith Olbermann could prove the same about George W. Bush. In the Zenger trial, Judge De Lancey didn’t buy it anyway. Nonetheless, Hamilton risked contempt of court by pivoting directly toward the jury and saying, “Then, gentlemen of the jury, it is to you we must now appeal for witnesses to the truth of the facts we have offered and are denied the liberty to prove.”

  Actually, neither side called any witnesses in that trial, but the jury took Hamilton’s point. Their verdict wasn’t an endorsement of defamation. It was a recognition that if a people are to be free, they have the right to pursue the truth and tell it as best they can — and that neither government nor any political faction has a monopoly on veracity. Pursuing truth, not partisanship, was the principle that carried the day in a New York City courtroom on Aug. 4, 1735.

  Citizen Journalists

  The Zenger saga has an instructive postscript. It occurred 273 years later, just three years after the launch of The Huffington Post.

  As it turned out, Arianna Huffington’s interests went far beyond creating an online media counterweight to George W. Bush’s presidency. Focusing on the future of journalism at a time when the old media’s business model was already under financial stress, Huffington joined forces with well-known New York University journalism professor Jay Rosen to create an army of “citizen journalists.”

  Launched in early 2007, the venture was named “OffTheBus,” a sly reference to Timothy Crouse’s classic 1973 book on presidential campaign reporting. This endeavor was a subversive response to the good-old-boy reporting network Crouse immortalized. OTB’s tag line was “Campaign coverage by people who are not in the club.”

  Ultimately, it engaged some 1,700 unpaid writers to cover the 2007-2008 presidential cycle. This all-volunteer army was overseen by a tiny staff of professionals. One was Marc Cooper, a progressive political writer and University of Southern California journalism professor. Another was Amanda Michel, who today is director of global engagement at The Guardian but in 2007 was a 29-year-old wunderkind with no formal journalism training. Her talent was harnessing online communities, which she’d learned while working on the Howard Dean and John Kerry presidential campaigns.

  Their team would produce thousands of stories and countless page views and attracted some 5 million unique visitors to Huffington Post’s website in October 2008 alone. Its best-remembered story, by far, was an account of an April 6, 2008, political fundraiser in Pacific Heights, a toney San Francisco neighborhood. The candidate was Barack Obama. The HuffPo citizen journalist in attendance was Mayhill Fowler, a 61-year-old native Tennessean who lived across the bay in Oakland.

  In the decades since she’d graduated from Vassar and moved to the Bay Area to study at the University of California at Berkeley, Fowler had wed and worked sporadically, by her own account, as “a teacher, editor and writer, but mostly raised two daughters.” An uncommonly thoughtful person, she had quickly emerged as a favorite among OTB’s editors — and readers. In an October 2007 piece on OTB, New York Times political writer Katharine Seelye singled Fowler out as one of the site’s “emerging star correspondents.”

  Fowler took a particular interest in Obama. She contributed the maximum $2,300 to his campaign, which was not only normal for OTB citizen journalists, but was encouraged, as it granted them increased access to campaigns they were covering. Fowler had previously traveled at her own expense to see Obama campaign in the Midwest and in Texas, but the San Francisco event was close to home so she wrangled an invite to the fundraiser, which was closed to the mainstream press. With Obama leading Hillary Clinton in pledged delegates, the conversation that night turned to the looming Pennsylvania primary. From the audience, some of whom were preparing to go east for the faceoff, came a question: What could they expect when they went to campaign in the Rust Belt?

  “You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them,” Obama replied. “And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are going to regenerate and they have not.”

  So far, so good. Then Obama added: “And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

  Fowler had covered Obama when he campaigned across Pennsylvania and that’s not what he had said to the faces of those voters, and she was “taken aback” by his judgmental tone.

  “I’m a religious person, and I grew up poor in a very wealthy family — sometimes we didn’t have enough to eat, but my larger family was rich,” she told Seelye in an April 2008 story, adding that her father was a hunter. “Immediately, the remarks just really bothered me,” Fowler added. “For the first time, I realized he is an elitist.”

  Fowler had a dilemma. She was smart enough to know the sneering remarks about rural Americans might hurt the candidate whom she still wanted to win. She confided in her husband, who didn’t see anything particularly wrong with what Obama had said. But it nagged at her and she called Amanda Michel. To Michel’s credit, she advised Fowler, “If you’re going to cover the campaign, you have to not be partial or your coverage isn’t worth as much as it could be.”

  So, following her gut feeling and her editor’s supportive advice, Fowler blogged about the incident. Hillary Clinton’s campaign pounced, and the mainstream media jumped on the story (often omitting Fowler’s name). Some Obama fanboys attacked her for being disloyal, but Team Huffington rallied behind her. Arianna defended her reporter in a blog post while vacationing on a yacht, lambasting Clinton’s campaign. Jay Rosen, one of the most level-headed advocates of the proposition that disclosure of bias is preferable to feigned objectivity, examined the ethical questions thoroughly on his blog. After the campaign was over, Michel did something similar for Columbia Journalism Review.

  Almost two years later, Fowler published an e-book on the election, “Notes From a Clueless Journalist: Media, Bias and the Great Election of 2008.” It’s a nuanced and informative book, as anyone who read Fowler’s blog would expect. In the preface, she explains her motives, not just for writing about the Pacific Heights fundraiser, but also chronicling the inspiring saga of Barack Obama himself. “All I cared about,” she wrote, “was getting the election story.”

  Notwithstanding the title of her book, traditional reporters who read it or followed her writing found Fowler anything but clueless. She came across as committed, empathetic, curious, intellectually honest, and highly ethical. It gave many of us hope for the future.

  But here’s the rub, the postscript to the postscript, if you will: If something like that happened today, would an online media outlet with a clear point of view deign to report it? For that matter, would the legacy media? The treatment of the Hunter Biden laptop story suggests an answer, and it is not an encouraging one.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Slow Genocide Of 120,000 Armenian Christians Happening Under Azerbaijan Occupation: Report
  Slow Genocide Of 120,000 Armenian Christians Happening Under Azerbaijan Occupation: Report

  Authored by Raymond Ibrahim via The Gatestone Institute,

  The thousand-year-old genocide of Armenians at the hands of Turkic peoples has reached a new level. Several watchdog organizations — including the International Association of Genocide Scholars, Genocide Watch, and the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention — are accusing Azerbaijan of committing genocide against the 120,000 Armenians living in Nagorno-Karabakh. Historically known as Artsakh, this ancient Armenian region was brought under Azerbaijani rule in 2020.

  Modern day hostilities between Armenia, an ancient nation and the first to adopt Christianity, and Azerbaijan, a Muslim nation that was created in 1918, began in September 2020, when Azerbaijan launched a war to capture Artsakh. Although it had been Armenian for more than 2,000 years and its population still remains 90% Armenian, after the dissolution of the USSR, the “border makers” granted it to the Republic of Azerbaijan, hence the constant warring over this region.

  

  Once the September 2020 war began, Turkey quickly joined its Azerbaijani co-religionists against Armenia, even though the dispute did not concern it. It dispatched sharia-enforcing “jihadist groups” from Syria and Libya — including the pro-Muslim Brotherhood Hamza Division, which once kept naked women chained and imprisoned — to terrorize and slaughter Armenians.

  One of these captured mercenaries later confessed that he was “promised a monthly $2,000 payment for fighting against ‘kafirs’ in Artsakh, and an extra 100 dollar[s] for each beheaded kafir.” (Kafir, often translated as “infidel,” is Arabic for any non-Muslim who fails to submit to Islam, which makes them de facto enemies.)

  These Muslim groups committed massive atrocities (here and here). One included raping an Armenian female soldier and mother of three, before hacking off all four of her limbs, gouging out her eyes, and sticking one of her severed fingers inside her private parts.

  The war ended in November 2020, with Azerbaijan gaining control of a significant portion of Artsakh.

  Then, on December 12, 2022, Azerbaijan sealed off the humanitarian Lachin Corridor — the only route between Artsakh and the outside world. A recent report by the Dutch journalist Sonja Dahlmans summarizes the current situation:

  “In the extreme southeastern part of Europe, known as the Caucasus, a silent genocide is looming. The Lachin Corridor that connects Armenia to Artsakh, the region in Azerbaijan where mainly Christian Armenians live, has been closed by the government for eight months. Supermarket shelves are empty; there is hardly any food, fuel, or medicine for the 120,000 Armenian Christians who live there, including 30,000 children and 20,000 seniors.

  “At the time of this writing [Aug. 24, 2023], a convoy of food and medicine has been standing in front of the border since July 25 [a month], but the International Red Cross is not allowed access to the inhabitants of Artsakh. According to journalists living in the area, most residents only get one meal a day. People in Artsakh queue for hours at night for bread, waiting for their daily rations. At the same time, sources within Artsakh report shooting at Armenians trying to harvest the land…

  “[I]n all probability bread will also soon be unavailable due to the shortage of fuel… Bakers can no longer heat their ovens. Last week, a 40-year-old Armenian man died of malnutrition. A pregnant woman lost her child because there was no fuel for transport to the hospital.”

  Separate reports tell of 19 humanitarian trucks “loaded with some 360 tons of medicine and food supplies” that have been parked for weeks and prevented from crossing.

  This is not the first time Turks starve Armenians to death (as this 1915 picture of a Turkish administrator taunting emaciated Armenian children with a piece of bread makes clear).

  On August 7, 2023, Luis Moreno Ocampo, former Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, framed the situation:

  “There is an ongoing Genocide against 120,000 Armenians living in Nagorno-Karabakh, also known as Artsakh.

  “The blockade of the Lachin Corridor by the Azerbaijani security forces impeding access to any food, medical supplies, and other essentials should be considered a Genocide under Article II, (c) of the Genocide Convention: ‘Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.’

  “There are no crematories, and there are no machete attacks. Starvation is the invisible Genocide weapon. Without immediate dramatic change, this group of Armenians will be destroyed in a few weeks.

  “Starvation as a method to destroy people was neglected by the entire international community when it was used against Armenians in 1915, Jews and Poles in 1939, Russians in Leningrad (now Saint Petersburg) in 1941, and Cambodians in 1975/1976.”

  Similarly, after going on a fact-finding mission to Armenia, former U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom Sam Brownback referred to the blockade as the latest attempt at “religious cleansing” of Christian Armenia:

  “Azerbaijan, with Turkey’s backing, is really slowly strangling Nagorno-Karabakh. They’re working to make it unlivable so that the region’s Armenian-Christian population is forced to leave, that’s what’s happening on the ground.”

  Muslim regimes regularly make life intolerable for Christian minorities, apparently to force them to abandon their properties and leave. A few weeks ago, the president of Iraq revoked a decade-old decree that granted Chaldean Patriarch Cardinal Louis Raphael Sako powers over Christian endowment affairs. “This is a political maneuver to seize the remainder of what Christians have left in Iraq and Baghdad and to expel them,” said Diya Butrus Slewa, a human rights activist from Ainkawa. “Unfortunately, this is a blatant targeting of the Christians and a threat to their rights.”

  In Artsakh, the situation seems to be worse: just as no one can get in, apparently no one can get out. Azerbaijan is holding those 120,000 Armenians captive, starving and abusing them at will.

  Brownback, in his testimony, said that this latest genocide is being “perpetrated with U.S.-supplied weaponry and backed by Turkey, a member of NATO.” If the U.S. does not act, “we will see again another ancient Christian population forced out of its homeland.”

  Nagorno-#Karabakh: The mystery of the missing #churchhttps://t.co/hsjclEwLwf#Artsakh #Armenia pic.twitter.com/lKZg1Qr4Fd

  — Ruzanna_A 🇦🇲 #StopArtsakhBlockade (@avaruza) March 25, 2021

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

  Not only has U.S. diplomacy been ineffective for the besieged Armenians; it has actually exacerbated matters by allowing the Azerbaijanis to continue their atrocities. According to one report:

  “[T]he only thing the Washington-backed talks appear to have produced is the emboldenment of Azerbaijan’s aggression….

  “For over eight months, the region’s 120,000 Indigenous Armenians—who declared their independence in the early 1990s following escalating violence and ethnic cleansing by Azerbaijan—have been deprived access to food, medicine, fuel, electricity, and water in what is nothing less than genocide by attrition….

  “The same week peace talks began in Washington, Baku [capital of Azerbaijan] tightened its blockade by establishing a military checkpoint at the Lachin Corridor. When Washington-based talks resumed in June, Azerbaijan began shelling the region. In the months since, the International Committee of the Red Cross has been denied access to Karabakh—and later reported that an Armenian patient in its care had been abducted by Azerbaijani forces en route to Armenia for treatment.

  “This is the predictable consequence of Washington’s insistence on negotiations amid Azerbaijan’s blockade of Artsakh and occupation of Armenian territory. It has signaled to Baku that its strategy of coercive diplomacy is working, disincentivizing de-escalation, and forcing Armenia to negotiate with a gun to its head…

  “Washington has also actively strengthened Azerbaijan’s position by indicating support for Artsakh’s integration into Azerbaijan. Given Azerbaijan’s state-sponsored dehumanization of Armenians, the litany of human rights abuses perpetrated during and since the 2020 war, and its own disastrous domestic human rights record—it is impossible to imagine Armenians could ever live freely under Azerbaijan’s rule.

  “For Azerbaijan, this disingenuous participation in negotiations has allowed it to uphold the veneer of cooperation while engaging in conduct that has immeasurably set back the prospects of a durable peace.”

  Clearly, negotiating simply bought the Azerbaijanis more time in which to starve the Armenians, and possibly another way for the United States to pretend it was “doing something” without actually doing anything — apart from allowing more savagery.

  Indeed, part of the façade of diplomacy is that Azerbaijan insists that the Christian Armenians of Artsakh are being treated no differently than Muslim Azerbaijanis — since all are citizens of Azerbaijan. One report sheds light on this farce:

  “Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and other officials have declared that the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh are citizens of Azerbaijan, seeming to back prior statements of Azerbaijani authorities pledging to guarantee the rights and security of ethnic Armenians.

  “But actions speak much louder. The First Nagorno-Karabakh War three decades ago arose following waves of anti-Armenian pogroms. Azerbaijan is now one of the most repressive and autocratic countries in the world, scoring among the lowest in the world on freedom and democracy indexes—in stark contrast to Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh.

  “Aliyev (who inherited his post from his father) has confessed to having started the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War in 2020, and proudly admitted that a generation of Azerbaijanis has been brought up to deeply despise Armenians (here and here). He denies the Armenian Genocide (alongside Turkey) and negates the existence of Armenians as a nation, including their history, culture, and right to be present anywhere in the region.

  “No Armenian, not even a foreign national of ethnic Armenian descent or anyone with an Armenian sounding name, is allowed to enter Azerbaijan.

  “The results are clear: nearly every Armenian who fell into Azerbaijani captivity after the 2020 war has been persecuted, imprisoned, tortured, mutilated, decapitated or murdered. None of these acts has ever been punished. To the contrary, those who kill Armenians receive medals and are glorified in Azerbaijan. It is no wonder that Armenians are petrified and cannot fathom living under Azerbaijan’s authority.”

  Aside from the Lachin Corridor crisis, a recent 12-page report documents the systematic destruction of ancient churches, crosses, Christian cemeteries, and other cultural landmarks on land — Artsakh — that historically belonged to the world’s oldest Christian nation, Armenia.

  One example is the Holy Savior Cathedral in Shushi, Artsakh. First, Azerbaijan bombed the church during the 2020 war, an act Human Rights Watch labeled a “possible war crime.” Then, after the war, with Azerbaijan having seized the area, officials claimed to be “restoring” the church, when in fact its dome and cross were removed, making the building look less like a church. As one report notes:

  “The ‘case’ of Shushi is indicative of the well-documented history of Armenian cultural and religious destruction by Azerbaijan. From 1997 to 2006, Azerbaijan systematically obliterated almost all traces of Armenian culture in the Nakhichevan area, which included the destruction of medieval churches, thousands of carved stone crosses (“khachkars”), and historical tombstones.”

  Dahlmans also reports:

  “[A]n Armenian church in Artsakh… disappeared after Azerbaijan’s victory in the second Nagorno-Karabakh war (2020). During the victory, Azerbaijani soldiers pose on top of the church shouting ‘Allahu Akbar’… [T]he church has been completely wiped out and only a few stones remain as a reminder…

  “The Western press rarely writes about the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Most reactions follow the line that it is not a religious conflict, but a claim by two countries over a disputed territory. Given the many examples that exist in which precisely religious buildings, tombs and inscriptions are systematically destroyed, it is difficult to maintain that this is the case. “

  One of the main reasons that Armenia finds itself standing alone against this genocidal onslaught is due to the West’s “desire to maintain favorable relations with Azerbaijan given its role as a European energy partner [and this] has outweighed any purported commitment to upholding human rights—bolstering Azerbaijan’s aggression.”

  It is these same priorities that have made Russia, once the defender of all Orthodox Christian nations in the East, more apathetic than might be expected. According to another report:

  “Azerbaijan was able to impose this blockade because Russian peacekeepers allow them to do so. The Russians are there as part of a ceasefire agreement ending the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War. The same agreement, inked by Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan in 2020, guarantees access along that now-blocked road. Although Russia is often portrayed as Armenia’s patron, the reality is more complicated. Russia’s largest oil company owns a 19.99% share of Azerbaijan’s largest natural gas field. It is not so surprising then that Armenians in Artsakh demonstrated against Russian inaction after the killings of their police officials.”

  Longtime Armenian-activist, Lucine Kasbarian, author of Armenia: A Rugged Land, an Enduring People, sums up the situation:

  “We who are Armenian, Assyrian, Greek and Coptic bitterly know just how this will end. It’s deja vu all over again. Again and again, we’ve seen the deceit and brutality, received the chilling reports, warnings, graphic videos, open letters and petitions from alarmed genocide scholars. But alas, NATO, Islamic supremacism, gas and oil are going to take precedence over life and liberty once again unless high-powered vigilantism can save the day.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 09/08/2023 – 02:00

• The Petro-Dollar's Shaky Future: How The Biden Admin Has Alienated One Of Our Crucial Allies
  The Petro-Dollar’s Shaky Future: How The Biden Admin Has Alienated One Of Our Crucial Allies

  Authored by Christopher LaBorde via GooldSeek.com,

  In late 1973 a deal was struck between the US and The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia that changed the future of both nations and the U.S. dollar for the next 50 years.

  The importance of the deal has been downplayed, and the Biden administration’s near destruction of this deal has almost been outright ignored.

  However, I have had a front row seat to the sentiment changes I am writing about, and I recommend that the reader consider this political game a concerning matter for the long-term stability of the U.S. dollar. 

  In summary, it appears that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is open for new alliances outside of the US that would have never been considered before this time.

  

  The History

  In October of 1973, the US, UK, Netherlands, Canada and Japan were the targets of an OPEC oil embargo that increased the price of oil from $3 a barrel to $12 a barrel in a matter of months after they chose to support the Israelis in the Yom Kippur War. In the four years prior, Nixon price ceiling policies had doubled our dependency on foreign oil and 83% of that oil came from the Middle East. To make matters worse, in the three prior decades, US industry and consumers had become drunk on stable cheap energy, built an entire infrastructure and prosperous economy that was dependent on prices remaining low, and had firmly closed the door on any form of alternative energy options (nuclear). The sudden 4-X spike in oil prices over a 3-month period from this embargo created a real shock to the US way of life and threatened to cripple the US economy. OPEC had our attention and its un-official leader, Saudi Arabia, was in a good position to listen to proposals from the US.

  In late 1973, A deal was made to end the embargo in early 1974 and pull the United States out of the Oil Crisis. Despite the US being in a tight spot, the negotiations created a deal that benefited both countries unimaginably over the following 5 decades that was described in a May 2016 Bloomberg article.

  The gist of this deal can be summarized in the following two reciprocal agreements:

  • Agreement 1.
    • The Al Saud family, the ruling family of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, agreed to sell the US oil at a price that we could live with if we agreed to become their defender and supplier of military equipment – This helped ensure the family and the kingdom’s position in the region and provided a great customer for the US military industrial complex over the next 50 years.
  • Agreement 2.
    • The Al Saud family also agreed to buy an unfathomable amount of U.S. treasuries with some of the proceeds from the annual oil purchases – This helped back the Saudi Arabian currency with dollars while providing the U.S. economy with a very healthy and regular dose of liquidity.

  This two-part mutually beneficial deal allowed the US to continue to spend money and have the stability of OPEC’s energy reserves behind it, while providing support for the kingdom and its ruling family. This deal has been active for multiple administrations up until this very day despite some rough waters, but as you will read, it appears to be changing.

  Recent History

  In 2015, a freedom of information act was filed in the 9-11 investigations that sought reparations from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia based on the participation of some of its citizens’ roles in the bringing down of the twin towers. During the following years the Obama administration maintained the position that the KSA government could not be held responsible for the action of a few of its people, and the treasury / petrol dollar deal maintained its mutually beneficial terms. The PR troubles of the deal were then inherited by the Trump administration, who quickly realized the value of maintaining the trade relationship and worked hard at continuing to have the kingdom recognized as a pro-US ally and one of our primary supporters in the region against the backdrop of an unstable nuclear Iran. Officials from the Kingdom suggested that the US get its political house in order rather than bring the 1973 deal to light for the full scrutiny of the general public to digest; and the Trump administration saw an opportunity to ask the kingdom to be the fulcrum for a “Peace in the Middle East” deal.

  In 2017, the then 32-year-old Mohammed Bin Salmon “MBS”, the emerging leader of the kingdom, was in the process of both fully securing his leadership position and managing a country-wide corruption clean-up campaign. In many discussions with Saudi nationals the prince’s cleanup exercise was seen as a god-sent action that put the country back on track. However, in the U.S. the press chose to cover the event from the point of view of an old-school coup playing out on live television, which served the press well and renewed U.S. / K.S.A. tensions. Despite another round of disturbances in the optics between the countries, the deal survived and continued on. 

  In 2018, after the “house cleaning exercise” was cooling down the young millennial prince emerged as the clear leader for the kingdom and the Trump administration vowed its support for him and the continued U.S. / Saudi alliances. The idea was to bring things back on track as quickly as possible and start working with the new normal. Unfortunately, it was later determined that someone in the young prince’s afterguard was not in favor of how he was being spoken about after the house-cleaning exercise and independently took matters into their own hands to quiet down the opposition.

  On October 2nd, 2018, the unfortunate result was a journalist and son of a powerful family that had been promised a diplomatic position in the pre-housecleaning KSA regime, entered into the KSA Embassy in Turkey and would never exit. As a result of the rogue actions of a staff member, the young prince became embroiled in a freedom of the press / human rights scandal with the apparent assassination of a reporter and outspoken critic of his administration. The PR situation only became worse in the US press as MBS appeared to not fully realize the crimes he was being accused of. The problem was that with each stab from the press, MBS felt as though he was being personally wronged, and with each response from the prince, the U.S. social media public gained a deeper split with the Kingdom. As the Kingdom was gaining new foreign eastward facing ties, this was quickly becoming a bigger problem for the US than it was for the Kingdom.

  In late 2019, a very exposed relationship between the Kingdom and the U.S. became a campaign topic for Trump opposition. There was no shortage of Western judgment for the Kingdom, and it became an important point for critics to associate Trump with, but the deal and its steady flow of cash that made the U.S. way of life possible was never up for discussion. This was clearly a challenging time to keep the full nature of how much the U.S. needed the kingdom under control and away from the press and the U.S. public. A win from the Arab region was needed and it was needed fast to cool down growing negative sentiments from the U.S. towards the kingdom if the deal was to remain intact. 

  In Q1 of 2020 the Abraham Accords campaign went into full force. With a renewed desire from both parties to refresh their relationship and get back on the “right foot” the idea of “Peace in the Middle East” was hatched as a new goal to focus on. The strategy was that such a grand goal could wipe clean the slate between the U.S. public opinion and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and the two countries could find themselves looking at a new deal for new hope in the region. In short, the Abraham Accords aimed to reconcile centuries old tensions between Middle Eastern nations sharing Abrahamic religious ties. This deal had been discussed since the beginning of the Trump campaign, but its timing was needed and looked like it could possibly bring together the Arab world with Israel. For years the Arab world had not acknowledged Israel and Israel had not acknowledged Palestine. The deal was designed to slow tensions between the warring neighbors and to start to bring trade between Israel and all of the Middle East.

  On August 13th, 2020, the Abraham Accords were signed and Israel was free to trade technology with the Arab world and “the greatest peace deal” of all time was signed. However, in order for this concession to be made, the KSA prince would have to show weakness on some level with the people of the Arab world because it is widely understood that the Palestinians have long suffered at the hands of the Israelis. As a fierce young leader this was not a concession that would easily be made, so the concession deal that was struck was a deal for access to restricted US defense technologies. The U.S. would have to agree to sell full capability F35’s to the K.S.A. and the U.A.E. militaries, something that had never been allowed.

  On January 20th 2021, President Joe Biden took office and the “catch” to the deal was discovered. In this case the catch was that the deal was signed with the Trump administration, not the Biden administration, and after the administration change, no full capability F35’s would be allowed to be delivered to the K.S.A. or U.A.E. military. The Biden administration decided to not honor that part of the deal and then decided not to acknowledge MBS as the current leader of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The administration then decided to double down on declaring MBS personally to be a very unpleasant person and an enemy of human rights, despite the incredible changes taking place for women’s equality within his Kingdom at that very moment. As you may imagine this was not the prince’s G-20 membership welcome that he felt he was due, nor one that made much sense for what was at stake for the U.S. and its economy. Unfortunately, Biden’s political posturing also watered down the goodwill of the accords and prolonged the tensions in the relationship triangle between the Kingdom, Israel and Palestine, but Biden’s tone towards KSA was about to shift. 

  On February 24th, 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine. In the months following, Europe had to find a new energy supplier as Putin shifted Russia’s supplies East and the price of all energy climbed steeply. President Biden then made a plea to OPEC to increase its supply to help ease the price of oil that the U.S. was starting to experience because of the shortage, but as you can imagine, the plea fell on deaf ears and the execution of one of the fastest full Karma circles recorded in international history took place. 

  On March 3rd, 2022, in an Atlantic Article, MBS suggests that President Biden should be concerned about the cares of the United States as it is not something that he himself is worried about any longer. MBS also clearly communicated that he was no longer concerned about the U.S.’s view of him or his kingdom’s actions. He stated that he will still do business with the US as well as many other countries, but that the US should probably pay more attention to their own country than to his. The article also mentions that MBS felt snubbed by the U.S. for assuming he was responsible for the death of the reporter and that that Biden refused to acknowledge his position as leader of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. In the clear text of this article, it can be read just how much damage had been done by the president to the relationship between the two countries in the 14-months since he took office. 

  On March 15th, 2022, The Wall Street Journal announced in a headline, “Saudi Arabia Considers Accepting Yuan Instead of Dollars for Chinese Oil Sales”, which proved that MBS was remaining true to his statements that he was exploring trade relationships outside of the US and the petro-dollar. The article explains that there are many difficulties in a move like this but that some of these difficulties can be mitigated and will likely be considered. This act seemed to suggest that the Kingdom was actually willing to make moves away from the petro-dollar deal and that the Biden administration’s political posturing had consequences beyond the OPEC request being denied.

  On May 31st, 2022, the U.S. had imposed the final SWIFT sanctions on Russia and opened the door for Russia to negotiate oil deals with China – Also Not In Dollars. Had this been done at any time before the sanctions were initiated, this act would have been considered an act of aggression to the United States and a possible act of war against the United States of America and the “Petro-Dollar.” However, in this instance it became a basic chess move in response to the weaponization of the SWIFT system and the sanctions placed against Russia, a move that the US encouraged and opened the door for. As business dealings appeared to be moving more East, this weaponization of the SWIFT system forced the hands of OPEC members to also consider the possibility that the timing of a dollar exit may not be here, but an alternative may be wise to consider, and the news outlets started to report that many other countries were feeling the same.

  In July of 2022 the Arab news media started to cover stories of talks of the Kingdom moving into the BRICS alliance (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa). In May of 2023 the story had progressed to a Bloomberg article with the title, “The BRICS Bank Wants New Members as Saudi Arabia Looks to Join”. Besides Saudi Arabia, it was also reported that eight other OPEC member nations have been reported to have applied for membership to the BRICS alliance, including: Algeria, Angola, Congo, Gabon, Nigeria, Iran, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela. When you include the existing BRICS countries, the OPEC countries that have applied and other oil producing countries that have applied to the BRICS alliance (such as Iraq, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Indonesia and Argentina) the list includes 19 of the top 25 oil producing countries in the world. These countries also represent up to 78% of the world’s oil reserves and possibly 36% of the global GDP, at a time when the US GDP only represents 25% of the Global GDP. I don’t suffer from the idea that these vastly different cultures will suddenly be able to get along and sing in harmony, but it should be understood that the US led weaponization of the SWIFT system clearly signaled something to these countries. That message intended, or not, might have been that the US is willing to default on their promise to accept dollars your country holds in reserve for trade if they do not like your politics. If that was the understood message, you can see how this may be very upsetting to countries who hold large sums of dollars in reserve.

  On August 9th 2023 it was reported by the Wall Street Journal that the Biden administration had finally switched on to the gravity of the situation and was now working to repair relations with the kingdom, and that they had started trying to negotiate around the very topics that have been covered in this article. Ironically, 31-Months after the Abraham accords deal was damaged by the current administration; the administration is now trying to use this very deal as a vehicle to repair US KSA relations and move forward. On the cover of this updating of the Abraham Accords, it is being actioned to bring Palestine and Israel to more peaceful terms. However, the meat of this deal for the US may have more to do with Saudi Arabia’s growing Eastern relationships, possibly with the BRICS, and assurances that KSA will not include Chinese military bases within the kingdom or the pricing of Oil outside of the dollar. The Kingdom has clearly stated that they are not ready to fully agree to a deal with the US at this time, but that if they move forward, they will be requesting additional security guarantees and access to civilian nuclear technologies. The US has always refused sharing US nuclear technology with the region, but the Kingdom understands their current leverage with Biden’s prior actions towards the Kingdom.

  On August 22, His Highness Prince Faisal bin Farhan bin Abdullah, The Kingdom’s foreign minister and senior diplomat, announced that he would be attending the BRICS summit in South Africa on behalf of MBS. Now that this meeting has concluded, one can only wonder what was discussed in the hallways and side-venues…

  *  *  *

  Hopefully next time you are at the pumps you can reflect on our relationship with the Kingdom and how it has been part of a delicate balance that has helped facilitate the U.S. way of life for the last 50 years. Kings and presidents have come and gone but the support that these nations have had for each other have been part of the fabric that have made the existence and growth of both nations possible. However, it is under these very different times that these arrangements are changing, and these changes are not small changes. Many of you will read this and think that the U.S. needs to make itself more independent, and I would agree with you that there is great value in that; we just need to carefully consider the timing, the price of those actions, how this will shift the political landscape and where this will leave the US dollar.

  What to do in the meantime?

  In no way am I writing to say good or bad things about the United States or the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, I am writing to say that part of the bedrock that the US dollar has been built on over the last 50 years may be changing. I suggest that readers keep a keen eye on the headlines that involve OPEC and Eastern powers, as subtle headlines buried far off the front page may be the headlines that harken the news of a new trajectory for the dollar over the coming decade.

  As discussed in the last article, the US dollar has other pillars underneath it, but it’s always a good idea to keep an eye on the bridge footings.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 23:40

• Fani Willis Scolds Jim Jordan For 'Illegal Intrusion' Into Her Trump Hunt
  Fani Willis Scolds Jim Jordan For ‘Illegal Intrusion’ Into Her Trump Hunt

  Fulton County, GA District Attorney Fani Willis (D) fired off a nastygram to House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH), who she says is trying to ‘interfere with and obstruction [sic] this office’s prosecution’ of Donald Trump and 18 other defendants, after Jordan asked her to turn over all documents related to the case.

  Willis argues that Jordan’s federal powers to investigate are “not unlimited,” and that “there is no justification in the Constitution for Congress to interfere with a state criminal matter, as you attempt to do.”

  

  In Jordan’s original Aug. 24 letter to Willis, he suggested that Willis is trying to interfere with the 2024 election for which Trump is the front-runner for the GOP nomination, adding that her investigation might infringe on the free speech of Trump and other defendants.

  On Thursday, Willis accused Jordan of peddling “inaccurate information and misleading statements” which improperly interfered with a state criminal case.

  “Its obvious purpose is to obstruct a Georgia criminal proceeding and to advance outrageous misrepresentations,” Willis wrote of Jordan’s letter. “As I make clear below, there is no justification in the Constitution for Congress to interfere with a state criminal matter, as you attempt to do.”

  According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Jordan’s letter came 10 days after a Fulton County grand jury indicted Trump and 18 other people for their roles in an alleged scheme to overturn the 2020 US election.

  Trump faces charges in four separate criminal cases even as he solidifies his place as the leading Republican candidate for president next year. Many Republicans believe the prosecutions are political.

  In recent days, some Georgia Republicans have pushed to impeach or sanction Willis, though Gov. Brian Kemp has rejected such proposals. In Washington, Jordan’s committee has launched an investigation to determine whether federal and Fulton County authorities have coordinated their Trump prosecutions.

  In his letter, Jordan noted that Willis began her investigation of Trump in February 2021 but “did not bring charges until two-and-a-half years later, at a time when the campaign for the Republican presidential nomination is in full swing.

  “Moreover, you have requested that the trial in this matter begin on March 4, 2024, the day before Super Tuesday and eight days before the Georgia presidential primary,” wrote Jordan. “It is therefore unsurprising many have speculated that this indictment and prosecution are designed to interfere with the 2024 presidential election.”

  Read the letter to Jordan below:

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 23:20

• Leading The Charge On Civics Education
  Leading The Charge On Civics Education

  Authored by Thomas Kelly via RealClear Wire,

  The need for stronger civics instruction has never been clearer. As recently released test scores revealed, American students simply do not possess the civics knowledge they need to become thoughtful and engaged citizens. Knowledge of basic facts is important; knowledge of our nation’s story and founding ideals—which gives meaning to these facts—is more so.

  

  Unfortunately, many K-12 civics teachers do not have the necessary training to succeed in the classroom. Schools of education do not typically afford aspiring teachers an opportunity for in-depth study of key texts in the American tradition. High levels of polarization and a lack of trust in public schools mean many teachers are unsure how to teach about key figures and moments in our history or how to discuss controversial political issues in a nonpartisan way.

  That’s where my organization, the Jack Miller Center (JMC), comes in. We are a non-partisan, nationwide network of scholars and teachers dedicated to teaching the American political tradition. Our scholars have the expertise teachers need to navigate our current divisions and build trust. They can help teachers understand the contours of our most fundamental debates and squarely address the failures in our nation’s history while fully appreciating our achievements.

  To that end, JMC introduced a Founding Civics Initiative in 2016. “Founding Civics” has clearly resonated with teachers. In just eight years nearly 2,000 teachers have participated in this initiative. In fact, this year we’ve reached an all-time high for summer programs: JMC has completed 24 teacher education programs across nine states this summer alone, training nearly 500 teachers for the upcoming school year and beyond.

  These programs offer in-depth explorations of some of the most challenging topics in civics today by avoiding simple left-right narratives and focusing on primary sources.

  This year, multi-day programs were held in partnership with nine campuses. Programs like the “Civic Literacy and Citizenship Symposium” with the University of Wisconsin-Madison offered teachers the opportunity to discuss the importance of virtue for liberty, the evolution of the First Amendment, and the development of judicial review. The “Summer Civics Institute on American Principles and Debates” at American University saw teachers digging into the roots of contemporary ideologies and examining them in relation to the American founding.

  Programs at Baylor University and the University of North Texas allowed teachers to confront race and American politics head-on through sessions on slavery and the American founding, Lincoln and the Civil War, and African American political thought. “Investigating Foundational Questions in American Civics,” in partnership with North Greenville University, encouraged teachers to think more carefully about concepts such as American exceptionalism and whether the Declaration was really for all Americans.

  Florida is a state on the frontlines of education reform, so JMC made our work there a strategic priority. We offered six programs across the state and continue to play a leading role in statewide civics reform with nearly 800 Florida teachers having participated in JMC programs since 2020.

  At the University of West Florida program, special attention was paid to dissent in American politics—from the Anti-Federalists in the ratification debates, to the dissents in the Dred Scott case, to anti-slavery advocates such as William Lloyd Garrison and Frederick Douglass. At Florida Atlantic University teachers considered the American founding in 21st century contexts by examining Hamilton the musical in light of Alexander Hamilton’s actual writings and considering issues of free speech and civil discourse on social media.

  In St. Petersburg, we also commenced our second year of the competitive-admission year-long American Political Tradition Institute, which consisted of a five-day residential program and will continue with virtual curriculum-development sessions during the academic year. Teachers loved the summer sessions, with one tweeting that she “walked away exhilarated” while another described it as “truly empowering.”

  Summer institutes and workshops such as these are tremendously important, but credit-bearing graduate courses in American political thought and history are also essential. Graduate courses can help public school teachers rise in district pay scales while offering the rigor of a formal class structure and graded assignments.

  We sponsored four graduate courses for teachers this summer, including “Teaching Civics in an Age of Controversy” and “Political Thought of the American Revolution” through the University of Chicago, “Alexis de Tocqueville’s ‘Democracy in America’” at Tufts University, and “The American Constitutional Experience” at Lake Forest College. All courses offered deep dives into crucial primary sources while also considering prominent secondary sources that shape the way we understand the American story.

  The mission of the Jack Miller Center is to help teachers and students connect with and safeguard our nation’s ideals. Improving K-12 teachers’ knowledge of America’s history and its founding will help preserve that vital knowledge for future generations. This is an urgent mission all educators should share. As JMC’s founder and chairman, Jack Miller, says, “The battle for the soul of our nation will be won or lost in our classrooms.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 23:00

• Morgan Stanley Created 2015 Hunter Biden Dossier Highlighting "Fraudulent" Looking Schemes And "Suspicious" Transactions
  Morgan Stanley Created 2015 Hunter Biden Dossier Highlighting “Fraudulent” Looking Schemes And “Suspicious” Transactions

  Whistleblowers at Morgan Stanley raised the alarm over what they thought looked like “fraudulent” schemes and “suspicious” transactions all the way back in 2015, eventually escalating his concerns to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) just a few days before Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016, according to documents obtained by Just the News.

  

  “Due diligence on involved parties reveals less than clean records,” one Morgan Stanley investment bank compliance presentation from May of 2015 states.

  The bank even created a dossier about Hunter Biden’s history, including his expulsion from the US Navy, his association with Ukrainian energy giant Buisma, and photos of the Bidens.

  In a May 8, 2015 presentation deck titled “Overview of Wakpamni Series 2014 Bonds Potentially Suspicious Structure & Transactions,” the bank warned that some activities – such as the Native American tribal bond scheme, required the bank to take compliance action.

  “No clear illegal activity is being accused, but authors of this presentation determined activity was suspicious enough to warrant escalation of review by appropriate internal Compliance representatives,” reads the presentation, which singled out several business partners, including Devon Archer and Hunter Biden.

  

  “The Navy Reserve discharged Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter this year after he tested positive for cocaine,” it states.

  The dossier also flagged an August 25, 2008 NYT article noting that Hunter had been “Caught Up in Hedge Fund Trouble,” stating “A son and a brother of Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware are accused in two lawsuits of defrauding a former business partner and an investor of millions of dollars in a hedge fund deal that went sour.”

  See below (via Just the News):

  As JTN further reports:

  The presentation is one of the earliest known whistleblower activities to raise serious questions about Hunter Biden and his foreign business exploits. It triggered suspicious activity reports (SARS) filed by banks and a SEC complaint that would eventually lead to the 2016 indictment of several Hunter Biden business partners in a bond fraud scheme and later FBI and IRS investigations targeting Hunter Biden himself for tax evasion.

  While SARS reports are frequently generated by compliance officers in the financial industry, the step of independently reporting information directly to the SEC is much more rare.  

  The documents obtained by Just the News chronicle the efforts by at least one vice president inside the Morgan Stanley investment bank to blow the whistle on companies affiliated with Hunter Biden and one of his chief business partners, Devon Archer. The concerns included that the firms may have been involved in a fraudulent bond scheme with the Native American Wakpamni tribe and may have improperly benefited from tax dollars in a separate technology investment.

  After some time, two Morgan Stanley officials filed whistleblower complaints against Hunter Biden with two federal agencies.

  Read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 22:40

• Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson Whips Out Race Card To Dismiss His "Slow Start" And Other Criticisms
  Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson Whips Out Race Card To Dismiss His “Slow Start” And Other Criticisms

  By Mark Glennon of Wirepoints

  Chicago’s Mayor Brandon Johnson on Tuesday night lambasted critics, arguing that he’s being held to a “different standard” as a black man, as reported by the Chicago Tribune.

  

  From the Tribune: “There is a different standard that I’m held to. There is,” Johnson said. “And that’s not something that I’m mad at, but that’s just the reality. I’m not the first person of color, particularly a Black man, that will be held to a different standard than other administrations.”

  Johnson apparently doesn’t like being called “slow,” which he says is a “microagression.” He has been criticized for a slow start as mayor.

  “You all read the press. I don’t. But you all look at these dynamics. You all know how there’s been a certain, particular coverage of me, right? Think about it. You know, there’s coverage of me being slow, right?” Johnson said. “These are microaggressions, that if you don’t have the lens of those who have lived through these experiences, you would just miss it. You would, because the same — some of the folks who would call me slow, do you understand what that term means? Particularly (toward) the Black community. So you have these forces that perpetuate a particular view of Blackness.”

  He also blamed racism for concerns about subservience to the Chicago Teachers Union, which helped elect him and where he previously was a political organizer. When asked about that, he said, “You think I’m going to suddenly be surprised or get upset because now all of a sudden, oh my goodness, the world is oppositional to a Black man on the left who leads with love?” Johnson responded. “And that the only rationale that can be possible for any of my decisions is that somehow a Black man is being controlled?”

  Same for criticism over his firing of Dr. Allison Arwady, the city’s former public health commissioner. She crossed swords with the teachers’ unions by trying to get schools open during the pandemic.

  When asked about that, Johnson said, “Perhaps things should go without saying, but as far as this dynamic that a Black man executive can’t make decisions on his own,” Johnson said, and he ripped “the same forces” that he said didn’t believe he could balance a budget, unite the City Council or win the election. “Well, let me just offer news for the city of Chicago: The people of Chicago elected me as mayor, and if anybody has a problem with it, come see me in four years.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 22:20

• Former FTX CEO To Forfeit $1.5 Billion, Pleads Guilty To Federal Campaign Finance And Money-Transmitting Crimes
  Former FTX CEO To Forfeit $1.5 Billion, Pleads Guilty To Federal Campaign Finance And Money-Transmitting Crimes

  With Biden’s weaponized Dept of Justice intending to seek a second indictment of Hunter Biden after the catastrophic disaster that was the government’s first sweetheart plea deal, which revealed the corruption of “special counsel” David Weiss, who now is scrambling to slap Hunter’s wrist for the second time over a, drumroll, gun charge which will lead to the president’s crackhead son not spending even a minute in prison for being, along with his senile father, a bought and paid for Chinese muppet, the US Department of “Justice” needed a big enough distraction and got that today when SBF’s former right hand figurehead and former FTX CEO Ryan Salame, pleaded guilty Thursday in New York federal court to campaign finance and money-transmitting crimes, and agreed to forfeit more than $1.5 billion. Yup, Salame had $1.5 billion in cash just hanging around courtesy of the epic criminal syndicate that was FTX, and is about to part with it.

  

  According to CNBC, Salame, during his plea, admitted that from fall 2021 to November 2022 he steered tens of millions of dollars of political contributions to both Democrats and Republicans – but really mostly Democrats…

  

  … in his own name when in actuality the money came from Alameda Research, the hedge fund arm of the cryptocurrency exchange owner FTX. Those contributions were made at the behest of then-FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried, Salame said, making SBF the second biggest Democrat donor during the 2022 midterms, only behind George Soros…

  

  … in which the Dems managed to avoid getting steamrolled thanks to Biden draining the SPR. Oh and, according to Vox, it was SBF who was “one of the people who is most responsible” for Biden being “elected” president.

  

  “From at least in or about 2020, up to and including in or about November 2022, Ryan Salame, the defendant, engaged in multiple conspiracies to advance the interests of Samuel Bankman-Fried … and the cryptocurrency companies Bankman-Fried founded and controlled — including FTX.com (“FTX”) and Alameda Research (“Alameda”) — through the operation of an unlawful money transmitting business and violations of the federal election law,” the charging document filed against Salame says.

  That document says that Salame, in a private message to a confidant, wrote that “the purpose of these bipartisan donations would be ‘to weed out anti crypto dems for pro crypto dems and anti crypto repubs for pro crypto repubs,’ and that donations would likely be routed through Salame ‘to weed out that republican side.’”

  Salame, who was released on a $1 million bond Thursday, faces a maximum possible sentence of 10 years in prison for the campaign finance violation and charge of operating an unlicensed money-transmitting business. His sentencing was scheduled for March 6 by Judge Lewis Kaplan in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

  In addition to what must be a record monetary forfeiture, which will be paid to the U.S. government, the 30-year-old Salame will pay $5 million to debtors of FTX and $6 million in fines to the government. Salame also will surrender two houses he owns in Lenox, Massachusetts, and his 2021 Porsche automobile.

  Salame’s attorney, Jason Linder of the firm Mayer Brown, in a statement said. “Ryan looks forward to putting this chapter behind him and moving forward with his life.″

  A source told CNBC that Salame is not cooperating with federal prosecutors who are preparing for the criminal fraud trial of 31-year-old Bankman-Fried. But three other former executives who previously pleaded guilty in the same court are expected to testify against Bankman-Fried.

  They are Caroline Ellison, who had been CEO of Alameda; former FTX technology chief Gary Wang; and Nishad Singh, who was FTX’s engineering boss.

  U.S. Attorney Damien Williams, whose office is prosecuting the FTX cases, in a statement said, “Ryan Salame agreed to advance the interests of FTX, Alameda Research, and his co-conspirators through an unlawful political influence campaign and through an unlicensed money transmitting business, which helped FTX grow faster and larger by operating outside the law.”

  Meanwhile, SBF – who yesterday lost his appeal to get out of Brooklyn jail where they don’t serve adderall or vegan food. and is set to go on trial Oct. 3 on wire fraud and securities fraud charges related to his alleged looting of billions of dollars in customer funds from FTX courtesy of endorsements from some of the highest profile politicians criminals in the country.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 22:00

• FDA Refuses To Provide COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Data To US Senator
  FDA Refuses To Provide COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Data To US Senator

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

  U.S. officials are refusing to provide COVID-19 vaccine safety data to a U.S. senator.

  

  Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) asked the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the results of analyses on data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System in January. The request came after the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said none of the safety signals it identified for the COVID-19 vaccines were “unexpected.”

  The two agencies have run different types of analyses on the system’s reports, which are primarily made by health care professionals.

  The CDC ran Proportional Reporting Ratio analyses, which involve comparing the number of reported adverse events to the number of adverse events reported after vaccination with other vaccines.

  The first time the agency ran analyses using the method for the COVID-19 vaccines, in 2022, hundreds of signals were triggered, files obtained by The Epoch Times show.

  The FDA in 2021 started a different type of analysis, called Empirical Bayesian (EB) data mining.

  The Proportional Reporting Ratio results “were generally consistent with EB data mining, revealing no additional unexpected safety signals,” Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the CDC’s director at the time, told Mr. Johnson previously.

  Mr. Johnson demanded answers on that claim, prompting the CDC to point him to the FDA.

  The FDA recently responded to Mr. Johnson, telling him that it cannot provide the information he seeks.

  “FDA’s EB data mining analyses of adverse events contained in VAERS reports for COVID-19 vaccines are currently the subject of pending FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] litigation. FDA is unable to comment on pending litigation or provide information or data that is currently being considered in pending litigation,” the agency told the senator.

  Mr. Johnson in a new letter told FDA Commissioner Dr. Robert Califf that the claim was wrong.

  “As you are well aware, Congress has a right to information contained at U.S. federal agencies as it conducts its constitutional oversight responsibilities,” Mr. Johnson said.

  “It is outrageous that FDA would assert that pending litigation, and particularly FOIA litigation, would allow your agency to obstruct my congressional oversight,” he added. “Any pending litigation FDA may have relating to its EB data mining records has no bearing on its responsibility to comply with a congressional request.”

  Mr. Johnson said in the past he’s repeatedly received from the government documents subject to litigation, including from the FDA’s parent agency, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

  He urged the FDA to produce the EB data mining analyses by Sept. 20.

  The FDA declined to immediately provide a comment.

  The agency was sued in January over its refusal to provide the results of the EB data mining to The Epoch Times and the nonprofit Children’s Health Defense, citing exemptions in the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

  Children’s Health Defense, the litigant, said that the refusal to provide the records was illegal.

  In the last update in the case, the FDA said it has 150 responsive pages but that it has to do a “page-by-page, line-by-line review” to determine whether any information on the pages should be withheld, or redacted. The agency said it is “facing an unprecedented FOIA workload” stemming from federal courts ordering it to release information it had said would be made public on the COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna.

  

  Ignored Questions

  In another new letter, Mr. Johnson pressed the HHS on the program it administers to provide compensation to people injured by the COVID-19 shots.

  Despite injections starting in December 2020, and more than 1.5 million reports being lodged with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. HHS has compensated just four people, paying $8,592 in total.

  Others have been approved for compensation but the money is still pending.

  Mr. Johnson in April asked for more details on the program as the agency has not been forthcoming, including whether there are caps on the amount of money an injured person can receive and whether the government has advertised the program.

  Mr. Johnson also demanded communications between HHS and COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers regarding compensation claims.

  In a recent letter, HHS declined to answer many of the questions.

  Mr. Johnson on Sept. 5 urged HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra to provide answers to all of his questions.

  He pointed to how Mr. Becerra, when being vetted by the Senate, told senators that he would commit to providing a prompt response to any questions addressed by Senate Finance Committee members.

  “As a member of the Senate Finance Committee and as ranking member of the Senate’s top investigative subcommittee, your agency’s June 23, 2023 response is completely unacceptable and calls into question the veracity of the commitment you made before the Senate during your confirmation hearing,” Mr. Johnson said. “I call on you to immediately revise HHS’s incomplete response and provide the requested information.“

  HHS did not respond to a request for comment.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 21:40

• San Fran Is Officially America's Worst City: 1 In 8 Home Sellers Lose Money With An Average Loss Of $100,000
  San Fran Is Officially America’s Worst City: 1 In 8 Home Sellers Lose Money With An Average Loss Of $100,000

  In retrospect, it’s surprising that it took so long.

  With Case-Shiller reporting that the nation’s worst-by-far (not to mention feces-covered) real-estate  market is that of San Francisco, where prices have seen annual declines for the past 8 months, half of which have seen double-digit drops…

  

  …. overnight RedFin reports more bad news for those unlucky enough to be living in the socialist utopia that is San Francisco: home sellers in this liberal bastion are four times more likely than the average U.S. home seller to take a loss, as the Bay Area metro reels from an outsized drop in home prices. In fact, according to the report, the typical San Francisco seller who takes a loss sells their home for $100,000 less than they bought it for. And when they do, they have to walk on shit-covered streets, through crowds of homeless, to buy another home one which they pray won’t be burgled in the near future because, well, good luck calling cops in San Fran.

  Here are the details from Redfin:

  Roughly one of every eight (12.3%) homes that sold in San Francisco during the three months ending July 31 was purchased for less than the seller bought it for, up from 5% a year earlier. That’s a higher share than any other major U.S. metro and is quadruple the national rate of 3%.

  

  Next came Detroit (6.9%), Chicago (6.5%), New York (5.9%) and Cleveland (5.8%). 

  In San Francisco, which tied with New York for the largest median loss in dollar terms, the typical homeowner who took a loss sold their home for $100,000 less than they bought it for. Nationwide, the typical homeowner who sold their home for less than they bought it for lost $35,538.

  Homeowners were least likely to sell at a loss in San Diego, Boston, Providence, RI, Kansas City, MO and Fort Lauderdale, FL. In each of those metros, roughly 1% of homes sold for less than the seller originally paid.

  * *  *

  Turning back to San Francisco, just because it’s both terrifying and amusing to watch a formerly great city implode under the weight of Soros-funded DAs, here home sellers were most likely to lose money because the region has experienced outsized home-price declines. It was one of the first markets to see prices sink when high mortgage rates triggered a slowdown in the housing market last year. By April 2023, San Francisco’s median home sale price was down a record 13.3% year over year, more than triple the nationwide drop of 4.2%. As of July, it was down just 4.3% year over year to $1.4 million, but that compared with a national gain of 1.6%. The total value of homes in San Francisco has fallen by roughly $60 billion since last summer, a separate Redfin analysis found.

  Prices in the Bay Area have fallen fast for a few reasons:

  • First, it’s home to the most expensive real estate in the country, meaning housing costs had a lot of room to come down. It has also been hit hard by layoffs in the technology sector.
  • Additionally, it’s not as popular as it once was; remote work has allowed scores of people to relocate to more affordable areas.

  Next, read the following sentence and see if you can spot the common thread:

  “San Francisco, Detroit, Chicago and New York, which top the list of metros where home sellers are most likely to take a loss, all rank among the top 10 metros Redfin.com users are looking to leave.”

  If you said these are all traditionally Republican-controlled bastions… you failed.

  

  “Some condos in the Bay Area are now worth less than their owners bought them for in 2018 and 2019, in part because commuting from Oakland and other outlying areas into downtown San Francisco isn’t really a thing anymore,” said local Redfin Premier real estate agent Andrea Chopp, who focuses on Oakland and other East Bay neighborhoods. “There are buyers out there, but they’re a lot more cautious and picky than they were when mortgage rates were low. The Bay Area housing market was unsustainable before, so this correction is probably healthy, but the unfortunate thing is prices remain unaffordable for a lot of people—especially with rates now above 7%.”

  But while the liberal bastion of San Francisco is now officially America’s worst city, the vast majority of U.S. home sellers are still reaping gains, especially those

  Even though home prices have fallen from their peak, a majority of home sellers are still reaping significant financial gains. Nationwide, 97% of home sellers sold for a profit during the three months ending July 31, with the typical home that sold going for 78.4% ($203,232) more than the seller bought it for.

  Today’s home sellers are making money despite an ongoing housing downturn in part because a scarcity of homes for sale is fueling bidding wars and propping up home values. Most people who bought when home prices peaked would lose money if they sold now, so they’re not selling. Many of the homeowners who are selling today have owned their homes for long enough to make a profit regardless of month-to-month fluctuations in housing values.

  In Boise, ID, Redfin Premier agent Shauna Pendleton has clients who will likely have to take a $100,000 loss on their home because they’re selling it after only about a year. They’re moving back to Seattle because their employer is requiring them to return to the office. Pendleton noted that it’s not common for homeowners to sell at a loss in Boise, but when it does happen, it often involves homes selling for upwards of $750,000.

  More in the full Redfin report available here.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 21:20

• 2 Million Guns Sold In August, 49th Straight Month Of Over 1 Million Sales
  2 Million Guns Sold In August, 49th Straight Month Of Over 1 Million Sales

  Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Gun sales in the United States exceeded 2 million last month—the 49th straight month in which firearm sales crossed a million.

  

  In August, 2.04 million checks were conducted through the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), according to an analysis by Guns.com. Though this is a 16.4 percent dip from the 2.45 million checks conducted in August 2022, the numbers are still higher when compared to the years before the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020, it said.

  This August registered the fifth highest NICS checks for any August in the past 25 years. This was also the 49th consecutive month that gun sales crossed the 1 million mark.

  Data from the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) showed around 1.1 million background checks last month, down 13 percent from the same month last year.

  While NICS numbers include checks conducted for reasons like clearing concealed carry permit applications, the NSSF adjusts these numbers. As such, NSSF data is seen as a potentially truer depiction of retail gun sales.

  In a statement to Guns.com, Mark Oliva, public affairs officer with the NSSF, said that the 1.1 million gun sales figure shows “the desire for lawful firearm ownership is far from over.”

  “Americans, literally by the millions, are investing in exercising their Second Amendment rights. This has happened every month for more than four years continuously.”

  “While the Biden administration proposes rules to infringe on fundamental American rights and certain governors, attorneys general and district attorneys general and district attorneys refuse to lock up criminals that prey on communities without consequence, Americans are sending a clear and unequivocal message that their personal safety, and the free exercise of their rights, is non-negotiable.”

  According to safety research organization Safehome, around 17.4 million guns were sold across the United States in 2022, a lower number compared to 2021 and 2020.

  The organization attributed the decline to “consumers reducing their spending and the economy experiencing inflationary pressures that have led to a slowdown in discretionary expenses overall.”

  Gun sales saw a 64 percent increase in 2020, the biggest annual rise in two decades. The current downward trend “indicates a return to the typical sales figures seen in the years prior to 2020.”

  The sales boom in 2020 was influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic, due to which people spent more time in outdoor activities, Safehome said while pointing out that 2020 was also a presidential election year.

  “Traditionally, election years can spark an increase in gun buying as customers may worry new leaders could change laws regarding gun ownership. There were similar smaller increases in gun sales in 2016 and 2012, both presidential election years.”

  In 2022, states like Wyoming, Montana, and Alaska had the highest estimated gun sales per capita. In contrast, this figure was the lowest in Iowa, Oregon, and the District of Columbia.

  Biden’s Gun Crackdown

  While gun sales continue to exceed a million on a monthly basis, the Biden administration is proposing a rule that would essentially classify any American who sells guns as a firearms dealer, thereby tightening gun control measures in the country.

  At present, individuals can engage in selling firearms without having to be a registered firearms dealer. The new rules would classify gun sales under business activities and require that individuals get a license as well as undertake background checks.

  Randy Kozuch, executive director of the National Rifle Association–Institute for Legislative Action (NRA–ILA), called the move a “war on the Second Amendment.”

  The Gun Owners Association said the proposed rule is “virtually outlawing private firearm transactions to ensure the government gets its hands on your personal information and transaction records for their illegal gun registry.”

  The Biden administration had also introduced a law that would make Americans felons if caught possessing an unregistered braced firearm.

  Multiple federal judges have issued preliminary orders blocking the rule from being enacted. However, these rules only apply to members of the groups who filed lawsuits and in the jurisdictions of the judges who issued the verdicts.

  Guns Promote Safety

  President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris are also pushing for a nationwide ban on “assault weapons.” In a statement to Fox News, the NRA criticized such attempts.

  The organization pointed out that the AR-15 rifle, which which many gun control advocates refer to as an “assault weapon,” is one of the most popular self-defense rifles in America.

  “A testament to this is the 8-month pregnant Florida mother who, with her AR-15, defended her family from two armed intruders who brutally assaulted her husband,” NRA spokesman Billy McLaughlin told the outlet.

  He was referring to an incident from 2019 when a pregnant woman shot an armed intruder and sent a second intruder fleeing. “Joe and Kamala ought to speak to the many ignored and forgotten law-abiding Americans who rely on AR-15s for their safety.”

  “They’re playing politics with human lives and are blind to the fact that their pro-criminal policies drive more people to buy guns,” he said.

  A CNN poll from May showed that Americans are divided on how the availability of guns affects public safety.

  While 36 percent of respondents said the presence of guns would make public places less safe, 32 percent argued that allowing gun owners to carry their firearms would make public places safer.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 21:00

• "Davos In The Desert": UAE Becomes Global ATM As Western Finance Dries Up
  “Davos In The Desert”: UAE Becomes Global ATM As Western Finance Dries Up

  Five years ago, virtue-signaling American finance executives peeled out of a Saudi Arabian event in Riyadh following the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.

  

  Now, with Western financiers hampered by rising interest rates and a reduced appetite for dealmaking, private equity, venture capital and real estate funds have come back with hats-in-hand to tap into the Middle East’s vast wealth – which has been bolstered by higher energy prices thanks to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

  It turns out nothing heals old wounds like money… as major Western financial firms scramble to set up offices in the Middle East to win local investments.

  While the Middle East steps on the gas, the traditional backers of investment funds—pension plans and college endowments—are in retreat. The global shift to higher interest rates caused losses in the biggest parts of their portfolios—especially stocks and bonds.

  Investors put $33 billion toward U.S.-based venture capital funds in the first half of 2023, less than half the $74 billion in the same period in 2021, according to PitchBook. Global fundraising for all private funds fell 10% last year to $1.5 trillion, according to Preqin—a decline many expect to continue.  -WSJ

  “Fundraising has become much, much harder over the past 12 months,” said Brenda Rainey, an executive vice president at Bain & Co. who advises private-equity funds, in a statement to the Wall Street Journal.

  But not in the Middle East…

  To wit, this year’s Future Investment Initiative Institute, known as “Davos in the Desert,” will take place on Riyadh, and is expecting so much demand that it’s charging $15,000 per head to attend, the Journal reports.

  Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) has seen commitments rise to $56 billion in 2022, a significant jump from $33 billion last year.

  “Now, everybody wants to go to the Middle East—it’s like the gold rush in the U.S. once upon a time,” according to fundraising advisory firm CEO Peter Jädersten of Jade Advisors. “It’s difficult to raise money everywhere.”

  Gulf funds now have the upper hand in negotiations, able to be “very thoughtful and selective” about things such as stakes in the fund managers themselves, or side-by-side investments, as per Ibrahim Ajami of Abu Dhabi state fund Mubadala.

  All eyes on Abu Dhabi

  One of the most influential dealmakers to emerge in the last few months is Abu Dhabi’s national security adviser, Sheikh Tahnoun bin Zayed Al Nahyan, who has been using the country’s $1.5 trillion investment war chest to make runs at buying Standard Chartered and Lazard, as well as recent deals to buy a $1.2 billion UK healthcare giant and a nearly $6 billion Columbian food company, according to Bloomberg.

  

  In March, Tahnoon was handed control of the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (ADIA) following a March reshuffle. The $993 billion wealth fund is among the world’s largest, and now ranks as the second-largest spender on deals among regional peers since the beginning of last year.

  

  Born in the late 1960s, just after the discovery of oil in Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan has graduated from the close-knit circles of the UAE’s royal family to become one of the world’s most potent financial juggernauts.

  Over the past few months, he has been on a capital-injecting spree, drawing billionaires like Ray Dalio into his vortex. According to Karen Young, a senior research scholar at Columbia University, “The UAE leadership has recognized its most important source of statecraft is financial. Sheikh Tahnoon is now the strategist behind multiple economic statecraft tools.”

  Over the past few months, Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan has gained control of the largest sovereign wealth fund in the United Arab Emirates, expanding the assets he oversees to almost $1.5 trillion. He’s proceeded to bankroll billions of dollars in deals via an expanded empire of private and state entities. Drawing in titans of finance such as Rajeev Misra and billionaire Ray Dalio, Sheikh Tahnoon — one of Abu Dhabi’s two deputy rulers, the UAE’s national security adviser and brother to its president — has sought to invest in everything from technology to finance, with varying degrees of success.

  Known to be a fan of Brazilian jiu-jitsu, cycling and chess, Sheikh Tahnoon now helms two wealth funds, the region’s most important private investment firm, the country’s largest lender and its biggest listed corporate. That’s made him the defacto business chief of the wealthy Al Nahyan family, with access to seemingly endless reserves of cash in OPEC’s third-largest producer — an unusual amount of financial firepower even in the oil-rich Persian Gulf.

  Other notable deals Tahnoon has been involved with include an investment in TikTok’s Chinese owner ByteDance, a $10 billion fund targeting tech opportunities, and a deal to bankroll Softbank Vision Fund’s key architect Rajeev Misra’s new $6.8 billion fund. Another of Tahnoon’s entities, G42, is partnering with Nvidia competitor Cerebras Systems, which just completed the first of nine AI supercomputers aimed at taking a run at Nvidia.

  

  That said, it’s not all a cakewalk for Sheikh Tahnoon. Navigating the intricate labyrinths of international regulations has proven to be a challenge. As Abu Dhabi inches closer to Beijing, with intentions of joining the BRICS bloc, it’s raising eyebrows across Washington corridors.

  Lynn Ammar, an Abu Dhabi-based partner at law firm Cleary Gottlieb warns, “The broad geographic scope is likely to continue to attract attention from FDI authorities, such as CFIUS, who may be concerned about potential information flow to China.” This comes as the United States puts foreign investments under the microscope, tightening scrutiny over deals tied to the Chinese government.

  What’s more, Tahnoon isn’t just the de facto business chief of the wealthy Al Nahyan family, he’s also the UAE’s national security adviser, wearing a dual hat that integrates economic and geopolitical strategy. Recent reports indicate significant UAE investments in Asian and African economies, marking a clear orientation toward emerging markets.

  Wonder if this would be happening under a second Trump term and no Ukraine invasion?

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 20:40

• Judge Skeptical As Prosecutors Claim Trump Georgia Trial Could Take Four Months
  Judge Skeptical As Prosecutors Claim Trump Georgia Trial Could Take Four Months

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A Georgia judge handling the trials of former President Donald Trump and 18 co-defendants appeared to be skeptical of prosecutors’ proposals to bring all the co-defendants together for a trial starting next month.

  “It just seems a bit unrealistic to think that we can handle all 19 in forty-something days,” Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee told the court in a Wednesday hearing in regards to motions to sever that were brought by co-defendants Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell. The judge denied the request to split the two cases.

  

  During the hearing, prosecutors estimated the trial would take four months and that they’d call more than 150 witnesses. “That is our time estimate,” prosecutor Nathan Wade told Judge McAfee during the hearing, which was also broadcast live on television and on the judge’s YouTube channel.

  But Mr. McAffee told prosecutors that he believes the trial would take twice that—or eight months. “It could easily be twice that,” he said, noting the number of defendants in the case.

  “We’re on an expedited timeline with these statutory speedy trial demands,” Judge McAfee said, while adding that he plans to press forward and “make that October 23 trial date stick” for Mr. Chesebro and Mrs. Powell. It’s not clear when the other co-defendants will go to trial.

  The judge also suggested that any trial he conducts could be rendered moot if a defendant successfully appeals to a higher court. Already, a federal judge held a hearing in former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, who is charged in the case.

  “It could potentially even be a six-month turnaround just for the 11th Circuit to come up with a decision,” Judge McAfee said of the appeals process. “Where does that leave us in the middle of a jury trial?” the judge asked.

  Mr. Wade, who provided the four-month estimate, said that did not include jury selection and added that whether or not defendants choosing to testify could affect timing. But he said he expects a trial to take that long regardless of how many defendants it includes, arguing that because the trial was brought under Georgia’s anti-racketeering law prosecutors would seek to prove the entire conspiracy against each defendant.

  Another prosecutor, Will Wooten, argued that under the state’s RICO—or Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act—statute, the defendants should be tried together. All 19 defendants were accused of participating in the alleged scheme under Georgia’s RICO law last month.

  “Anytime a person enters into a conspiracy they are liable for all of the acts of all of their co-conspirators, and that’s it. Evidence against one is evidence against all, and that’s it,” Mr. Wooten said.

  

  The hearing was also broadcast live on television and on the judge’s YouTube channel, a marked difference from the other three criminal cases against Trump, where cameras have not been allowed in the courtroom during proceedings.

  Whenever and wherever any trial in the case ultimately takes place, jury selection is likely to be a significant challenge. Jury selection in a racketeering and gang case brought last year by Ms. Willis began in January and is still ongoing. In another large racketeering case, Ms. Willis tried nearly a decade ago against former Atlanta public schools educators, it took six weeks to seat a jury.

  On Tuesday, Ms. Willis’ team asked the judge to allow the use of a jury questionnaire that prospective jurors would have filled out before they show up for jury selection, writing in a court filing that it “will facilitate and streamline the jury selection process in many respects.”

  Prospective jurors may be more comfortable answering personal questions on paper than in open court and lawyers for both sides could agree that certain jurors aren’t qualified without additional questioning, prosecutors said.

  Meanwhile, Mr. Meadows was in federal court last week arguing that he was acting in his capacity as a federal official and his case should be heard by a federal judge. U.S. District Judge Steve Jones has yet to rule on that request. Four other defendants who are also seeking to move their cases to federal court have hearings set before Jones later this month.

  As for President Trump, the former president on Wednesday told radio host Hugh Hewitt that he would “absolutely” testify in one of the four trials against him. He was charged in separate cases in Georgia, New York, Florida, and Washington, D.C., pleading not guilty to all the charges.

  The Associated Press contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 20:20

• How Did SK Hynix's Chips End Up In New Huawei Smartphone?
  How Did SK Hynix’s Chips End Up In New Huawei Smartphone?

  US lawmakers have been infuriated with Huawei Technologies Co.’s ability to produce a new smartphone with a cutting-edge processor despite mounting US sanctions. The inquiry into Huawei’s Mate 60 Pro started when Bloomberg hired TechInsights to conduct a complete teardown of the smartphone, which released the report earlier this week. 

  Huawei uses an advanced 7-nanometer processor built by China’s top chipmaker, Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. But another report from TechInsights shows memory and flash in the Mate 60 Pro comes from SK Hynix Inc. 

  

  Bloomberg said Mate 60 Pro’s components are almost entirely sourced from domestic suppliers, “and Hynix’s hardware is an isolated example of materials sourced from overseas, according to TechInsights.” 

  South Korea-based Hynix told Bloomberg that it “no longer does business with Huawei since the introduction of the US restrictions against the company and, with regard to the issue, we started an investigation to find out more details.” 

  

  The mystery of how Huawei sourced the memory chips deepens, as Hynix said it “is strictly abiding by the US government’s export restrictions.” 

  Bloomberg offers some ideas of how Huawei might have procured the Hynix chips: 

  “Huawei may have procured the memory chips from Hynix, whose Chinese base cranks out an estimated one-third to half of its DRAM for global markets. One possibility is that Huawei may be tapping a stockpile of components it accumulated as far back as 2020 before the full set of US trade curbs had been imposed on it. International suppliers of advanced technology have been prohibited from supplying Huawei over the past three years by US trade curbs, implemented on fears of the hardware being used to aid China’s military.”

  News of the Bloomberg/TechInsights report enraged some US lawmakers who have spent the last several years slapping China with sanctions to curb its progress in chip technology. Representative Mike Gallagher, chairman of the House Select Committee on Competition with China, said Wednesday the US should end all its exports to both Huawei and SMIC: 

  “The time has come to end all US technology exports to both Huawei and SMIC to make clear any firm that flouts US law and undermines our national security will be cut off from our technology.” 

  How Huawei obtained the memory chips from Hynix remains unclear. However, given this week’s developments, US lawmakers will likely not be done imposing tech sanctions on Beijing.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 20:00

• Snyder: 'Mad Max' Conditions Are Coming
  Snyder: ‘Mad Max’ Conditions Are Coming

  Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

  How far would you go to feed your family? 

  Hopefully that is a question that you will not have to answer any time soon, but right now we are seeing millions upon millions of people become more desperate as economic conditions rapidly deteriorate and food costs soar.  At this point, most Americans are just barely scraping by from month to month, and in poorer countries on the other side of the world there are people that are literally starving to death. 

  

  As I have detailed previously, the UN has reported that 2.4 billion people did not have enough food to eat last year, and 900 million of them were facing severe food insecurity.  Sadly, those numbers will inevitably be even higher for 2023.  A global rice crisis has erupted, and the collapse of the Black Sea grain deal has greatly restricted the flow of agricultural goods from that part of the globe.  Food costs are spiking all over the planet, and that is really bad news for all of us.

  For those of us that live in the United States, the good news is that nobody is starving at this stage.

  But food prices have become extremely oppressive, and economic conditions are quickly moving in the wrong direction.

  670,000 full-time jobs have been lost in just the past two months, and on Friday we witnessed the worst unadjusted payrolls report for the month of August since the Great Recession.

  Yes, things really are that bad.

  One recent survey discovered that 61 percent of Americans are currently living paycheck to paycheck, but I expect this number to go even higher in the months ahead…

  Inflation, mortgage rates over 7% and credit card APR’s north of 20% have pushed all income brackets into living paycheck to paycheck, according to a new survey from Lending Club Bank.

  “In July 2023, 61% of U.S. consumers live paycheck to paycheck, unchanged from June 2023, but 2 percentage points higher than July 2022. Generally, more consumers of all income brackets reported living paycheck to paycheck in July 2023 than last year,” Alia Dudum, a money expert at LendingClub told FOX Business.

  Things are particularly dire for low income workers.  That same survey discovered that a whopping 78 percent of those that earn less than $50,000 a year are living paycheck to paycheck at this point…

  Lower-income workers have been the hardest hit by higher prices, particularly for food and other necessities, since those expenses account for a bigger share of the budget, studies show.

  Now, 78% of consumers earning less than $50,000 a year and 65% of those earning between $50,000 and $100,000 were living paycheck to paycheck in July, both up from a year ago, LendingClub found. Of those earning $100,000 or more, only 44% reported living paycheck to paycheck.

  As I discussed last week, U.S. households that are feeling financial strain are increasingly turning to debt to make ends meet, and this has pushed debt levels to unprecedented heights…

  Total household debt climbed to a new high in the second quarter of 2023, reaching $17.06 trillion, with credit card debt exceeding $1 trillion, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. As interest rates stay high, costs continue to rise for expenses like housing and cars, and student loan payments resume, the amount of debt may rise, according to economists who spoke to the Daily Caller News Foundation.

  “The amount of debt outstanding, and in particular the surpassing of the $1 trillion mark, is significant and worrisome,” Peter Earle, an economist at the American Institute for Economic Research, told the DCNF. “It owes to a combination of several factors. The initial response to the pandemic, which prominently included the Fed setting policy (interest) rates at essentially zero for several years, made the amount of credit and the price of taking on debt extraordinarily cheap.”

  As economic conditions get worse, people are becoming more desperate.

  This is helping to fuel a crime wave all over the nation, and retailers are being forced to implement extreme measures.

  According to the Wahington Post, a Giant Food store in Washington D.C. is actually going to be taking all Tide, Colgate and Advil products off the shelves completely because theft has become such a problem…

  In the coming weeks, a Giant Food market in D.C. will clear its beauty and health aisles of all national labels. No more Tide, Colgate or Advil, only store brands. Shoppers also will have to present their receipts to an employee before exiting the store.

  It’s the regional supermarket chain’s most overt gambit against the rampant theft that’s plaguing retailers of all sizes. It’s also a potential last-ditch effort to avoid shutting down the unprofitable store on Alabama Avenue — the only major grocer east of the Anacostia River in Ward 8.

  An executive for the chain told the Washington Post that the company has “no other choice” and she noted that other stores in the area have done similar things…

  “We have no other choice,” Diane Hicks, senior vice president of operations said Thursday during a walk-through with officials from the D.C. mayor’s office, the Metropolitan police and fire departments, and Chamber of Commerce. She added that other nearby stores have locked up all their product on those aisles or removed them altogether.

  “I’ve been leaving it out for our customers and unfortunately it just forces all the crime to come to us.”

  This is where our entire society is heading.

  It is just a matter of time before we see armed guards stationed in grocery stores and on food trucks all over America.

  Desperate people do desperate things, and right now we are seeing things happen that are absolutely nuts.

  Just a few days ago, an extremely shocking incident that happened in broad daylight at a Home Depot store in California made headlines all over the nation…

  Brazen thieves were caught on camera casually walking out with $9,000 worth of goods from separate California stores as lawlessness in the state governed by Gavin Newsom continues.

  A group of masked thieves stormed into a Home Depot store in Signal Hill on August 27 and stole $5,000 worth of power tools in full view of shocked staff and customers.

  The seven men loaded two shopping carts with expensive goods and carried as much as possible in their arms before walking out.

  These sorts of robberies have become so common that I couldn’t possibly cover them all.

  We really are starting to become a “Mad Max” society.

  Of course the truth is that the entire world is moving in that direction.  Global supplies of food are getting tighter and tighter, and the recent spike in rice prices has created a tremendous amount of concern…

  Countries worldwide are scrambling to secure rice after a partial ban on exports by India cut global supplies by roughly a fifth. Global food security is already under threat since Russia halted an agreement allowing Ukraine to export wheat and the El Nino weather phenomenon hampers rice production.

  Now, rice prices are soaring, and it’s putting the most vulnerable people in some of the poorest nations at risk. Vietnam’s rice export prices, for instance, have reached a 15-year high. Even before India’s restrictions, countries already were frantically buying rice in anticipation of scarcity later when the El Nino hit, creating a supply crunch and spiking prices.

  Civil unrest has already started to erupt in various parts of Africa, but if current trends continue things will get a whole lot worse around the globe in 2024.

  Are you prepared for what is ahead?

  Right now, a lot of people are apparently asking that question.  In fact, according to Zero Hedge the number of Americans searching for the term “live off grid” on the Internet has hit the highest level in years…

  What’s piqued our interest is the sudden panic by some Americans searching ‘live off grid’ on the internet, hitting the highest level in five years. The driving force behind finding a rural piece of land for dirt cheap, buying or building a tiny home, installing solar panels, and sourcing your own food and water might have to do with the worst inflation storm in a generation while Democrat cities implode under the weight of soaring violent crime.

  I have been relentlessly warning my readers that “Mad Max” conditions are coming for years.

  Anyone that took an honest look at the long-term trends should have been able to see that.

  Global leaders have been making absolutely disastrous decisions for a very long time, and now we are all going to reap the consequences.

  *  *  *

  Michael’s new book entitled “End Times” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can check out his new Substack newsletter right here.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 19:40

• 'Lee' Explodes To Category 4 Hurricane 
  ‘Lee’ Explodes To Category 4 Hurricane 

  Update (1920ET):

  In about a 12-hour timeframe, Hurricane Lee rapidly intensified from a Category 1 to Category 4 storm on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale. 

  The National Hurricane Center’s latest update said, “Lee becomes a category 4 major hurricane. Dangerous surf and life-threatening rip currents are likely in the Leeward Islands, Puerto Rico, Bahamas and along the east coast of the U.S.” 

  5PM AST Sep 7: #Lee becomes a category 4 major hurricane. Dangerous surf and life-threatening rip currents are likely in the Leeward Islands, Puerto Rico, Bahamas and along the east coast of the U.S. Visit https://t.co/tW4KeGe9uJ for the latest pic.twitter.com/Rg0Z5gAAwx

  — National Hurricane Center (@NHC_Atlantic) September 7, 2023

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

  Weather Channel meteorologist Jim Cantore said, “Another cat5 on the way… Almost a double rapid intensifier. Impressive to say the least.” 

  Cantore continued, “Still much to be watched into next week as steering sets up. Any potential direct USA impacts would be likely a week away.” 

  Well that didn’t take long. #Lee has gone from a 75mph hurricane 24 hours ago to a 130mph beast. Likely another cat5 on the way… Almost a double rapid intensifier. Impressive to say the least. Still much to be watched into next week as steering sets up. Any potential direct… pic.twitter.com/qI3jIv4sOR

  — Jim Cantore (@JimCantore) September 7, 2023

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

  Here are the latest spaghetti models of Lee’s possible paths.

  

  Cat 5 by tomorrow morning?

  *   *   * 

  The National Hurricane Center warned Hurricane Lee is intensifying, and computer models suggest it might reach “major hurricane” status by early Friday. 

  Lee is located 965 miles from the northern Leeward Islands in open waters with maximum sustained winds of 80 mph. The Category 1 storm is moving west-northwest at 13 mph.

  

  “The environment around the cyclone looks ideal for rapid intensification. The models are in fairly good agreement that significant strengthening should begin later today and continue into the weekend, when Lee will likely reach its peak intensity,” NHC said. 

  NHC warned, “Fluctuations in strength are likely from days 3 to 5 due to potential eyewall replacements, but Lee is still expected to be a dangerous hurricane over the southwestern Atlantic early next week.” 

  Computer models show Lee “slowing down before making a turn to the north in response to steering currents around it, particularly a dip in the jet stream moving toward the East Coast,” said Axios. 

  Late next week, it’s possible that Hurricane Lee tracks close to New England and/or Atlantic Canada.

  The path out to sea may be blocked by a ridge of high pressure.

  A long time to go, but I’d say the trend is not our friend with regard to land impacts 😬

  Tracking @ECMWFbot 👇 pic.twitter.com/vNrZOhfSPQ

  — Ben Noll (@BenNollWeather) September 7, 2023

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

  Possible Cat. 5?

  There is a chance that #Lee could be a Cat5 hurricane. We have one in the Pacific now called #Jova which has nearly doubled its wind speed in 24 hours.( 85 to 160mph). No threat to land with Jova. pic.twitter.com/knoCjsdF4c

  — Jim Cantore (@JimCantore) September 7, 2023

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

  Axios noted Lee is about “week to 10 days away from a potential threat to the U.S. mainland.” 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 19:20

• Will Hunter Go Full NRA? A Biden Indictment Could Bring A Surprising Challenge
  Will Hunter Go Full NRA? A Biden Indictment Could Bring A Surprising Challenge

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  After the spectacular collapse of his sweetheart deal with the Justice Department in court, Hunter Biden’s lawyer angrily told the prosecutors in open court to “just rip it up.”

  It appears, however, that the defense team does not want to shred one part of the deal: the diversion agreement to avoid any charge over his false statement to obtain a gun permit.

  The defense is now arguing that, since the two sides signed the agreement before the implosion in court, it is final and complete.

  

  The Justice Department thinks otherwise. It is arguing that neither the probation officer nor the Court agreed to the plea agreement to finalize it. Indeed, it was the sweeping immunity language buried in the gun charge section that led the Court to throw a flag on the play.  Accordingly, the Justice Department is now pledging to indict Hunter by the end of the month.

  Hunter, however, is insisting that the Justice Department will have to pry the agreement from his cold, dead fingers. Indeed, the President’s son may be channeling more from the National Rifle Association (NRA) than its catchline. If the court rejects the diversion agreement as executed, Hunter could be making an argument that will leave the Biden White House in something of a pickle.

  One obvious attack against a charge is to argue that the underlying law itself is unconstitutional.

  Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), anyone who is an “unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance,” including marijuana, is barred from possessing a gun and can face up to 10 years in prison.

  However, recently the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled the law violated the Second Amendment in United States v. Daniels. The case involved a man who was arrested in possession of marijuana and two loaded firearms. The Fifth Circuit relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen v. New York Rifle & Pistol Association, which established that firearms laws must conform with the nation’s “historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

  President Biden denounced Bruen as a virtual abomination and has been a vocal supporter of the underlying law. Hunter, however, may now find himself in strange company in seeking to avoid any federal charge.

  In the appellate opinion, Judge Jerry E. Smith wrote that “Our history and tradition may support some limits on an intoxicated person’s right to carry a weapon, but it does not justify disarming a sober citizen based exclusively on his past drug usage.”

  That sounds tantalizingly familiar, but is it enough for Hunter to go full Wayne LaPierre?

  If so, this would not be the first time that Hunter followed a path that his father has previously condemned in others. For example, for decades, Joe Biden has railed against “deadbeat dads” despite his son’s long effort to avoid paying child support to Lunden Alexis Roberts. Hunter spent years fighting support for his daughter Navy, even after a court confirmed that he was her father. Joe Biden himself only recently acknowledged the existence of Navy after routinely excluding her from the list of his grandchildren.

  Yet, the President may not be quite ready for his son to join actual hunters in advocating for sweeping gun rights protections, including for drug users.

  In making the argument, Hunter will have to claim that references to gun ownership by “law-abiding citizens” in past cases like District of Columbia v. Heller and Bruen should not be read to exclude everyone who breaks the law. Judge Smith cites a prior ruling in United States v. Rahimi, rejecting the federal ban on gun possession by people subject to domestic violence restraining orders. In that decision, the court held that the phrase should be read as “shorthand” alluding to “people who were historically ‘stripped of their Second Amendment rights.’”

  The government has argued (and would likely argue in the Biden case) that there were laws from the 17th and 18th centuries barring people from publicly carrying or firing guns while intoxicated.

  However, the Fifth Circuit rejected the historical claim and noted that “under the government’s reasoning, Congress could ban gun possession by anyone who has multiple alcoholic drinks a week…based on the postbellum intoxicated carry laws. The analogical reasoning Bruen prescribed cannot stretch that far.”

  The government has tried to use other laws barring guns to the mentally ill and dangerous individuals as historical analogs, but the court would have none of it.

  Indeed, Hunter could find himself arguing that people are too often denied rights by the government under claims that they are “insurrectionists.” Sound familiar?

  The government has pointed to how “Founding-era governments took guns away from persons perceived to be dangerous.”

  However, the Fifth Circuit noted that those laws targeted unpopular people, including Catholics, as akin to traitors to the Revolution. Judge Smith wrote that drug users “are not a class of political traitors, as British Loyalists were perceived to be. Nor are they like Catholics and other religious dissenters who were seen as potential insurrectionists.”

  So, a rejection of the gun diversion agreement could prove an even greater diversion for the Biden family as Hunter embraces the very decisions and rights long opposed by his father.

  In the meantime, the Justice Department would be citing historical precedent used against Catholics (like the Bidens) as potential insurrectionists who cannot be trusted with weapons.

  Of course, White House Press Spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre could defend all of this by paraphrasing the NRA that the “only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun [case] is a good guy with a gun [case].”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 19:00

• Woke Bill Gates Foundation Becomes One Of Anheuser-Busch's Top Shareholders
  Woke Bill Gates Foundation Becomes One Of Anheuser-Busch’s Top Shareholders

  A new Form 13F filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission reveals that one of the ‘wokest’ billionaires has put his stamp of approval on one of the wokest beers in America. 

  The filing showed the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Trust bought 1.7 million shares of Anheuser-Busch, valued at around $95 million, signaling Gates has confidence in the beer company that imploded its Bud Light brand after a disastrous advertising campaign in April with transgender TikTok influencer Dylan Mulvaney. 

  

  Gates’ Seattle-based $69 billion trust bought the shares around the latest earnings report around $59.89 per share. Shares are currently trading at a 6% discount around $56.24. 

  

  Last month, Anheuser-Busch said US revenues slid 10% in the second quarter due to the consumer backlash of Bud Light. This allowed Modelo Especial, the nation’s new king of beers, to become the best-selling beer among US consumers. 

  Gate’s bet on Anheuser-Busch ranks him as the ninth largest shareholder. 

  

  Gates, who has previously said he’s “not a big beer drinker,” has bought other brewers, including a 3.76% stake in Heineken Holding NV earlier this year. 

  A former Anheuser-Busch executive told Fox News’ Neil Cavuto that Gates’ investment into the brewer is a “mistake.” 

  “Bill Gates is definitely making a mistake.

  “Earlier this year, he already made a $900 million mistake when he invested into one of Anheuser-Busch’s largest rivals, Heineken. He did that earlier this year. And since that investment, Heineken’s down about 10%, whereas the broader markets are up 10%.”

  “So if I was looking for advice on investing to software companies, tech companies, I might go to Bill Gates. But if you’re looking at the beer industry, he doesn’t have a great track record of investing in winners at this point,” former Anheuser-Busch executive Anson Frericks said. 

  Bill has put his stamp of approval on Bud Light. 

  

  Some on social media have called for a doubling down on the Bud Light boycott following the news Gates is now a majority shareholder of the brewer. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 18:40

• CDC Warns RSV Cases Are Rising Among Infants, Babies
  CDC Warns RSV Cases Are Rising Among Infants, Babies

  Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is warning physicians and caregivers about an increase in respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) cases across some parts of the Southeastern United States in recent weeks.

  

  In a Sept. 5 health advisory, the health agency said the rise in cases suggests a “continued shift toward seasonal RSV trends observed prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

  “Historically, such regional increases have predicted the beginning of RSV season nationally, with increased RSV activity spreading north and west over the following 2–3 months,” the CDC said.

  CDC data shows increases in weekly RSV levels since July but the agency said that nationwide, RSV test positivity had remained below the season onset threshold of 3 percent for two consecutive weeks.

  However, more recent data show test positivity has increased in Florida since late July, and the three-week moving average has been greater than 5 percent for the last month.

  RSV hospitalizations also increased in Georgia in August, the CDC said.

  From Aug. 5 through Aug. 19, the rate of RSV-related hospitalizations increased from 2 in 100,000 kids aged 4 and younger, to 7 per 100,000, with the majority of those hospitalizations being in babies less than a year old, the CDC said.

  In response to the rise in cases, the health agency urged clinicians to “prepare to implement new RSV prevention options” ahead of the 2023–2024 RSV season, including administering shots of monoclonal antibody products to patients as well as a preventative antibody treatment called nirsevimab.

  

  FDA Approves RSV Treatments

  “For all infants ages <8 months, and infants and children ages 8–19 months who are at increased risk of severe RSV, clinicians should start to offer Nirsevimab when it becomes available (expected by early October),” the CDC said.

  A panel of outside advisers to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) voted unanimously in July to approve nirsevimab for RSV in newborns and infants up to 24 months of age.

  Sold under the brand name Beyfortus, the treatment is made by AstraZeneca and marketed by Sanofi. The companies said the drug showed efficacy in several clinical trials.

  Regulators in countries including Canada and the United Kingdom have already approved Beyfortus.

  A month later in August, regulators with the FDA also approved the first vaccine to be taken by pregnant women to prevent RSV infections in babies and toddlers.

  Made by Pfizer, the Abrysvo single-dose injection was approved for use at 32 through 36 weeks of pregnancy. According to the pharmaceuticals giant, pregnant women who receive immunity from the shot will pass that immunity along to their unborn baby before birth, thus protecting them from lower respiratory tract disease (LRTD) and severe LRTD caused by RSV until at least the age of 6 months.

  In trials, a dangerous hypertensive disorder known as pre-eclampsia occurred in 1.8 percent of pregnant individuals who received Abrysvo compared to 1.4 percent of pregnant individuals who received a placebo, according to the FDA.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 18:20

• Fan Appeal: Could Basketball Kick Football Off Its Throne?
  Fan Appeal: Could Basketball Kick Football Off Its Throne?

  As the NFL season kicks off, millions of Americans will be glued to their television screens (or whatever screens their watching on), happy to finally see the return of their favorite sport.

  According to Statista Consumer Insights, American football – or just football depending on where you live – is still the clear number 1 sport in the United States. 77 percent of U.S. adults who generally follow sports said they follow football, putting it far ahead of basketball, followed by 59 percent of respondents, and baseball at 50 percent.

  But, as Statista’s Felix Richter reports, while football has been America’s true favorite pastime for decades (sorry baseball), that doesn’t necessarily mean things will stay that way forever.

  In fact, there are some signs that football’s reign could eventually come to an end, as the sport has struggled to resonate with younger fans in the same way that the NBA has.

  As the following chart shows, football has already lost its lead to basketball among 18- to 24-year-olds, while retaining a dominant lead in older age groups.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  With game times of around three hours that aren’t exactly action-packed, NFL games just aren’t ideally suited for younger consumers who are no longer used to pay attention to anything for that long.

  The NBA has been quicker to embrace the change in sports consumption, catering to an audience that is more likely to watch highlight clips on social media than sitting through entire games on ESPN. The fact that basketball is also easier to pick up and play casually adds to the sport’s popularity among young fans, not to mention the appeal of superstars such as LeBron James, who are deeply ingrained in popular culture.

  Whether this trend will continue long enough for basketball to kick football off its throne remains to be seen, but for now basketball is winning the battle for young audiences.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 18:00

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• European Nat Gas Prices Tumble After Chevron Australia LNG Workers Delay Strike
  European Nat Gas Prices Tumble After Chevron Australia LNG Workers Delay Strike

  A Bloomberg report that workers on Chevron’s Gorgon and Wheatstone LNG projects have delayed strike action until Friday is being viewed as a sign talks are going well, as strikes were meant to begin Thursday. The positive conclusion to last week’s talks between Woodside and unions is another indication the worst-case scenario is unlikely.

  The new deadline for industrial action at the Gorgon and Wheatstone plants is 6 a.m. local time Friday, a Chevron Australia spokesperson told Bloomberg. The unions previously threatened to start partial strikes on Sept. 7 and then escalate to full stoppages that would begin Sept. 14 and last two weeks.

  

  “We will continue to work through the bargaining process as we seek outcomes that are in the interests of both employees and the company,” the company said in the statement. “We will also continue to take steps to maintain safe and reliable operations in the event of disruption at our facilities.”

  “It really is essential to explore all avenues to avoid industrial action,” said Richard Pratt, a consultant for Precision LNG. “Once strikes start, the parties are driven further apart so this is a welcome development.”

  The two Australian LNG plants operated by Chevron made up about 7% of global LNG supply last year (see “Q&A On Australia’s LNG Strike Risks“). The extension of talks follows a compromise that another Australian exporter, Woodside Energy Group Ltd., reached with workers last month to prevent industrial action at its own plant.

  Meanwhile, Bloomberg notes that the impact of any industrial action may be limited at first because demand is muted in Europe and Asia, but a prolonged disruption may have sparked a bidding war between the two regions for alternative cargoes in peak winter season.

  The threat of strikes had roiled global gas markets since early August, when unions first voted for potential labor actions at the three plants. The European gas benchmark surged 40% at one point, highlighting the continent’s heavy dependence on LNG after the curtailment of Russian pipeline gas flows. Imports of LNG in Europe are recovering after a recent dip, helping offset reduced pipeline-gas flows from Norway amid maintenance there. Still, traders remain on high alert for any prolonged blips in supplies.

  In immediate response, Dutch front-month futures, Europe’s gas benchmark, traded 10% lower at €30.90 a megawatt-hour…

  

  … and with EU natural gas storage now above 93%, could fall further in the near-term unless the situation in Australia deteriorates.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 02:45

• To The Last Ukrainian
  To The Last Ukrainian

  Authored by Katya Sedgwick via AmericanMind.org,

  The war is a disaster in every sense…

  

  It was Vladimir Putin who initially noted that the West is willing to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian.

  Well, it looks like it’s finally happening – we’ve run out of Ukrainians, or at least we ran out of the ones willing to die for their country. Ukraine is running short of the young, fertile, and productive.

  When Russia launched its full-scale invasion of its neighbor in February, 2022, the media lit up with stories of bumbling, murdering Russkies and heroic Ukrainians.

  The legend of the Ghost of Kyiv, the mystery pilot destroying legions of Russian fighter planes—eventually debunked as propaganda—raised expectations of a quick triumph of the underdog.

  Many Ukrainians volunteered in these early days of war. Out of 6.1 million living abroad, some returned to defend their country. Martial law was swiftly imposed, barring able-bodied military age men from crossing the border. In the the rapidly aging post-Soviet nation, military age was defined as 18 to 60.

  In a piece I wrote last year for The American Conservative, I collected draft-dodging stories from the back pages of Ukrainian media. I took care to avoid Russian sources that could be dismissed as propaganda. I also found what was then a very unusual New York Times item that described popular Telegram channels that alert subscribers of real time locations of conscription officers issuing summons on the streets of Ukrainian cities.

  An interesting twist on the real time draft-dodging tools was a March 2023 post on a censored and hyper patriotic Kharkiv Live channel recommending this type of group chat to over a half a million of its subscribers. Vocally expressed nationalistic sentiments, as it turned out, don’t necessarily translate into willingness to take up arms — or even support of mass mobilization.

  A recent survey found that just 6 percent of respondents in Kharkov are planning to enlist if the situation deteriorates. This number is the lowest in the country, but other regions are not far behind. Kiev, for instance, is at 12 percent. Because this is a wartime poll conducted in a country under martial law, I’d take its findings with a grain of salt.

  A few weeks ago, Vladimir Zelensky acknowledged the problem of corruption in the armed forces and fired all regional recruitment chiefs. He intends to replace them with “warriors who have gone through the front or who cannot be in the trenches because they have lost their health, lost their limbs, but have retained their dignity and have no cynicism.” It’s an agreeable sentiment, but I strongly suspect that the returning fighters are quite cynical in many regards, especially when it comes to the way business is conducted in their country. Last week’s resignation of the Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov at the time of widely publicized military corruption scandals should be a clue that the problem is larger than the recruitment chiefs. Zelensky’s official explanation that the country is looking for “new approaches” amounts to an admission of failure.

  Ukraine is now insistent on drafting everyone. Since a large number of draft-eligible men fled abroad — 163,287 live in Germany alone — they need to be extradited. Poland already began the process of deporting Ukrainians back home to fill the trenches. Moreover, the Defense Ministry approved new drafting rules under which men suffering from disabilities ranging from slow progressing nervous system disorders to  hemorrhagic conditions are now eligible to be drafted. Morale and effectiveness of this kind of army is questionable. 

  This late in the war, Ukrainians are unlikely to change their mind about marching into the meat grinder. Ukraine does not publicize its casualties, but multiple videos circulating on social media show sprawling fresh graves under the national banners. The recent official U.S. estimate is 70,000 dead and 150,000 to 200,000 wounded out of 5.5 million military age men—more dead in 18 months than the U.S. lost in the Vietnam War. According to German medical supplier Ottobock, which makes prosthetics, the number of amputees now stands at up to 50,000. With characteristic German understatement Ottobock adds that the real figure is probably higher because it takes time to process cases. Meantime, Ukraine is preparing for 1.5 million disabled.

  The volunteers who answered the call early in the war were likely ideological and educated. Obituaries commemorated the flower of Ukraine—an activist, an actor, an astrophysicist. Men escaping the draft are wealthy and connected, educated, and living in large population centers. The ones dragged into combat now are poor and rural.

  The greatest loss to the country has been the departure of women and children. After the flight of refugees and the annexation of southeastern regions, Ukraine’s population dropped from 42 to about 30 million. Women from Kiev and Kharkov, the largest and most developed Ukrainian cities, are most likely to have left the country. These women are young and middle aged, and have college degrees and children. According to a report in the Italian newspaper Carrier De La Serra, educated refugees were able to find employment abroad and their children study in local languages. Some families crumble. It’s doubtful that those already growing roots will return after the war. More likely they will be joined by their equally well-educated husbands.

  Given Ukraine’s very low pre-war birth rate, the loss of millions of children and women of reproductive age can be catastrophic. So is the damage done to the Ukrainian village and cultural heritage, both Russian and Ukrainian.

  Ukraine’s greatest accomplishment in the war so far is the methodical erasure of every visible reference to Russian culture from its landscape — starting with monuments to the foundational Russian poet Alexander Pushkin and going down the list of literary and cultural figures.

  Ukraine has a storied martial tradition—the Cossack valor is legendary. Many of those drafted went into the meat grinder putting their faith into providence alone. But today’s Ukraine is urban; the nomadic steppe dwellers are gone and so are their large families. Too many only sons perished in the trenches and further losses are hardly acceptable to ordinary people. A positive outcome for Ukraine is hard to imagine even in the unlikely scenario that Russia loses on the battlefield.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 09/07/2023 – 02:00

• The Only Thing We Have To Fear Is Extinction Itself
  The Only Thing We Have To Fear Is Extinction Itself

  Authored by James George Jatras

  A version of this presentation was given to the Ron Paul Institute’s Scholars Seminar on Sept. 1st in Washington, DC.

  Today it’s hard for anyone under the age of 50 to appreciate how genuine and pervasive was fear of a nuclear holocaust during the Cold War between the US- and Soviet-led blocs.

  Books, movies, and TV both reflected and stoked popular anxiety about the possible “end of civilization as we know it.” The heyday for this was in the 1950s and 1960s, with books like The Long Tomorrow(1955) and On the Beach (1957, with a 1959 film adaptation), and films like Fail Safe, Seven Days in May, Dr. Strangelove (all in 1964, while the real-life scare of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis was fresh in people’s minds).

  There appeared to be a bit of a lull during the 1970s era of US-Soviet détente under Nixon, Ford, and Carter, perhaps also reflecting elite sympathy for socialism and an expected future convergence between the ideological groupings, which on a basic level shared the same globalist, materialist values. But nuclear terror returned with a vengeance in the 1980s – for example, The Day After (1983) and the animated When the Wind Blows (1986). And who can forget (certainly no male person!) the delightful Nena’s 1983 music video Neunundneunzig Luftballons.

  

  The Left, both in the United States and worldwide, was unanimous that Ronald Reagan, a self-confessed anti-communist, was a reckless cowboy who wanted to blow up the planet. As that great philosopher, Sting, put it in his 1985 song, “The Russians”:

  There is no historical precedent
  To put the words in the mouth of the president?
  There’s no such thing as a winnable war
  It’s a lie we don’t believe anymore
  Mister Reagan says, “We will protect you”
  I don’t subscribe to this point of view
  Believe me when I say to you
  I hope the Russians love their children too

  The irony is that Reagan’s own views were hardly different from the ones the song sought to promote. As he stated jointly with Soviet premier Mikhail Gorbachev that very same year, 1985: “A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought,” a view that prevailed until the USSR imploded just a few years later.

  We live in a very different world now, where the prospect of nuclear annihilation barely registers with anyone.

  Just as big earthquakes are often preceded by foreshocks, major wars are frequently heralded by smaller conflicts. Before World War One: the Franco-German Morocco crises (1906 and 1911), the Italo-Turkish War (1911-12), the two Balkan Wars (1912, 1913). Before World War Two: the Second Italo-Ethiopian War (1935-37) and, the most famous pre-conflagration rumble of them all, the Spanish Civil War (1936-39).

  Today, we are looking at a possible regional war in West Africa, centering on American and French demands that “democracy” be restored in Niger. (As one Indian publication put it, “Death follows Victoria Nuland”) Then, of course, there’s China/Taiwan.

  But the obvious Spanish Civil War-rank conflict of the moment is Ukraine.

  I don’t think we need to go into all the details of how we got here, but just in brief:

  • Relentless NATO expansion after 1991;
  • The 2014 US- and EU-backed coup that overthrew Victor Yanukovich, followed by the Russian annexation of Crimea and the new Kiev regime’s launch of a war to repress rebellions in the Russian-speaking east and south of the country;
     
  • The 2015 Minsk agreements, which provided for Ukraine’s neutrality and decentralization, and for reintegration of the rebellious areas with protections of their language and culture – agreements that both Ukrainian and European former officials have admitted they never intended to implement, seeing them only as a delaying ruse for building up a force capable of conquering the Donbas;
     
  • A relentless program of Ukraine’s NATO-ization in all but name under Obama, Trump, and Biden; and
     
  • Washington’s peremptory rejection of Moscow’s 2021 ultimata to the United States and NATO to resolve the conflict diplomatically, with the hope that Russia, baited into an incursion into Ukraine, would be bled white in an Afghanistan-style insurgency and by crushing sanctions that would “turn the ruble into rubble,” pancake Russia’s economy, and lead to regime change in Moscow.

  Oops. Russia’s expected ruin didn’t happen. Even the mainstream media cheerleaders of only a fortnight ago now admit that Ukraine is losing, assigning the blame not to the geniuses that thought up this strategy (if it can be called that) but to Ukraine’s being too “casualty averse” – even as that country is turning into one vast graveyard. There’s speculation that some in Washington and other western capitals are seeking an “off-ramp” – if for no other reason than the need to focus on the really big show, a looming war with China. Some suggest that in the end, we’ll just walk away, consigning Ukraine to the Memory Hole along with Afghanistan. All that’s left then is for GOP neocons to whine that the Biden Administration was too stingy with their aid and “lost Ukraine” while they gear up for the main event in the western Pacific.

  Personally, I don’t think that will happen. Nobody cares about Afghanistan but the Afghans, but if Washington walks away from Ukraine it’s effectively conceding that the US, through NATO, no longer is the security hegemon of Europe. That means the effective end of NATO, in fact if not in name; and where NATO goes, its concubine, the European Union, won’t be far behind.

  More to the point, though, the notion that this will soon end with a whimper misses the whole point. None of this is really about Ukraine, which is just an expendable tool to hurt Russia. (Maybe the Poles or Lithuanians or Romanians are eager to volunteer for the job once we’re fresh out of Ukrainians.) Ukraine is just a variable; the constant is Ruthenia delenda est. Russia must be destroyed.

  Gilbert Doctorow, a noted observer of Russian affairs, likens the current situation to that of Napoleon’s 1812 Russian campaign depicted by Leo Tolstoy in War and Peace. Today as then, what happens next will be less due to this or that policymaker making this or that bad decision. Rather, “the precondition for war is the near universal acceptance of the logic of the coming war.”

  What is that logic today? It’s simple: the ruling circles in the United States (needless to add, with their sock puppets in western capitals) are utterly, unselfconsciously convinced that they are the living embodiment of all virtue, truth, and progress in what Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov described as the “replication of the experience of Bolshevism and Trotskyism” – to cite Reagan, morphing ourselves into a new Evil Empire in place of the old one. As neocon kingpins William Kristol and Robert Kagan put it in their 1996 manifesto, the policy of the United States in the coming era must be one of “benevolent global hegemony” intended to last – well, forever. Its moral content is exemplified, on the one hand, by US support for subjugation of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church and, on the other, the spectacle of a transgender US serviceperson acting as a PR official for the Ukrainian military declaring that “we’re human,” and the Russians “most definitely aren’t.”

  As I like to say: there’s no Transatlanticism without transgenderism.

  Unsurprisingly, regarding their alleged lack of human-ness, the Russians disagree. But who cares what they think? Our leaders see not only Putin but Russians in general as an obstacle to the radiant future, where every knee will bow before the sacred rainbow flag.

  Sun Tzu says “If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” The Russians more or less know themselves. They kind of know us, but not as well as they think they do, with rather a tendency to project normalcy onto fundamentally abnormal people. On the other hand, our rulers – dangerous people whose levels of arrogance and ignorance defies description: monkeys with nuclear hand grenades – know neither themselves nor the Russians.

  On top of that, as Doctorow further observes, the mechanisms that lent some stability and restraint to the US-Soviet standoff are now all but gone, rendering the once-“unthinkable” of the 1950s’ nuke horror films all-too-thinkable today:

  ‘… no one wants war, neither Washington nor Moscow. However, the step-by-step dismantling of the channels of communication, of the symbolic projects for cooperation across a wide array of domains, and now dismantling of all the arms limitation agreements that took decades to negotiate and ratify, plus the incoming new weapons systems that leave both sides with under 10 minutes to decide how to respond to alarms of incoming missiles—all of this prepares the way for the Accident to end all Accidents.  Such false alarms occurred in the Cold War but some slight measure of mutual trust prompted restraint. That is all gone now and if something goes awry, we are all dead ducks.’

  “No one wants war.” A similar thought was expressed by Hermann Göring, when he was on trial at Nuremberg:

  Of course the people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. … But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.

  So I guess Doctorow is a bit off the mark in suggesting that “no one wants war.” Clearly, somebody wants war. A lot of very important “somebodies” wanted this war in Ukraine. They wanted war in the Balkans in the 1990s. They wanted war in Afghanistan, Iraq (twice!), Libya, Yemen, Syria, and a dozen places in Africa where we have almost no idea what’s going on.

  “All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked…” I can’t help but think of the meme with two blank-face NPCs, one wearing a pink knit hat mindlessly repeating “Russia! Russia! Russia!,” the other with a red MAGA hat chanting “China! China! China!” Between them is the seal of the CIA with the eagle saying, “Yes, yes, my pretties. That’s it. That’s it.”

  Here we are, 60 years after the fact, with the growing recognition by even the most spoon-fed normies that the CIA had something to do with the assassination of Jack Kennedy. In fact, we have here today perhaps the foremost authority on the topic, Mr. Jacob Hornberger. Yet doubting our rulers’ truthiness still is treated as a thought crime. A little while ago, Vivek Ramaswamy was the target of a media hate fest for (in the words of The New Republic) “spout[ing] conspiracy theories about January 6 and 9/11.” Oh no! “Conspiracy theories”! (Or, as they are known when they turn out to be true, “spoiler alerts.”) The heretic Ramaswamy evidently believes – shocking as this sounds – that our government has not been entirely honest about these matters. He must be a dupe for the Russians! Or for the Chinese! – which The New Republic also implies.

  You may have heard some people compare the “lawfare” being directed against Donald Trump, with the evident aim of eliminating the likely opponent next year of the desiccated-husk-of-Hunter-Biden’s-dad (assuming ol’ Joe will be the Democratic nominee, which I don’t), to the behavior of a banana republic. This is a gratuitous insult to the friendly spider-infested nations to our south!

  I recently suggested to a sober observer of public affairs that the strategic goal is keeping Trump off the ballot in one or more must-win states for him, like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, Arizona, to which he responded: “That’s a recipe for civil war.” (I tried to imagine what Republicans taking to the streets would look like. A mob of decrepit Boomers rolling their motorized wheelchairs down to the corner and burning down the post office?) Anyway, taking him out via lawfare seems to be Plan A. If that fails – well, Plan B would get us into Mr. Hornberger’s area of expertise.

  The term “cold” civil war, a war that might possibly turn “hot,” has become a commonplace in American discourse. So has the expression “national divorce.” In 1861 Americans both North and South worshipped the same God, read the same Bible, honored the same Founding Fathers, claimed fidelity to the same Constitution. In today’s America, we can’t even agree on our pronouns or on what a “woman” is, much less on what it means to be an American. We are moral aliens to one another, indeed enemies. What actually holds the former American republic together? “Muh Constitution”? “Muh democracy”?

  Keep in mind, we’re not talking about a mere political crisis that will get solved in an election or two. Not even about political and constitutional collapse, or even a financial and economic calamity – that’s coming too, in part because of the impact of the Ukraine war on the dollar-denominated global system – but a fundamental challenge to the social fabric itself, and not just in the United States.

  A watershed was passed with covid and the measures – the lockdowns, the masks, social distancing and monitoring, the clot shot, censorship of dissent, all combined with a pervasive, inescapable external and internal panopticon: as the troubadour of transhumanism Yuval Harari writes, “we are seeing a change in the nature of surveillance from over the skin surveillance to under the skin surveillance” – supposedly intended to deal with a virus, accomplishing within a few short months what decades of climate hysteria could not, summed up under the moniker “the Great Reset” and its ubiquitous slogan “Build Back Better.”’

  Taken together what we’re experiencing has all the appearance of a controlled demolition of all established human interactions in anticipation of their replacement by something we are assured by our betters will be an improvement. The contours of the “new normal” in the post-American America hurtling in our direction have already become so familiar as to need little elaboration:

  • Infringement of traditional liberties based on “keeping us safe”;
     
  • “Cancel culture”;
     
  • Blurring of the lines between Big Government, Big Finance, Big Pharma, Big Data, etc., amounting to corporate state capture; and, not directly based on supposed anti-virus measures but closely tracking with them,
     
  • Joint government and corporate promulgation of socially destructive, historically counterfeit ideologies (“intersectionality,” LGBTQI+++, feminism, multiculturalism, “critical race theory,”), with principal targeting of children subject to sexualization and predation by those expressing what were once quaintly known as abnormal appetites and identities.

  These so-called “values” – which, remember, are effectively the official ideology of the West, which we seek “benevolently” to impose on the rest of the world, by force if necessary – in turn accelerate longstanding trends towards infertility and demographic collapse pointing to thinning the human herd and replacement via post-human society, transhumanism, and bio-engineering. This is not just “political” but a strike at the heart of human existence: the spiritual, moral, and even biological basis for marriage, family formation, and production of the next generation. In a word: depopulation.

  A few years ago, His Royal Highness, the late Prince Philip of the United Kingdom, perhaps half in jest delivered this thigh-slapper: “In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, to contribute something to solving overpopulation.” Some of you may have heard of groups like Extinction Rebellion and BirthStrike: “Are you terrified about the future that lies ahead for contemporary and future youth? Do you want to maximize your positive impact on the Climate Change Crisis? You can protect children while fighting climate change and systematic corruption by refusing to procreate!” Makes perfect sense: preserve a better planet for future generations by eliminating future generations. It reminds me of Otto von Bismarck’s comparing the idea of preventive war to committing suicide out of fear of death. (That’s not as abstract as it might sound. Recently a young woman in Canada seeking help for depression and suicidal ideation was advised by hospital staff that she might be interested in their tried and Trudeau-ed “Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID)” euthanasia program. Tempted to kill yourself? Let us help you!) 

  But why stop at half measures? The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, VHEMT (pronounced “vehement,” according to their website): “We’re the only species evolved enough to consciously go extinct for the good of all life, or which needs to. Success would be humanity’s crowning achievement. May we live long and die out.”

  Maybe they’re on to something! In his landmark work The Socialist Phenomenon, the late Russian mathematician and student of history Igor Shafarevich took note of what he believed is a collective human death impulse:

  The idea of the death of mankind—not the death of specific people but literally the end of the human race—evokes a response in the human psyche. It arouses and attracts people, albeit with differing intensity in different epochs and in different individuals. The scope of influence of this idea causes us to suppose that every individual is affected by it to a greater or lesser degree and that it is a universal trait of the human psyche.

  This idea is not only manifested in the individual experience of a great number of specific persons, but is also capable of uniting people (in contrast to delirium, for example) i.e., it is a social force. The impulse toward self-destruction may be regarded as an element in the psyche of mankind as a whole. [ … ]

  In the Freudian view (first expressed in the article “Beyond the Pleasure Principle”), the human psyche can be reduced to a manifestation of two main instincts: the life instinct or Eros and the death instinct or Thanatos (or the Nirvana principle). Both are general biological categories, fundamental properties of living things in general. The death instinct is a manifestation of general “inertia” or a tendency of organic life to return to a more elementary state from which it had been aroused by an external disturbing force. [“Dust thou art, unto dust shalt thou return.”] The role of the life instinct is essentially to prevent a living organism from returning to the inorganic state by any path other than that which is immanent in it.

  Marcuse [Shafarevich refers here to Herbert Marcuse, theorist of the Frankfurt School, known for his adaptation of the theory of class conflict in classical Marxism to other social divides, notably in the area of sex, setting the stage for “intersectionality”] introduces a greater social factor into this scheme, asserting that the death instinct expresses itself in the desire to be liberated from tension, as an attempt to rid oneself of the suffering and discontent which are specifically engendered by social factors.

  With the failure of the Ukrainian offensive, Moscow now faces a dilemma. Do they move decisively to impose a military solution that ends the war, or do they continue to show restraint in the hopes that somebody, somewhere – Kiev, Washington, London, Brussels – decides it’s time to sue for peace? Keen not to take a precipitous step that might bring about a direct clash of NATO and Russian forces, so far they’ve opted for the latter – I repeat: so far.

  The West faces its own dilemma. Do our rulers concede defeat, which effectively means the end of the Global American Empire (the GAE)? Or do they drag things out as long as possible, hoping Moscow will fall for another Minsk-type ceasefire, with the Kremlin playing the part of Charlie Brown taking another run at kicking the football, having been promised that this time we’ll keep our word? Or, mistaking Russian restraint for weakness, do they push the envelope by inserting a “coalition of the willing” into western Ukraine, challenging Russian naval forces in the Black Sea, encouraging and equipping the Ukrainians to step up attacks on Moscow and other Russian cities, staging some sort of false flag of the type that has proved so effective in other conflicts? In other words, do we double down? That’s in addition to opening up other asymmetrical theaters in the Balkans, Syria, Iran, the Taiwan Strait, and elsewhere.

  In mistakenly projecting a rational actor mentality onto their opponents, the Russians seem to be acutely aware of the legitimate concern that decisive military action on the ground could panic NATO and trigger an uncontrolled escalation. They seem oblivious to the contrary concern, that, by holding back and waiting for a reasonable dialogue that will never take place, they are in effect encouraging their adversary to stage one reckless provocation after another – in the sustained belief that some deus ex machina can snatch victory from the jaws of defeat – resulting in the very uncontrolled escalation that Moscow seeks to avoid.

  Even these speculations assume that the miserable specimens of humanity calling the shots in Western capitals would only risk a direct conflict but would not deliberately choose it. But is that assumption correct? As Doctorow notes, the old Cold War restraints have broken down. Maybe demonstration of a teeny-tiny, low-yield nuke is just the thing to show that non-human Vladof Putler that the GAE is serious!

  What could possibly go wrong?

  Recently on his podcast Judge Andrew Napolitano showed part of a computer simulation of a US-Russia nuclear exchange in which the initial toll on the US population was only (“only”!) about nine percent, while on Russia it was around 62 percent. (Given that Russia has more warheads than we do, I don’t know how they came up with that, but I didn’t conduct the simulation.)  Is it so impossible that somewhere, somebody might look at those data and decide it’s a tolerable tradeoff? (Later on, the simulation has pretty much everyone on earth starving to death from nuclear winter, with agriculture in the northern hemisphere unviable for several years. Now there’s a way to resolve both global warming and supposed overpopulation with one stroke! Hey, VHEMT, have we got a concept for you!)

  Whether or not these dolts manage to kill us all, either by deliberate action or through sheer incompetence, it’s hard to escape the notion that we are approaching the edge of some profound historical moment that will have far-reaching, literally life and death consequences, both domestically and internationally. In the period preceding World War I how many Europeans suspected that their lives would soon be forever changed—and, for millions of them, ended? Who in the years, say, 1910 to 1913, could have imagined that the decades of peace, progress, and civilization in which they had grown up, and which seemingly would continue indefinitely, instead would soon descend into a horror of industrial-scale slaughter, revolution, and brutal ideologies?

  Which brings us to my parting admonitions to your predecessors in this seminar, which I see no need to change:

  My young friends, the impact any one of us can expect to have in the face of world-historic trends before which the fates of nations and empires fly like leaves in the autumn winds is vanishingly small. Already baked into the cake will be, I believe, hardships for you that we’ve become accustomed to think only happen to “other people” in “other countries” far away, not seen here since the Revolution and the Civil War, or maybe in isolated instances during the Great Depression: financial and economic disruption and, in some places, especially in urban areas, collapse; supply chains, utilities, and other aspects of basic infrastructure ceasing to function (what happens in major cities when food deliveries stop for a week?), even widespread hunger; rising levels of violence, both criminality and civil strife. These will be combined, paradoxically, with the remaining organs of authority, however discredited, desperately cracking down on the enemy within – no, not on murderers, robbers, and rapists, but on “science deniers,” “religious fanatics,” “haters,” “conspiracy theorists,” “insurrectionists,” “gun nuts,” “purveyors of “medical misinformation,” Russian or Chinese “stooges,” and, of course, “racists,” “sexists,” “homophobes,” and so forth. It’s the late Samuel Francis’ “anarcho-tyranny” nightmare come to life with a vengeance.

  Nevertheless, for what it is worth, I put before you three practical tasks for your consideration.

  Firstly, be vigilant against deception, in a day when assuredly evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. Admittedly, this is a tough one, given the ever-present lying that surrounds us and the suppression of dissent. Try to sift truth from falsehood but don’t become obsessed because, in many cases, you won’t be able to be sure anyway. Focus most on what’s proximate to you and on the people most important to you. … Be skeptical – about everyone. … There may be a cost. As Solzhenitsyn said, “He who chooses the lie as his principle inevitably chooses violence as his method.”

  Secondly, as stewards of every worldly charge placed on us by God and by other people—as fathers and mothers, as husbands and wives, as sons and daughters, as neighbors, as students, as workers, as citizens, as patriots—we must prudently care for those to whom we have a duty within the limited power and wisdom allotted to us. Start with yourselves. Be as self-sufficient as possible. Get involved in your community; that leftist slogan is actually a good one: think globally, act locally. Befriend your neighbors. Learn a real skill – electricity, plumbing, carpentry. Farm! Don’t go to law school, for goodness’ sake. Get in shape. Eat and sleep right. Have plenty of the essentials: food, fuel, gold, ammunition. Learn to shoot. Limit computer and phone time. Experience nature. Cultivate healthy personal relationships – real ones, not virtual ones. Marry young, have kids, lots of them – especially women, don’t get seduced by all that “career” nonsense. Nobody on his or her deathbed ever said, “Gosh, I wish I’d spent more time at the office.” Read old books. Cultivate virtue. Go to church.

  Simply being what used to be considered normal and leading a productive life is becoming the most revolutionary act one can perform. With that in mind, find the strength to be revolutionaries indeed! In the face of the culture of death and extinction, choose to affirm life.

  You’ve seen the meme: Hard times create strong men; Strong men create good times; Good times create weak men; Weak men create hard times. Well, take it from the weakling Boomer generation that brought them to you: the hard times, they is a-coming. But they won’t last forever. If you live through them – and some of you will not – we’ll see what possibilities, as of now literally unimaginable, might then exist. But you will need to be personally fit to take advantage of them. You will also need to be part of some kind of sustainable community of likeminded people.

  Thirdly, for those of you who are believers, particularly Christians, we must pray without ceasing, firm in faith that, through whatever hardships may lie ahead, even the very hairs of our head are all numbered, and the final triumph of Truth is never in doubt.

  Thank you, and good luck. You’re going to need it.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 23:45

• China Launching $40 Billion Investment Fund To Subsidize Its Semiconductor Industry
  China Launching $40 Billion Investment Fund To Subsidize Its Semiconductor Industry

  It looks as though the competition in semiconductors between the U.S. and China is only getting started.

  And hey, when it doubt: nationalize the industry! That seems to be China’s strategy after it was announced this week that Beijing is going to be launching a new, $40 billion investment fund backed by the government, to help boost and subsidize its semiconductor industry. 

  This investment will be the largest of three that have been launched by China’s “Big Fund”, the nickname for the China Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund, according to Yahoo Finance. Its focus is going to be on “investment on equipment used in manufacturing advanced chips”.

  Other “Big Fund” funds were launched in 2014 and 2019, with funding provided by companies like China Development Bank Capital, China National Tobacco Corp. and China Telecom. 

  

  Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. and Hua Hong Semiconductor have been beneficiaries of the “Big Fund” in the past, as has flash memory chipmaker Yangtze Memory Technologies, Yahoo reports. 

  The fundraising process “may take months”, according to the report, and it is unclear when China may launch the fund. 

  China is aiming to be self-reliant when it comes to chipmaking at the same time the U.S. has tried to limit the country from accessing advanced chips. 

  Chinese President Xi Jinping’s domestic push for semiconductors comes after the U.S. government’s CHIPS act was launched, providing $39 billion in manufacturing subsidies specifically targeting high end chip production in the U.S.

  The global semiconductor industry remains weighed down by regulation: as of now China has imposed restrictions on Micron and the U.S. has put into place export controls that have caused some companies difficulty in selling to China.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 23:25

• "It's Just Bizarre That Some People Still Want COVID Measures…"
  “It’s Just Bizarre That Some People Still Want COVID Measures…”

  Commentary by Anthony Furey via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Let’s start off with a little pop quiz. Please read this headline from CTV News and tell me the year the story was published: “Ontario will not require masks in schools this fall despite uptick in COVID cases.”

  

  I’d like to think that it is from 2021, and that while people were still relatively concerned about the virus, the government determined that it should be up to parents whether or not their kids wore masks in class.

  Alas, this is not true. Ontario still mandated masks at that time.

  OK, so it must be fall of 2022 then? That sounds about right, because it is true that there were no mask mandates in Ontario schools at that point and the majority of kids chose not to wear them.

  It’s not from then, though. This is a news headline from just the other day—September 2023. Why is this considered news? Why is a media outlet even reporting about COVID and schools right now? Was the government even considering a mask mandate?

  These were all good questions that people asked on social media after the story went live. The last one is probably the most important one, because it would be very worrisome if the government was in fact considering such a mandate.

  “As is the case with every jurisdiction in Canada, masks will not be required in Ontario schools,” Education Minister Stephen Lecce said in an emailed statement to CTV. He then went on to talk about ventilation measures in the classrooms.

  Lecce did not give a press conference on this issue. The ministry didn’t even send out their own press release. While the story doesn’t spell this out, it seems like the intrepid reporter randomly asked the Education Ministry this question out of the blue for the sole purpose of writing this story. The fact that Lecce’s statement began with a nod to how nowhere else is doing this can probably be interpreted as a bit of an eyeroll at the news outlet for even asking the question in the first place. Good.

  It’s just bizarre that some people still want COVID measures right now, and the sprinkling of news stories currently cropping up seem to just play to that increasingly small and oddball base.

  A recent Toronto Star story discussed how small businesses are nervous about having to potentially face COVID restrictions this coming fall and winter. But the business advocates they quoted were just responding to random hypothetical questions put to them. It’s not like there was any government official or credible medical voice who was saying such things were in the works. It’s an entirely manufactured narrative at this point.

  The unfortunate part is that while most people won’t even notice these stories and just go about their daily lives, there will be a small number of people needlessly alarmed and frightened by them.

  Now I’m aware that my simply writing this column is in some ways playing into the efforts of those voices trying to get the COVID band back together again. They clearly want people talking about it as much as possible, even if it’s in opposition to them, just to get the discussion ramped up again. The best response is really just to totally ignore them and the whole narrative.

  One thing that we still haven’t received, though, is accountability when it comes to those who were so horribly wrong. Last fall, some alleged experts tried to claim that the back-to-school season would be a disaster without restrictions and children would suffer greatly from COVID. That didn’t at all come close to happening. So if you were an expert before you made such grandiose predictions—ones that came with calls to restrict the lives of children—the consensus should be that you are no longer an expert. Instead, too many people were encouraged to say ridiculous things and there was no follow-up to check in on how wrong they were.

  The good news, however, is pretty much everyone has tuned out all of this noise by now.

  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, 09/06/2023 – 23:05

• EU To Seize On Xi, Putin Absence At G20 To Woo Africa Closer
  EU To Seize On Xi, Putin Absence At G20 To Woo Africa Closer

  Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s absence from the upcoming G20 Summit in New Delhi likely has a number of Western heads of state breathing a sigh of relief, given some sensitive agendas could more easily gain consensus in their absence.

  China’s new premier, Li Qiang, is taking Xi’s place, while Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov is representing Russia. EU officials will reportedly move to endorse the African Union’s bid to become a permanent member of Group of 20, while presenting themselves as the more stable path forward when it comes to Africa investment and engagement.

  

  Bloomberg has reported that this will be the goal of a high-level meeting with African leaders on the summit’s sidelines. This comes at a very sensitive moment for Europe given the coup events in Niger.

  More broadly, the past years have witnessed a series of junta governments come to power voicing anti-colonial sentiment, aimed particularly at France. 

  Russia and China have at the same time made deep inroads across the continent, offering investment, infrastructure and security agreements as a favorable alternative to “Western hegemony”. Bloomberg details based on diplomatic sources: 

  Among those due to take part are European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, European Council President Charles Michel and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. From the African side, participants will include leaders from G-20 member South Africa as well as from Egypt, Nigeria and the Comoros, current chair of the African Union, the people said.

  What’s being billed as a “mini-summit” takes place as competition intensifies for global influence amid a US-China standoff and divisions over Russia’s war on Ukraine.

  If it goes through, this would result in the African Union having the same status as the EU (of “permanent membership”, rather than merely “invited international organization”).

  Bloomberg further says that G20 summit host PM Narendra Modi is behind the plan: 

  Among the goals of their meeting in India on Sept. 9, European leaders want to endorse the African Union’s bid to become a permanent G-20 member, according to the people. Giorgia Meloni of Italy was among those leading on the AU’s G-20 membership at the last G-7 in Japan, while it is also a priority of this week’s summit host, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

  Map of African countries that have signed military agreements with Russia pic.twitter.com/CKlAC9zePv

  — The Cradle (@TheCradleMedia) August 3, 2023

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

  But lest this be seen simplistically an ‘east vs. west’ issue, Russia in June said it backs the AU becoming a permanent part of the G20. Lavrov specifically said it has the “active backing” of Moscow.

  Of course, this entails contrasting visions for the path of African states, given also President Putin has recently said Russia and Africa are going to “combat neo-colonialism, the practice of applying illegitimate sanctions, and attempts to undermine traditional moral values,” according to Russian media. But at least for this year’s G20, the West will have the upper-hand of engagement given their heads of state, including President Joe Biden, will be there, but not Xi or Putin… a first in a long time.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 22:45

• This Is How Bad Things Have Become In America…
  This Is How Bad Things Have Become In America…

  Authored by Michael Snyder via TheMostImportantNews.com,

  Can you imagine what tourists must think when they come to this country? 

  They spend a lot of money to fly all the way over here, and they are hoping to have amazing experiences that they will always remember.  But instead, they quickly realize that the cities that they have come to see are rapidly degenerating.  Today, our major cities are filthy, they are teeming with predators, and violent crime is completely out of control. 

  

  Let me give you an example of what I am talking about.  New York City is the financial capital of the world, and millions of tourists still visit each year.  But now the Big Apple has such an enormous rat problem “that rat tourism is fast becoming a boom industry”…

  As the city grapples with a major rat problem – sightings doubled last year, prompting the mayor to advertise for a “somewhat bloodthirsty” head rat-catcher in December – the rodent issue is, according to some, New York’s latest must-experience trend.

  As visitors to New York demand rat action, some of the city’s tour guides have started to add stops at notoriously infested sites, the New York Post reported this week.

  It means that rat tourism is fast becoming a boom industry.

  One study concluded that there are about 3 million rats in New York City today.

  And with each passing day, the population grows even larger.

  The east coast may have rats, but if you want to really have an experience with the crime wave that is sweeping across America the best place to do that is the west coast.

  Some tourists from Malta recently found that out the hard way. 

  When they visited a beach in the San Francisco area, they had all of their possessions stolen from their vehicles within just 10 minutes…

  Numerous groups of tourists visiting a beach in San Francisco had all their belongings stolen from their cars, including their passports, while at the ocean for just minutes.

  On their second day in San Francisco, a group of tourists from Malta contemplated cutting their trip short and returning to Europe after the brazen smash and grab that occurred in broad daylight within a mere 10-minute window.

  Another group from Europe was able to top that.

  They had all of their possessions stolen from their vehicle within just 5 minutes…

  At the same beach, another European family enjoying a day by the ocean fell prey to a car break-in.

  Shocking footage captured by Matty Lopez on Instagram and shared by journalist Arisley T. Pacheco, who documents robbery victims, revealed their car’s trunk vandalized, with shattered glass scattered across the ground.

  The man recording the video questions the tourists, ‘So what happened – you went to the beach for five minutes?’ Their response is disheartening: ‘They took everything we had – passports, cameras, phones, iPads, laptops, luggage – everything.’

  Whether we like it or not, this is our country now.

  Once upon a time, Beverly Hills was world famous for the luxury retailers that lined Wilshire Boulevard.

  But now many of those iconic retailers have shut down permanently due to rising crime…

  A new video documenting the growing number of high-profile stores in Beverly Hills that have closed recently, places renewed emphasis on the crisis facing the retail sector in most major cities.

  The video, posted by an account called cody90210, shows some 11 popular Beverly Hills retail stops now entirely shuttered, including the iconic former Barneys location, Brooks Brothers, All Saints, and the high-end women’s fashion boutique Escada. Both Escada and Barneys filed for bankruptcy in recent years.

  The closed shops, which also include convenience retailers like Rite Aid and Chipotle, and even popular workout class option SoulCycle, have shuttered their doors on Wilshire Boulevard, leaving the area bereft of its former appeal. Their sad decline marks a departure from the area’s lengthy heyday, which even saw band Weezer pen a song with the lyrics ‘Beverly Hills, that’s where I want to be.’

  I don’t know why anyone would want to live in southern California at this point.

  Earlier today, I came across a story about a street vendor in south Los Angeles that was viciously assaulted by a group of thugs in broad daylight “in front of his 8-year-old special needs daughter”…

  A group of masked males brutally attacked a street vendor in front of his 8-year-old special needs daughter and stole all his money in south Los Angeles over the weekend, KTLA-TV reported.

  These criminals have no respect for anyone or anything.

  They just want to take what you have.

  Of course this isn’t just a west coast phenomenon.  In Washington D.C., carjackings are up more than 100 percent so far this year…

  Washington D.C. has witnessed a staggering 670 reported carjackings in 2023 so far, representing 100 percent+ increase in the offense across the U.S. Capitol compared to the same period last year. The city’s Democrat-dominated city council, however, remains on vacation until September 15 and has shown no signs of trying to return early to solve the matter. In 2018, there were 140 carjackings, jumping to 360 by 2020, with total of 485 in 2022. The city has also seen a 113 percent increase in carjackings involving a firearm compared to 2022. A total of 513 incidents involved a gun, representing 77 percent of all D.C. carjackings. Only 157 incidents did not involve a firearm.

  Things are even worse in Baltimore.

  One young mother in the city that recently spoke to FOX45 News is deeply frustrated because she can’t seem to find a way to keep her 14-year-old daughter from stealing cars…

  As another school year begins, a Baltimore mom isn’t scheduling after-school activities for her 14-year-old daughter; instead, she’s scheduling court appearances and trying to figure out what – if anything – will get her daughter to stop stealing cars and follow the rules of her home detention.

  Rae spoke with FOX45 News about her 14-year-old daughter on the condition of not using her last name or showing her face on camera. In return, Rae spoke candidly about her daughter’s behavior, experience with police, and the Department of Juvenile Services.

  Apparently this 14-year-old girl is really good at stealing vehicles, and authorities refuse to keep her locked up because she is not an adult.

  Hopefully she will find a way to turn her life around.

  But the reality of the matter is that there are millions of others just like her.

  Our cities are being overwhelmed by hordes of young people that are totally out of control, and meanwhile police departments are shrinking.

  In fact, some small towns have eliminated their police departments entirely because it has become so difficult to find people that are willing to serve in this environment…

  America is in the midst of a police officer shortage that many in law enforcement blame on the two-fold morale hit of 2020 — the coronavirus pandemic and criticism of police that boiled over with the murder of George Floyd by a police officer. From Minnesota to Maine, Ohio to Texas, small towns unable to fill jobs are eliminating their police departments and turning over police work to their county sheriff, a neighboring town or state police.

  What is going to happen if the number of police continues to shrink but the number of criminals continues to rise?

  I think that we all know the answer to that question.

  Great chaos is coming to this country, and it isn’t going to be pretty.

  Our society has been trending the wrong way for a long time, and now we have reached a major tipping point.

  *  *  *

  Michael’s new book entitled “End Times” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.com, and you can check out his new Substack newsletter right here.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 22:25

• "Betrayed Customer Base": Backlash Erupts After Gun Safe Company Gives FBI Customer's Passcode 
  “Betrayed Customer Base”: Backlash Erupts After Gun Safe Company Gives FBI Customer’s Passcode 

  Liberty Safe, one of the leading gun safe manufacturers in the country, provided FBI agents with the combination of a safe belonging to an individual who attended the J6 protest, according to the Washington Examiner. This sparked instant backlash on social media among conservatives, calling for a ‘Bud Light-style’ boycott of the ‘not so safe’ company.

  Days ago, conservative comedians and YouTubers Keith and Kevin Hodge shared a lengthy post on X about a friend whom the Feds raided over “crimes related to January 6th.” They said the FBI could access his Liberty Gun Safe because agents called the manufacturer for the passcode.  

  🚨 Last week, a friend of ours was raided by the feds over J6, his name is Nathan Hughes and he’s from Fayetteville, Arkansas. Nate was raided by the FBI and arrested at gun point. His girlfriend (who just had a miscarriage) was held at gun point and put in handcuffs. The FBI… pic.twitter.com/LOpMQ28eUJ

  — Hodgetwins (@hodgetwins) September 5, 2023

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

  Liberty Safe stated on platform X, “Our company’s standard procedure is to share access codes with law enforcement when presented with a legitimate warrant for a property.”

  The statement continued, “After receiving the request, we received proof of the valid warrant, and only then did we provide them with an access code.”

  pic.twitter.com/UD6gxErzHV

  — Liberty Safe (@libertysafeinc) September 6, 2023

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

  Liberty Safe further noted that its policies are regularly updated to comply with the law and remain committed to “preserving our customers’ rights.” 

  … and conservatives were livid with Liberty Safe for complying with the FBI’s order:

  Liberty Safe = Bud light. https://t.co/okeXSRSFNP

  — Catturd ™ (@catturd2) September 6, 2023

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

  Liberty Not So Safe https://t.co/Qs3YV2NMW7

  — Ashley St. Clair (@stclairashley) September 6, 2023

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

  They finally shut replies off.

  This company is going under.

  Totally betrayed customer base. It’s impossible to earn back that trust. They had a moral duty to protect customers, and instead placated feds through a secret back door. Ugly, ugly stuff. https://t.co/xUtoH2IiaZ

  — Jordan Schachtel @ dossier.today (@JordanSchachtel) September 6, 2023

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

  And one more thing: absent a court order, you weren’t required to give them anything. You voluntarily gave out a combination over a warrant, per your own release, that didn’t apply to you or your property.

  Maybe start marketing your stuff as Bud Light storage. https://t.co/6YN0BDEGZd

  — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) September 6, 2023

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

  Hmmm. 

  i dont care that liberty safe gave the code to the feds

  i care that they had the codes in the first place

  Liberty safes are completely worthless https://t.co/Rn562z3NYH

  — Tim Pool (@Timcast) September 6, 2023

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

  Customers who own these safes and others should read the fine print of who can gain access to their safes.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 22:05

• Republicans Reject Motions To Dismiss Impeachment Articles Against Texas AG Ken Paxton
  Republicans Reject Motions To Dismiss Impeachment Articles Against Texas AG Ken Paxton

  Authored by Jana J. Pruet via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Texas Senate chamber was turned into a courtroom for the historic impeachment trial of state Attorney General Ken Paxton, which kicked off Tuesday morning at the state Capitol in Austin, Texas.

  

  After the swearing-in of the 30 senators who will decide whether or not to remove Mr. Paxton from office, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick began ticking off the pretrial motions before hearing opening statements.

  Mr. Paxton was impeached on 20 articles in late May by the GOP-led House of Representatives in a vote of 121–23. He is only the third sitting official to be impeached in the state’s nearly 200-year history. The last impeachment case was more than a century ago.

  The articles of impeachment include allegations of abuse of power and bribery, among others. Mr. Paxton and his lawyers have maintained that all of the accusations are false.

  The suspended attorney general is known as one of the most conservative lawmakers in the state of Texas. He has filed more than two dozen lawsuits against the Biden administration since President Joe Biden took office in January 2021.

  Dozens of Paxton supporters wearing red shirts showed up to witness the proceedings.

  Pretrial Motions

  The first half of the day was spent handling dozens of pretrial motions to dismiss the articles of impeachment, exclude certain evidence, and other matters as filed by Mr. Paxton’s legal team—all were denied.

  A simple majority, 16 of the 30 voting members, was needed to approve each of the motions. The most support Mr. Paxton received was 10 votes of 30 to dismiss one article. Many of the motions only garnered six to eight votes in Mr. Paxton’s favor.

  Mr. Paxton’s wife, Sen. Angela Paxton, watched from her Senate seat as the proceedings against her husband began. She is barred from voting or participating in the trial, according to the rules approved earlier this summer.

  Of the Senate Republicans, only six voted in support of Paxton to dismiss every article. They were Sens. Paul Bettencourt, Donna Campbell, Brandon Creighton, Bob Hall, Lois Kolkhorst, and Tan Parker.

  Five other Republicans voted to dismiss at least one of the motions: Sens. Bryan Hughes, Charles Perry, Charles Schwertner, and Kevin Sparks.

  The remaining Republicans, Sens. Brian Birdwell, Pete Flores, Kelly Hancock, Joan Huffman, Mayes Middleton, Robert Nichols, and Drew Springer, voted against every motion alongside the 12 Senate Democrats.

  In a summary judgment, Mr. Paxton’s attorneys argued that all of the impeachment articles lacked supporting evidence and, therefore, should be dismissed.

  The senators denied the first motion to dismiss all 20 articles in a vote of 24–6.

  In a win for Mr. Paxton, he was granted a request to preclude him from testifying, citing a defendent’s right not to be called as a witness in a criminal trial.

  “The attorney general cannot be compelled to testify,” Mr. Patrick stated, adding that the decision is “consistent with the reasoning and judgment” of the United States Supreme Court.

  Mr. Patrick also laid out the timing for the trial. Each side will be allowed one hour for opening and closing statements and 24 hours for each side to present evidence, questioning, and cross-examination of witnesses. The trial is expected to last about two weeks.

  

  House Impeachment Managers’ Opening Statements

  House Rep. Andrew Murr presented the opening statements for House impeachment managers who say Mr. Paxton should be removed from office despite being re-elected to a third term in November.

  House impeachment managers have accused Mr. Paxton of using his position to protect real estate investor Nate Paul, who they claim had the “keys” to the attorney general’s office.

  They allege Mr. Paul helped Mr. Paxton cover up an extramarital affair and paid for a home renovation in exchange for the attorney general’s legal help.

  “Voters did not know the whole truth.” Mr. Murr said. “Mr. Paxton went to great lengths to hide his misconduct from the public.”

  Mr. Murr spent less than 20 minutes citing impeachable actions that included accusations that Mr. Paxton used burner phones, “ditched” his security detail, and set up secret email addresses to cover up his alleged misconduct.

  He claims the evidence will show Mr. Paxton’s “slow creep of corruption,” adding that the attorney general’s conduct does not have to be proven criminal for him to be removed from office.

  “We don’t have to show some type of quid pro quo to establish that his conduct warrants impeachment,” Mr. Murr said. “Wrongs justifying impeachment don’t have to be crimes. Wrongs justifying the impeachment are broader than that because they have the purpose of protecting the state, not punishing the offender.”

  Opening Statements for Paxton

  High-profile Houston attorney Tony Buzbee called the entire case a “whole lot of nothing” supported by no evidence.

  Mr. Buzbee and defense attorney Dan Cogdell used nearly their full hour pushing back against the accusations they say will be disproven beyond a reasonable doubt.

  They accused the media of fueling the falsehoods against their client and said the gag order issued by Mr. Patrick prevented them from responding to the “manufactured lies” leveled against their client.

  Now, the House wants 30 people to decide whether Mr. Paxton is allowed to serve his office despite the more than 4.2 million who re-elected him less than a year ago. Mr. Buzbee said.

  Mr. Buzbee pointed out the speedy impeachment process that occurred four days after Mr. Paxton called for House Speaker Dade Phelan’s resignation over accusations of drunkenness while presiding on the floor.

  The lawyer also pushed back against accusations that Mr. Paul gave a job to the woman Mr. Paxton allegedly was having an affair with, adding that they would present the woman’s job application, employee contract, and paystubs to disprove the allegations of bribery. He said the woman was hired to do real work and that she is still employed in that position.

  “You’re going to see her face,” Mr. Buzbee said. “You’re going to hear about the work that she did. And you’re also going to hear that she continues to do that work today. She’s doing real work.”

  He said the accusations of burner phones, secret email addresses, and other actions are false.

  Mr. Buzbee said his team will present evidence that the Paxtons paid for the repairs to their home after it sustained water damage. He said the chatter of $20,000 granite countertops is completely untrue, adding that the home still has “ratty” countertops after the couple shopped for new countertops but ultimately decided against them due to costs.

  House impeachment managers also accused the attorney general of hiring Brandon Cammack, a Houston lawyer, to investigate Mr. Paul’s “baseless complaint” that his home and businesses were improperly searched by federal officials. Mr. Buzbee said Mr. Paxton was within his rights to hire the outside lawyer.

  After wrapping up the opening statements, House impeachment managers called their first witness, Jeff Mateer. Mr. Mateer was second-in-command in Mr. Paxton’s office prior to his resignation in 2020, following his meeting with the FBI regarding the relationship between Mr. Paxton and Mr. Paul.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 21:45

• Philly PD Commissioner Danielle Outlaw To Resign Amidst Ongoing Crime Wave
  Philly PD Commissioner Danielle Outlaw To Resign Amidst Ongoing Crime Wave

  In what’ll likely come as a welcome relief to the city of Philadelphia, its police commissioner Danielle Outlaw – who has overseen years of surging crime, property destruction and violent attacks in the Northeast city – has had enough and is stepping down.

  She’s leaving her role in Philadelphia for “a new job with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey”, according to Fox News. 

  After overseeing a massive crime wave in Philadelphia, Mayor Jim Kenney praised her work in the city, focusing not on the merits of her work (of which there are few), but her “reform” of “racism and gender discrimination”, stating: “Commissioner Outlaw has worked relentlessly for three and a half years during an unprecedented era in our city and a number of crisis situations, and she deserves praise for her commitment to bring long-overdue reform to the Department after years of racism and gender discrimination prior to her appointment.” 

  And why not focus on the merits of her work? Fox News broke it down:

  Crime data from the Philadelphia Police Department shows there has been a 21% drop in homicides this year to date compared to the same day in 2021, when the city recorded 562 homicides throughout the year. 

  But prior to Outlaw leading the department, the data shows Philadelphia annually recorded between 246 to 391 homicides each year between 2007 and 2019.

  In 2020, when she took over, there were 499 homicides, followed by 562 in 2021 and 516 in 2022.

  

  Her last day will be September 22, and she will then become Deputy Chief Security Officer at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

  Outlaw, formerly the police chief of Portland during a time of “mass political protests”, was appointed to lead Philadelphia’s police at just 43 years old by Democratic Mayor Jim Kenney. “While I am new to Philadelphia, I am not new to the challenges of big-city, 21st century policing,” she said upon her appointment. 

  “I am appointing Danielle Outlaw because I am convinced she has the conviction, courage, and compassion needed to bring long-overdue reform to the Department,” Kenney had said at the time. 

  He continued: “With our support, she will tackle a host of difficult issues, from racism and gender discrimination, to horrid instances of sexual assault on fellow officers. These are issues that too often negatively impact women — especially women of color — within the Department. Commissioner Outlaw will implement reforms with urgency, so that racial, ethnic, and gender discrimination are not tolerated.”

  It doesn’t seem like any public officials are actually interested in their jobs in Philadelphia – perhaps, rather, just collecting their pensions. Recall in 2022 we wrote when Mayor Kenney said he was “looking forward to the time he will no longer lead the city”.

  When being interviewed by Fox 29’s Chris O’Connell, Kenney let it slip that he’s looking forward to no longer being mayor: “Everything we have in the city, over the last seven years, I worry about. I don’t enjoy the Fourth of July, I don’t enjoy the Democratic National Convention, I didn’t enjoy the NFL Draft. I’m waiting for something bad to happen all the time. I’ll be happy when I’m not here – when I’m not mayor and I can enjoy some stuff.” 

  Two peas in a productivity pod…

  

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 21:25

• 3 Reasons There's Something Sinister With The Big Push For Electric Vehicles
  3 Reasons There’s Something Sinister With The Big Push For Electric Vehicles

  Authored by Nick Giambruno via InternationalMan.com,

  25 refrigerators.

  That’s how much the additional electricity consumption per household would be if the average US home adopted electric vehicles (EVs).

  

  Congressman Thomas Massie – an electrical engineer – revealed this information while discussing with Pete Buttigieg, the Secretary of Transportation, President Biden’s plan to have 50% of cars sold in the US be electric by 2030.

  The current and future grid in most places will not be able to support each home running 25 refrigerators—not even close. Just look at California, where the grid is already buckling under the existing load.

  Massie claims, correctly, in my view, that the notion of widespread adoption of electric vehicles anytime soon is a dangerous fantasy based on political science, not sound engineering.

  Nonetheless, governments, the media, academia, large corporations, and celebrities tout an imminent “transition” to EVs as if it’s preordained from above.

  It’s not.

  They’re trying to manufacture your consent for a scam of almost unimaginable proportions.

  Below are three reasons why something sinister is going on with the big push for EVs.

  But first, a necessary clarification.

  You no doubt have heard of the term “fossil fuels” before.

  When the average person hears “fossil fuels,” they think of a dirty technology that belongs in the 1800s. Many believe they are burning dead dinosaurs to power their cars.

  They also think “fossil fuels” will destroy the planet within a decade and run out soon—despite the fact that, after water, oil is the second most abundant liquid on this planet.

  None of these ridiculous notions are true, but many people believe them. Using propaganda terms like “fossil fuels” plays a large role.

  Orwell was correct when he said that corrupting the language can corrupt people’s thoughts.

  I suggest expunging “fossil fuels” from your vocabulary in favor of hydrocarbons—a much better and more precise word.

  A hydrocarbon is a molecule made up of carbon and hydrogen atoms. These molecules are the building blocks of many different substances, including energy sources like coal, oil, and gas. These energy sources have been the backbone of the global economy for decades, providing power for industries, transportation, and homes.

  Now, on to the three reasons EVs are a giant scam at best and possibly something much worse.

  Reason #1: EVs Are Not Green

  The central premise for EVs is they help to save the planet from carbon because they use electricity instead of gas.

  It’s astounding so few think to ask, what generates the electricity that powers EVs?

  Hydrocarbons generate over 60% of the electricity in the US. That means there’s an excellent chance that oil, coal, or gas is behind the electricity charging an EV.

  It’s important to emphasize carbon is an essential element for life on this planet. It’s what humans exhale and what plants need to survive.

  After decades of propaganda, Malthusian hysterics have created a twisted perception in many people’s minds that carbon is a dangerous substance that must be reduced to save the planet.

  Let’s entertain this bogus premise momentarily and assume carbon is bad.

  Even by this logic, EVs do not really reduce carbon emissions; they just rearrange them.

  Further, extracting and processing the exotic materials needed to make EVs requires tremendous power in remote locations, which only hydrocarbons can provide.

  Additionally, EVs require an enormous amount of rare elements and metals—like lithium and cobalt—that companies mine in conditions that couldn’t remotely be considered friendly to the environment.

  Analysts estimate that each EV requires around one kilogram of rare earth elements. Extracting and processing these rare elements produces a massive amount of toxic waste. That’s why it mainly occurs in China, which doesn’t care much about environmental concerns.

  In short, the notion that EVs are green is laughable.

  It’s simply the thin patina of propaganda that governments need as a pretext to justify the astronomical taxpayer subsidies for EVs.

  Reason #2: EVs Can’t Compete Without Government Support

  For many years, governments have heavily subsidized EVs through rebates, sales tax exemptions, loans, grants, tax credits, and other means.

  According to the Wall Street Journal, US taxpayers will subsidize EVs by at least $393 billion in the coming years—more than the GDP of Hong Kong.

  To put that in perspective, if you earned $1 a second 24/7/365—about $31 million per year—it would take you over 12,677 YEARS to make $393 billion.

  And that’s not even considering the immense subsidies and government support that have occurred in the past.

  Furthermore, governments impose burdensome regulations and taxes on gasoline vehicles to make EVs seem relatively more attractive.

  Even with this enormous government support, EVs can barely compete with gasoline vehicles.

  According to J.D. Power, a consumer research firm, the average EV still costs at least 21% more than the average gasoline vehicle.

  Without government support, it’s not hard to see how the market for EVs would evaporate as they would become unaffordable for the vast majority of people.

  In other words, the EV market is a giant mirage artificially propped up by extensive government intervention.

  It begs the question, why are governments going all out to push an obviously uneconomic scam?

  While they are undoubtedly corrupt thieves and simply stupid, something more nefarious could also be at play.

  Reason #3: EVs Are About Controlling You

  EVs are spying machines.

  They collect an unimaginable amount of data on you, which governments can access easily.

  Analysts estimate that cars generate about 25 gigabytes of data every hour.

  Seeing how governments could integrate EVs into a larger high-tech control grid doesn’t take much imagination. The potential for busybodies—or worse—to abuse such a system is obvious.

  Consider this.

  The last thing any government wants is an incident like what happened with the Canadian truckers rebelling against vaccine mandates.

  Had the Canadian truckers’ vehicles been EVs, the government would have been able to stamp out the resistance much easier.

  Here’s the bottom line.

  The people really in charge do not want the average person to have genuine freedom of movement or access to independent power sources.

  They want to know everything, keep you dependent, and have the ability to control everything, just like how a farmer would with his cattle. They think of you in similar terms.

  That’s why gasoline vehicles have to go and why they are trying to herd us into EVs.

  Conclusion

  To summarize, EVs are not green, cannot compete with gas cars without enormous government support, and are probably a crucial piece of the emerging high-tech control grid.

  The solution is simple: eliminate all government subsidies and support and let EVs compete on their own merits in a totally free market.

  But that’s unlikely to happen.

  Instead, it’s only prudent to expect them to push EVs harder and harder.

  If EVs were simply government-subsidized status symbols for wealthy liberals who want to virtue signal how they think they’re saving the planet, that would be bad enough.

  But chances are, the big push for EVs represents something much worse.

  Along with 15-minute cities, carbon credits, CBDCs, digital IDs, phasing out hydrocarbons and meat, vaccine passports, an ESG social credit system, and the war on farmers, EVs are likely an integral part of the Great Reset—the dystopian future the global elite has envisioned for mankind.

  In reality, the so-called Great Reset is a high-tech form of feudalism.

  Sadly, most of humanity has no idea what is coming.

  Worse, many have become unwitting foot soldiers for this agenda because they have been gaslighted into believing they are saving the planet or acting for the greater good.

  This trend is already in motion… and the coming weeks will be pivotal.

  That’s precisely why I just released an urgent report on where this is all headed and what you can do about it… including three strategies everyone needs today. Click here to download the PDF now.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 21:05

• Murder & Drug Chaos Forces Lockdown Of Entire Texas Prison System
  Murder & Drug Chaos Forces Lockdown Of Entire Texas Prison System

  The Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) declared a statewide lockdown of all its correctional facilities on Wednesday morning, citing increased contraband-related incidents and drug-related inmate homicides.

  TDCJ said most inmate-on-inmate homicides “are tied back to illegal drugs … and over the last five years, the volume of illegal narcotics entering the system has substantially increased.”

  In response to the drug and murder epidemic in Texas jails, TDCJ is implementing the following strategies to restore order:

  • Systemwide Lockdown: Each facility will limit the movement of inmates and their contact with those outside the prison. Inmates and staff will undergo intensified searches to intercept and confiscate contraband.

  • Digital Mail: TDCJ is completing the rollout of the digital mail program. Over the last few years, there has been a significant increase in paper soaked in K2 or methamphetamines coming into our facilities. The digital mail program will halt this contraband being sent through traditional mail. Effective September 6, 2023, all inmate mail should be addressed and sent to the Digital Mail Center. All mail received this week will be delivered to the digital mail processing center. More information about this program can be found here: TDCJ News – TDCJ Digital Mail Rollout.

  • Increased K9 Searches and Other Technology: To assist in contraband detection and outside funding related to contraband, TDCJ will be deploying additional resources. Specialized search teams and narcotic dogs will be deployed to units and staff will be subject to enhanced search procedures.

  • Comprehensive Searches: All persons entering our facilities at all locations will undergo comprehensive searches.

  “Due to the fact staff will be concentrating on these search efforts, visitation will be canceled until further notice. Inmates will still have access to the phone system and tablets,” TDCJ said. 

  #TDCJ is taking swift & immediate action to address a rise in dangerous contraband & drug-related inmate homicides. The agency is implementing an immediate lockdown & comprehensive search of all correctional facilities within TDCJ. For more info, visit: https://t.co/E4ufaah3s2 pic.twitter.com/3YPwo1aRBH

  — TDCJ (@TDCJ) September 6, 2023

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

  Once the drug searches are over, normal operations will resume at correction facilities. No timeframe has been given. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 20:45

• California School To Pay $100,000 Settlement For Keeping 11-Year-Old's Gender Transition Secret
  California School To Pay $100,000 Settlement For Keeping 11-Year-Old’s Gender Transition Secret

  Authored by Brad Jones via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A California school district that was sued over allegations teachers and staff at Buena Vista Middle School in Salinas, Calif., coached an 11-year-old girl to socially transition to a male gender identity settled with the girl and her mother for $100,000.

  

  The lawsuit, filed on June 14 last year, named Spreckels Union School District, the principal at the school, and two teachers as defendants.

  Jessica Konen, the child’s mother, came forward after a leaked audio recording revealed the two teachers telling other educators about how they secretly recruited students into the school’s LGBT club at a California Teachers Association weekend conference in Palm Springs in October 2021. The CTA event was billed as the “2021 LGBTQ+ Issues Conference, Beyond the Binary: Identity & Imagining Possibilities.” The two teachers were later suspended and no longer work in the district.

  Ms. Konen told The Epoch Times she’s relieved that a settlement has finally been reached.

  “It’s a massive victory across America for myself, for my daughter, and for other parents experiencing similar situations,” she said. “Our voices made a difference.”

  While she is grateful to the Center for American Liberty for taking on the pro-bono case, she said the battle for parental rights has only begun.

  “I just feel social transitioning done in secrecy is the real evil. We need to get rid of it, period. So, the fight must continue,” she said.

  Her daughter, Alicia Konen, who is now 16, echoed her mom’s sentiments, saying she’s ready to put the experience, which she described as “evil” and “horrible,” behind her.

  According to the Center for American Liberty and allegations in the lawsuit, Alicia was recruited to join an “Equality Club,” where she was taught about bisexuality, transgender identities, and other LGBT concepts when she was in the sixth grade.

  Alicia began to use a male name and pronouns and wore a chest binder under boy’s clothes.

  School staff finally called a meeting the last day before winter break during Alicia’s seventh grade year and demanded that Ms. Konen refer to her daughter by a male name and male pronouns, she said.

  “I was definitely intimidated,” she said.

  Ms. Konen recalls feeling awkward and stressed when she was tagging Alicia’s Christmas gifts.

  She wanted to be supportive to her daughter but wasn’t ready to call her by a male name and pronouns, so she wrote “Baby” and “Sweetheart” instead.

  “I was an emotional wreck trying to process everything. I was scared to mess up or to use the wrong pronouns,” she said. “I never used the male pronouns, and I never used the name.”

  Ms. Konen warned parents to “be vigilant,” talk to teachers, and pay attention to what’s happening at local school board meetings.

  

  “Don’t be afraid to ask questions. Don’t be afraid to show your values and your opinions,” she said.

  She also urged parents to get more engaged in their children’s lives.

  “We need to fight for our kids, because if we don’t fight for our kids, they’ll fight for our kids,” she said. “Be close to your child, because somebody wants to get closer.”

  ‘I Wanted to Tell My Mom’

  Alicia’s social gender transition began when she went to see a school counselor because she was feeling depressed, she told The Epoch Times.

  “I was told by the counselor—it was brought up that I was sad because I wasn’t who I was supposed to be, and that’s kind of where it all started,” she said.

  Alicia was “pulled away” from her schoolwork, and the counselor who she said was working with the school to “socially transition kids,” put her on a Gender Support Plan, known as a GSP, which required school staff to use a male name and pronouns when referring to her, and to allow her to use the unisex teachers’ restroom instead of the girl’s facilities.

  “I was advised by the school not to tell my mom, and I was given articles on how to hide a social transition from my mom,” she said. “I was extremely confused, and honestly very scared. I wanted to tell my mom, and continually said I wanted to tell her, but I was encouraged to keep it a secret. … The school said that my mother wouldn’t support me.”

  But, throughout the ordeal which lasted for more than a year, Alicia believed her mom would support her no matter what.

  

  Alicia said she has felt better about herself since she left middle school and entered high school where she is “actually able to focus on my academics.”

  And she is comfortable with her gender.

  “I am 1,000 percent a girl. I am Alicia. That is who I am, and no one can ever change that,” she said. “I feel free finally. I feel like I’m not under control by anybody. I can finally move forward with my life and be happy.”

  The Konens hope their high-profile case will draw attention and encourage other families to challenge state and local school board policies that exclude parents from their children’s lives.

  “I think that throughout the country there will be a lot more coming forward, realizing that they were never alone,” Ms. Konen said. “There are people out there who are hurt.”

  The settlement means they’re both able to talk more freely about their experience and have considered writing a book.

  “It is a complete passion of mine to continue to spread awareness,” she said.

  Alicia said she feels “extremely bad,” for other children who were socially transitioned at school.

  “That’s one of the main reasons I wanted to come out and speak about this case, because I want to be a voice for the people who feel like they don’t have a voice.”

  Ms. Konen said the school staff took advantage of her daughter’s young mind and vulnerable state, which she called “a form of brainwashing,” and didn’t tell her that Alicia was having suicidal thoughts.

  If parents are kept in the dark about their children’s problems, they won’t be able to help support them or get them the therapy they need, she said.

  “It’s extremely dangerous,” Ms. Konen said, “What if something happens that is irreversible? … If a child only has the support of schools, what happens when they go home? What happens when they have those bad days? What happens when they’re confused at home?”

  The best way to prevent youth suicides is for school staff and parents to work together, Ms. Konen said.

  “If everyone’s included, then that is in the best interest of the child—not hiding it,” she said. “The secret stuff has to go.”

  A spokesperson for the Spreckels Union School District was not immediately available for comment.

  

  ‘Hard to Put a Dollar Value on It’

  Eric Sell, a civil rights attorney at the Center for American Liberty who represented the Konens, told The Epoch Times the school district settled the case based on the underlying allegations in the lawsuit but hasn’t admitted any fault or liability.

  “What happened to Alicia, Jessica is hard to quantify. It’s hard to put a dollar value on it,” he said.

  But the $100,000 settlement will serve as a deterrent for other school districts that continue “to propagate these policies and keep parents in the dark,” Mr. Sell said. “As far as we are aware, this is the first time a school district has had to pay a family money for secretly transitioning their kid behind their backs.”

  The Center for American liberty is interested in such cases because it has seen a systematic erosion of parental rights, “particularly by government actors and schools,” he said.

  The problem is “really apparent” in California in public schools where gender ideology is “infecting schools” and “pushing kids towards dangerous decisions and dangerous life paths,” he said.

  Children, who may or may not fully weigh all the consequences of their actions, are making decisions that can potentially lead to medicalization or surgery and irreversible damage to their own bodies, he said.

  “We’re seeing so much of this that … the Center for American Liberty has decided to focus some of its time and resources on combating this specific problem,” Mr. Sell said.

  He said “it’s absurd” that California Attorney General Rob Bonta has sued Chino Valley Unified School District over its parental notification policy requiring school staff to inform parents within a few days if their child changes his or her gender identity at school.

  “The Supreme Court has consistently held that parents have the right to direct the upbringing and education of their children,” states the Center for American Liberty on its website.

  “This includes the right to have a say in whether their children’s school socially transitions them to a different gender. Parents are denied that right when schools think they know better than parents how to raise their children and intentionally hide information from moms and dads.”

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 20:25

• Germany To More Than Triple Ammunition Purchases After Stockpile Depleted Through Ukraine 'Gifts'
  Germany To More Than Triple Ammunition Purchases After Stockpile Depleted Through Ukraine ‘Gifts’

  Amid the broader problem of Ukrainian frontlines not advancing against superior Russian artillery and vast mine fields, Europe has been scrambling to boost its military support to Kiev. But now the problem of Europe’s own diminishing defense supplies is being felt more than ever, as many predicted.

  On Wednesday German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said his country plans to drastically ramp up purchases of ammunition in 2024, in an effort to replenish Germany’s own stocks which were depleted by donations to Ukraine.

  “We aim to more than triple our spending on ammunition purchases in 2024,” he said in a speech before parliament, but without revealing further details.

  

  Ukrainian forces have been burning through shells at a much higher rate than Western countries can produce them. While Washington makes a nice show of pledging new billions to the Zelensky government, it only does limited good on the actual battlefield given more artillery and weapons cannot magically appear in only days.

  NATO countries starting months ago sounded the alarm over their own dwindling inventories, also at a moment the risk ever-remains that the Western alliance and Russia could enter a direct shooting war.

  But Germany and its European allies are working on a plan, as Reuters explains:

  Germany is in negotiations with the Netherlands and Denmark on the joint procurement of ammunition, a defence source told Reuters on Wednesday, as Western countries are scrambling to replenish stocks depleted by donations to Ukraine. Germany is in negotiations with the Netherlands and Denmark on the joint procurement of ammunition, a defence source told Reuters on Wednesday, as Western countries are scrambling to replenish stocks depleted by donations to Ukraine.

  “Germany is ready to open its framework contracts (for the procurement of ammunition) to our partners as Defence Minister Boris Pistorius pledged earlier this year,” the source said, without giving details on the kind of ammunition affected.

  Meanwhile, Michael Maloof, a former senior security policy analyst in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, has said in an interview given to Russian media that Ukraine is blowing through an estimated $100 million per day on the conflict.

  “There’s no accountability for the expenditures going on right now in Ukraine, […] but $100 million a day of spending is a lot in the minds of the American people, especially when they’re confronted with inflation. That’s real money to them,” Maloof said.

  Ukraine Money Train: Kyiv Spending $100 Million Per Day on War, Says Ousted Defence Ministerhttps://t.co/geuzseBTiR

  — Breitbart London (@BreitbartLondon) September 5, 2023

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

  He said that now former Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov recently publicized the figure. “When he [Reznikov] comes up and starts making comments like that and we’re seeing the disasters that we are in, the question then arises, why are we continuing to fund this thing? We’re not seeing results. The West is not seeing results. Europe is saying the same thing,” Maloof added.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 20:05

• Judge Reinstates Georgia's Ban On Puberty Blockers, Hormone Therapies For Minors
  Judge Reinstates Georgia’s Ban On Puberty Blockers, Hormone Therapies For Minors

  Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that Georgia’s ban on puberty blockers and hormone therapy for minors with gender dysphoria can be reinstated, citing a recent federal appeals court decision that upheld a similar Alabama law.

  

  U.S. District Judge Sarah Geraghty, an appointee of President Joe Biden, had on Aug. 20 issued a preliminary injunction (pdf) temporarily halting Georgia’s ban, which was scheduled to take effect on July 1.

  She ruled that without an injunction, the plaintiffs, who are a group of parents with anonymous middle-school-aged transgender children, would experience “irreparable harm.” The judge stated that puberty blockers and hormone treatments had “been recommended by their health care providers in light of their individual diagnoses and mental health needs.”

  However, on the same day the injunction was ordered, the 11th Circuit of Appeals ruled that a similar ban in Alabama could proceed. The 11th Circuit hears appeals from Georgia as well.

  After the appeals court ruling, Alabama Attorney General Chris Carr urged Judge Geraghty to vacate her injunction.

  On Tuesday, Judge Geraghty put the injunction on hold pending a final decision in that case, saying it “rests on legal grounds that have been squarely rejected by the panel” in the Alabama case, but that further appeals in that matter were underway.

  Georgia’s ban encompasses two primary provisions: firstly, it bars minors from obtaining hormone replacement therapies and sex reassignment surgeries to address their gender dysphoria from licensed health care facilities. Secondly, it stipulates that medical providers who contravene this law risk losing their licenses.

  However, the initial complaint solely focused on hormone therapy and did not encompass any concerns related to surgery.

  The plaintiffs brought the lawsuit against the state in June. They contend that the ban infringes upon parents’ rights to make medical choices concerning the health and welfare of their children. It further alleges that the ban obstructs parents from obtaining suitable medical care for their children who are grappling with gender dysphoria.

  A spokesperson for Mr. Carr welcomed Judge Geraghty’s Tuesday ruling.

  “We are pleased with the court’s decision and will continue fighting to protect the health and well-being of Georgia’s children,” said Kara Richardson in a statement.

  In March, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, a Republican, approved a state law that prohibits specific medical procedures and treatments for minors who suffer from gender dysphoria, which refers to the emotional distress experienced by some individuals who don’t feel their biological sex matches their “gender identity.”

  That law notes there’s been a “massive unexplained rise in diagnoses of gender dysphoria among children over the past 10 years, with most of those experiencing this phenomenon being girls.”

  The Georgia law bars minors from undergoing transgender surgeries, although this aspect of the law was not under consideration in the case presided over by Judge Geraghty.

  Approximately six federal courts have issued injunctions against restrictions on what is commonly referred to as “gender-affirming care” for minors. Advocates assert that such care is deemed “medically necessary” as it can significantly reduce the risk of individuals experiencing gender dysphoria resorting to suicide.

  Opponents challenge the idea that transgender procedures definitively reduce suicide rates. A March research review, which focused solely on suicide likelihood, found inconclusive results.

  This uncertainty is due to a lack of control for the time elapsed after transgender procedures. Researchers suggest that individuals may experience an initial improvement in mental health, but over time, this effect could diminish, potentially leading to a return of pre-procedure levels of suicidal ideation.

  “There may be implications for the informed-consent process of gender-affirming treatment given the current lack of methodological robustness of the literature reviewed,” the study authors wrote.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 19:45

• Gucci? A Wig Shop? Unprosecuted Crime, Economic Woes Turn Beverly Hills Into Ghost Town
  Gucci? A Wig Shop? Unprosecuted Crime, Economic Woes Turn Beverly Hills Into Ghost Town

  Residents of the upscale Southern California enclave of Beverly Hills are getting what they voted for, after a spate of looting has turned the liberal utopia into a virtual ghost town amid a souring economic backdrop that’s seen 11 popular shops entirely shuttered – including the iconic Barneys location.

  In review:

  Damn they robbed the Gucci store in Beverly Hills 😭😭😭 pic.twitter.com/Tq3KBwc1Ct

  — Shannonnn sharpes Burner (PARODY Account) (@shannonsharpeee) August 1, 2023

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

  (not the first time)

  Then it was wigs…

  Across town in Glendale, thieves stole around $300,000 worth of merchandise from the Yves Saint Laurent store.

  Now, a viral TikTok video reveals the ghost town Beverly Hills has become.

  @cody90210 Its giving Recesion Core #santamonica #thirdstreetpromenade #thirdstreet #losangeles #recession2023 #recessioncore #bailout ♬ Love – Live From The Village – Keyshia Cole

  Other stores which have closed include Brooks Brothers, All Saints, and high-end women’s fashion store Escada, according to the Daily Mail, which notes that both Escada and Barneys have filed for bankruptcy in recent years.

  

  The closed shops, which also include convenience retailers like Rite Aid and Chipotle, and even popular workout class option SoulCycle, have shuttered their doors on Wilshire Boulevard, leaving the area bereft of its former appeal. Their sad decline marks a departure from the area’s lengthy heyday, which even saw band Weezer pen a song with the lyrics ‘Beverly Hills, that’s where I want to be.’

  The reasons for the ample number of closures vary, as many brands see a decrease in demand for in-person retail experiences, while others pivot business strategies following acquisitions by other brands. The downturned economy has also negatively impacted most brands, but especially those marketing luxury products. -Daily Mail

  Meanwhile, retailers in California are deailing with a major crime wave and District Attorneys who refuse to prosecute criminals.

  https://www.tiktok.com/embed.js

   

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 19:25

• The Pentagon Wants To Affirm Your Gender Transition (But Not If You're Avoiding The Draft)
  The Pentagon Wants To Affirm Your Gender Transition (But Not If You’re Avoiding The Draft)

  Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

  The costumed bureaucrats at the Pentagon we call “generals” have spent much of the last decade enthusiastically assisting three different administrations in “affirming” military employees who “transition” or consider themselves transgender.

  Openly identifying as transgender has been permitted in the US military since 2016 under the Obama administration. The Trump administration did not reverse this policy but took steps to limit the number of employees undergoing sex-change surgeries and other active efforts at “transitioning.”

  Since 2021, however, the Pentagon has returned to the earlier Obama-era policy of paying for surgeries, hormone usage, and related treatments requested by military employees. From 2007 to 2009, more than $3 million has been spent on surgeries, with and additional $12 million spent on related procedures.

  The Pentagon in recent years has fallen all over itself to pander to LGBT interest groups, as can be seen in this military recruitment video titled “Emma,” and in the fact that the Navy promoted as “non-binary” drag queen as the face of one of the Navy’s recruitment drives. 

  Given that the Pentagon has made it clear it is devoted to affirming these life choices among potential recruits, it would be reasonable to assume that the Pentagon rejects the idea that one’s “assigned sex” at birth has any objective meaning at all. After all, truly affirming the transgender ideology requires rejecting the notion that “men are men” or “women are women.” 

  That assumption would be wrong.

  

  When it comes to the military draft – which is presently inactive and called the “selective service program” – the military absolutely insists that “men are men.”

  In other words, the military wants to make sure no man can get out of the forced military service by claiming to be a woman. Thus, the Selective Service System (SSS) makes it quite clear that “the registration requirement on gender assigned at birth and not on gender identity or on gender reassignment.”

  In other words, maintaining the interests of the empire trumps transgenderism. 

  In its FAQ on “who needs to register,” the SSS states:

  Selective Service bases the registration requirement on gender assigned at birth and not on gender identity or on gender reassignment. Individuals who are born male and changed their gender to female are still required to register. Individuals who are born female and changed their gender to male are not required to register.

  The legal authority is based on the Military Selective Service Act (MSSA), which does not address gender identify or transgender persons. In addition, Presidential Proclamation 4771 refers to “males” who were “born” on or after January 1, 1960. Thus, Selective Service interprets the MSSA as applying to gender at birth because Congress did not contemplate transgender persons or a person’s gender identity when it required on “males” to register when the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940 was passed and amended by the Selective Service Act of 1948 to create the Selective Service System. Until Congress amends the MSSA or passes a separate law addressing transsexuals and gender identity, Selective Service must follow the intent of Congress when it required only males to register—the registration requirement is based on gender at birth.

  In the event of a resumption of the draft, individuals born male who have changed their gender to female can file a claim for an exemption from military service if they receive an order to report for examination or induction.

  There are a couple of ways we can interpret this discrepancy.

  • One way is to note simply that Congress has been unwilling to change the definition of who is eligible to be drafted, regardless of White House policy Thus, even if the administration wants to “affirm” the claimed identities of transgender military employees, it can only do so much in terms of changing selective service policy. 

  • As second way of looking at this is to note that the regime’s toying around with transgender ideology issues comes to an abrupt halt when that ideology might threaten the regime’s prerogatives to force the maximum number of American men into military service. 

  Both interpretations are likely true.

  

  The “needs” of the empire always come before social-policy pandering to select interest groups.

  But it’s also true Congress appears unenthusiastic about explicitly changing SS policy. 

  It’s easy to see, however, how Washington could “fix” this apparent inconsistency in policy. We will likely hear more and more calls for the selective service to include women as well. It’s already moving in that direction. This removes the problem of insisting that everyone who is a male “at birth” register for the draft regardless of stated “identity.” Rather than debate  who is a man, it’s easier to simply force everyone to register for the draft.

  Certainly, we have no reason to expect Congress to go in the opposite direction and make it possible for men to avoid the draft simply by “identifying as a woman.”

  It’s exceedingly unlikely Republican hawks would risk giving such a wide-open loophole to men seeking to avoid being enslaved by the regime for a period of years as conscripts. 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 19:05

• "They're Trying To Get Our IP" – Congressman Slams China's SMIC For Violating Chip Sanctions
  “They’re Trying To Get Our IP” – Congressman Slams China’s SMIC For Violating Chip Sanctions

  The Biden administration’s efforts to limit China’s access to high-tech semiconductor chips and advanced machinery for supercomputing and AI have yet to be successful. There is growing frustration in Washington this week after Bloomberg revealed that Huawei Technologies Co. and China’s top chipmaker, built a new smartphone using an advanced 7-nanometer processor. 

  On Tuesday, US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters he needs “more information” on the “character and composition” of Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp.’s Kirin 9000s chip powering Huawei’s Mate 60 Pro. Financial Times reported Sullivan was responding to a question during a briefing when a reporter asked whether US controls on exports of advanced semiconductors were being circumvented by Beijing. 

  TechInsights conducted a complete teardown of the Mate 60 Pro for Bloomberg. They found that the “processor is the first to utilize SMIC’s most advanced 7nm technology and suggests the Chinese government is making some headway in attempts to build a domestic chip ecosystem.” 

  

  For some context, Apple’s current iPhones use 4nm chips. The introduction of new iPhone 15 models will likely be powered by 3nm next week. Even though there is a sizeable gap between Huawei’s 7nm powered smartphone and Apple’s 4nm, it demonstrates the possibility that sanctions have been an ineffective weapon by Washington against China. 

  Dan Hutcheson, the vice-chair of TechInsights, told FT that Huawei’s Mate 60 Pro “demonstrates the technical progress” the country’s chip sector has made despite being limited to the latest ultraviolet lithography tools due to Western sanctions. 

  Hutcheson warned the development could spark another wave of Western chip sanctions on China to “curtail China’s access to critical manufacturing technologies.” 

  … and this development has caused a stir in Washington, as Bloomberg’s Annmarie Hordern reported Wednesday morning:

  When asked about whether SMIC violated trade sanctions by supplying Huawei with a new smartphone chip, @RepMcCaul said SMIC “warrants investigation” and it “looks like” they violated sanctions by supplying Huawei. SMIC continues “to try to get our intellectual property.”

  When asked about whether SMIC violated trade sanctions by supplying Huawei with a new smartphone chip, @RepMcCaul said SMIC “warrants investigation” and it “looks like” they violated sanctions by supplying Huawei. SMIC continues “to try to get our intellectual property.”

  — annmarie hordern (@annmarie) September 6, 2023

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

  Meanwhile, the Global Times, a state-run communist newspaper in China, posted this meme on X, saying, “Huawei breaks free from US tech blockade.” 

  

  Ming-Chi Kuo, analyst at TF International Securities, told clients in a note that Huawei’s new smartphone could revive its handheld business. 

  Goldman told clients via its GS Global Equities Call this morning to “Keep an eye on AAPL today following a WSJ report that China ordered officials not to use iPhones and other foreign – branded devices for work or bring them to government offices. ( WSJ ) On this note, semi/chip names were bid overnight following introduction of a new Huawei phone sparking hopes for the domestic semiconductor industry.” 

  This development is an ominous sign that Washington’s global arsenal of sanctions to prevent other powers from rising is failing (read: here) amid the emergence of a multi-polar world that is likely here to stay.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 18:45

• The Next Crisis Is Anyone's Guess, But The Government Is Ready To Lockdown The Nation
  The Next Crisis Is Anyone’s Guess, But The Government Is Ready To Lockdown The Nation

  Authored by John & Nisha Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

  “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.”

  – H.L. Mencken

  First came 9/11, which the government used to transform itself into a police state.

  Then the COVID-19 pandemic hit, which the police state used to test out its lockdown powers.

  In light of the government’s tendency to exploit crises (legitimate or manufactured) and capitalize on the nation’s heightened emotions, confusion and fear as a means of extending the reach of the police state, one has to wonder what so-called crisis it will declare next.

  It’s a simple enough formula: first, you create fear, then you capitalize on it by seizing power.

  Frankly, it doesn’t even matter what the nature of the next national emergency might be (terrorism, civil unrest, economic collapse, a health scare, or the environment) as long as it allows the government to lockdown the nation and justify all manner of tyranny in the so-called name of national security.

  Cue the Emergency State.

  Terrorist attacks, mass shootings, “unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters”: the government has been anticipating and preparing for such crises for years now.

  As David C. Unger writes for the New York Times: “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness have given way to permanent crisis management: to policing the planet and fighting preventative wars of ideological containment, usually on terrain chosen by, and favorable to, our enemies. Limited government and constitutional accountability have been shouldered aside by the kind of imperial presidency our constitutional system was explicitly designed to prevent.”

  Here’s what we know: given the rate at which the government keeps devising new ways to establish itself as the “solution” to all of our worldly problems at taxpayer expense, each subsequent crisis ushers in ever larger expansions of government power and less individual liberty.

  This is the slippery slope to outright tyranny.

  

  You see, once the government acquires (and uses) authoritarian powers—to spy on its citizens, to carry out surveillance, to transform its police forces into extensions of the military, to seize taxpayer funds, to wage endless wars, to censor and silence dissidents, to identify potential troublemakers, to detain citizens without due process—it does not voluntarily relinquish them.

  The lesson for the ages is this: once any government is allowed to overreach and expand its powers, it’s almost impossible to put the genie back in the bottle. As Harvard constitutional law professor Laurence Tribe recognizes, “The dictatorial hunger for power is insatiable.”

  Indeed, the history of the United States is a testament to the old adage that liberty decreases as government (and government bureaucracy) grows. To put it another way, as government expands, liberty contracts.

  In this way, every crisis since the nation’s early beginnings has become a make-work opportunity for the government.

  Each crisis has also been a test to see how far “we the people” would allow the government to sidestep the Constitution in the so-called name of national security; a test to see how well we have assimilated the government’s lessons in compliance, fear and police state tactics; a test to see how quickly we’ll march in lockstep with the government’s dictates, no questions asked; and a test to see how little resistance we offer up to the government’s power grabs when made in the name of national security.

  Most critically of all, it has been a test to see whether the Constitution—and our commitment to the principles enshrined in the Bill of Rights—could survive a national crisis and true state of emergency.

  Unfortunately, we’ve been failing this particular test for a long time now.

  Indeed, the powers-that-be have been pushing our buttons and herding us along like so much cattle since World War II, at least, starting with the Japanese attacks on Pearl Harbor, which not only propelled the U.S. into World War II but also unified the American people in their opposition to a common enemy.

  That fear of attack by foreign threats, conveniently torqued by the growing military industrial complex, in turn gave rise to the Cold War era’s “Red Scare.” Promulgated through government propaganda, paranoia and manipulation, anti-Communist sentiments boiled over into a mass hysteria that viewed anyone and everyone as suspect: your friends, the next-door neighbor, even your family members could be a Communist subversive.

  This hysteria, which culminated in hearings before the House Un-American Activities Committee, where hundreds of Americans were called before Congress to testify about their so-called Communist affiliations and intimidated into making false confessions, also paved the way for the rise of an all-knowing, all-seeing governmental surveillance state.

  By the time 9/11 rolled around, all George W. Bush had to do was claim the country was being invaded by terrorists, and the government used the USA Patriot Act to claim greater powers to spy, search, detain and arrest American citizens in order to keep America safe.

  By way of the National Defense Authorization Act, Barack Obama continued Bush’s trend of undermining the Constitution, going so far as to give the military the power to strip Americans of their constitutional rights, label them extremists, and detain them indefinitely without trial, all in the name of keeping America safe.

  Despite the fact that the breadth of the military’s power to detain American citizens violates not only U.S. law and the Constitution but also international laws, the government has refused to relinquish its detention powers made possible by the NDAA.

  Then Donald Trump took office, claiming the country was being invaded by dangerous immigrants and insisting that the only way to keep America safe was to expand the reach of the border police, empower the military to “assist” with border control, and essentially turn the country into a Constitution-free zone.

  That so-called immigration crisis then morphed into multiple crises (domestic extremism, the COVID-19 pandemic, race wars, civil unrest, etc.) that the government has been eager to use in order to expand its powers.

  Joe Biden, in turn, has made every effort to expand the reach of the militarized police state, pledging to hire 87,000 more IRS agents and 100,000 police officers, and allowing the FBI to operate as standing army.

  What the next crisis will be is anyone’s guess, but you can be sure that there will be a next crisis.

  So, what should you expect if the government decides to declare another state of emergency and institutes a nationwide lockdown?

  You should expect more of the same, only worse.

  More compliance, less resistance.

  More fear-mongering, mind-control tactics and less tolerance for those who question the government’s propaganda-driven narratives.

  Most of all, you should expect more tyranny and less freedom.

  Given the government’s past track record and its long-anticipated plans for using armed forces to solve domestic political and social problems in response to a future crisis, there’s every reason to worry about what comes next.

  Mark my words: as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, if and when another crisis arises—if and when a nationwide lockdown finally hits—if and when martial law is enacted with little real outcry or resistance from the public— then we will truly understand the extent to which the powers-that-be have fully succeeded in acclimating us to a state of affairs in which the government has all the power and “we the people” have none. 

  In the meantime, if all we do to reclaim our freedoms and regain control over our runaway government is vote for yet another puppet of the Deep State, by the time the next crisis arises, it may well be too late.

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 18:25

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Escobar: No Respite For France As A 'New Africa' Rises
  Escobar: No Respite For France As A ‘New Africa’ Rises

  Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Cradle,

  Like dominos, African states are one by one falling outside the shackles of neocolonialism. Chad, Guinea, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, and now Gabon are saying ‘non’ to France’s longtime domination of African financial, political, economic, and security affairs.

  

  By adding two new African member-states to its roster, last week’s summit in Johannesburg heralding the expanded BRICS 11 showed once again that Eurasian integration is inextricably linked to the integration of Afro-Eurasia.

  Belarus is now proposing to hold a joint summit between BRICS 11, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).  President Aleksandr Lukashenko’s vision for the convergence of these multilateral organizations may, in due time, lead to the Mother of All Multipolarity Summits.

  But Afro-Eurasia is a much more complicated proposition. Africa still lags far behind its Eurasian cousins on the road toward breaking the shackles of neocolonialism.   

  The continent today faces horrendous odds in its fight against the deeply entrenched financial and political institutions of colonization, especially when it comes to smashing French monetary hegemony in the form of the Franc CFA – or the Communauté Financière Africaine (African Financial Community). 

  Still, one domino is falling after another – Chad, Guinea, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger and now Gabon. This process has already turned Burkina Faso’s President Captain Ibrahim Traoré, into a new hero of the multipolar world – as a dazed and confused collective west can’t even begin to comprehend the blowback represented by its 8 coups in West and Central Africa in less than 3 years. 

  Bye bye Bongo 

  Military officers decided to take power in Gabon after hyper pro-France President Ali Bongo won a dodgy election that “lacked credibility.” Institutions were dissolved. Borders with Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, and the Republic of Congo were closed. All security deals with France were annulled. No one knows what will happen with the French military base.

  All that was as popular as it comes: soldiers took to the streets of the capital Libreville in joyful singing, cheered on by onlookers.  

  Bongo and his father, who preceded him, have ruled Gabon since 1967. He was educated at a French private school and graduated from the Sorbonne. Gabon is a small nation of 2.4 million with a small army of 5,000 personnel that could fit into Donald Trump’s penthouse. Over 30 percent of the population lives on less than $1 a day, and in over 60 percent of regions have zero access to healthcare and drinking water. 

  The military qualified Bongo’s 14-year rule as leading to a “deterioration in social cohesion” that was plunging the country “into chaos.”

  On cue, French mining company Eramet suspended its operations after the coup. That’s a near monopoly. Gabon is all about lavish mineral wealth – in gold, diamonds, manganese, uranium, niobium, iron ore, not to mention oil, natural gas, and hydropower. In OPEC-member Gabon, virtually the whole economy revolves around mining.   

  The case of Niger is even more complex. France exploits uranium and high-purity petrol as well as other types of mineral wealth. And the Americans are on site, operating three bases in Niger with up to 4,000 military personnel. The key strategic node in their ‘Empire of Bases’ is the drone facility in Agadez, known as Niger Air Base 201, the second-largest in Africa after Djibouti.  

  French and American interests clash, though, when it comes to the saga over the Trans-Sahara gas pipeline. After Washington broke the umbilical steel cord between Russia and Europe by bombing the Nord Streams, the EU, and especially Germany, badly needed an alternative. 

  Algerian gas supply can barely cover southern Europe. American gas is horribly expensive.

  The ideal solution for Europeans would be Nigerian gas crossing the Sahara and then the deep Mediterranean. 

  Nigeria, with 5,7 trillion cubic meters, has even more gas than Algeria and possibly Venezuela. By comparison, Norway has 2 trillion cubic meters. But Nigeria’s problem is how to pump its gas to distant customers – so Niger becomes an essential transit country.  

  When it comes to Niger’s role, energy is actually a much bigger game than the oft-touted uranium – which in fact is not that strategic either for France or the EU because Niger is only the 5th largest world supplier, way behind Kazakhstan and Canada. 
  Still, the ultimate French nightmare is losing the juicy uranium deals plus a Mali remix: Russia, post-Prighozin, arriving in Niger in full force with a simultaneous expulsion of the French military. 

  Adding Gabon only makes things dicier. Rising Russian influence could lead to boosting supply lines to rebels in Cameroon and Nigeria, and privileged access to the Central African Republic, where Russian presence is already strong.  

  It’s no wonder that Francophile Paul Biya, in power for 41 years in Cameroon, has opted for a purge of his Armed Forces after the coup in Gabon. Cameroon may be the next domino to fall.

  ECOWAS meets AFRICOM

  The Americans, as it stands, are playing Sphynx. There’s no evidence so far that Niger’s military wants the Agadez base shut down. The Pentagon has invested a fortune in their bases to spy on a great deal of the Sahel and, most of all, Libya. 
  About the only thing Paris and Washington agree on is that, under the cover of ECOWAS (the Economic Community of West African States), the hardest possible sanctions should be slapped on one of the world’s poorest nations (where only 21% of the population has access to electricity) – and they should be much worse than those imposed on the Ivory Coast in 2010.  

  Then there’s the threat of war. Imagine the absurdity of ECOWAS invading a country that is already fighting two wars on terror on two separate fronts: Against Boko Haram in the southeast and against ISIS in the Tri-Border region.

  ECOWAS, one of 8 African political and economic unions, is a proverbial mess. It packs 15 member nations – Francophone, Anglophone and one Lusophone – in Central and West Africa, and it is rife with internal division.

  The French and the Americans first wanted ECOWAS to invade Niger as their “peacekeeping” puppet. But that didn’t work because of popular pressure against it. So, they switched to some form of diplomacy. Still, troops remain on stand-by, and a mysterious “D-Day” has been set for the invasion. 

  The role of the African Union (AU) is even murkier. Initially, they stood against the coup and suspended Niger’s membership. Then they turned around and condemned the possible western-backed invasion. Neighbors have closed their borders with Niger.  

  ECOWAS will implode without US, France, and NATO backing. Already it’s essentially a toothless chihuahua – especially after Russia and China have demonstrated via the BRICS summit their soft power across Africa. 

  Western policy in the Sahel maelstrom seems to consist of salvaging anything they can from a possible unmitigated debacle – even as the stoic people in Niger are impervious to whatever narrative the west is trying to concoct. 

  It’s important to keep in mind that Niger’s main party, the “National Movement for the Defense of the Homeland” represented by General Abdourahamane Tchiani, has been supported by the Pentagon – complete with military training – from the beginning.  

  The Pentagon is deeply implanted in Africa and connected to 53 nations. The main US concept since the early 2000s was always to militarize Africa and turn it into War on Terror fodder. As the Dick Cheney regime spun it in 2002: “Africa is a strategic priority in fighting terrorism.” 

  That’s the basis for the US military command AFRICOM and countless “cooperative partnerships” set up in bilateral agreements. For all practical purposes, AFRICOM has been occupying large swathes of Africa since 2007.

  How sweet is my colonial franc

  It is absolutely impossible for anyone across the Global South, Global Majority, or “Global Globe” (copyright Lukashenko) to understand Africa’s current turmoil without understanding the nuts and bolts of French neocolonialism. 

  The key, of course, is the CFA franc, the “colonial franc” introduced in 1945 in French Africa, which still survives even after the CFA – with a nifty terminological twist – began to stand for “African Financial Community”. 

  The whole world remembers that after the 2008 global financial crisis, Libya’s Leader Muammar Gaddafi called for the establishment of a pan-African currency pegged to gold. 

  At the time, Libya had about 150 tons of gold, kept at home, and not in London, Paris, or New York banks. With a little more gold, that pan-African currency would have its own independent financial center in Tripoli – and everything based on a sovereign gold reserve. 

  For scores of African nations, that was the definitive Plan B to bypass the western financial system. 

  The whole world also remembers what happened in 2011. The first airstrike on Libya came from a French Mirage fighter jet.  France’s bombing campaign started even before the end of emergency talks in Paris between western leaders. 

  In March 2011, France became the first country in the world to recognize the rebel National Transitional Council as the legitimate government of Libya. In 2015, the notoriously hacked emails of former US secretary of state Hillary Clinton revealed what France was up to in Libya: “The desire to achieve a greater share in Libyan oil production,” to increase French influence in North Africa, and to block Gaddafi’s plans to create a pan-African currency that would replace the CFA franc printed in France. 

  It is no wonder the collective west is terrified of Russia in Africa – and not just because of the changing of the guard in Chad, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, and now Gabon: Moscow has never sought to rob or enslave Africa. 

  Russia treats Africans as sovereign people, does not engage in Forever Wars, and does not drain Africa of resources while paying a pittance for them. Meanwhile, French intel and CIA “foreign policy” translate into corrupting African leaders to the core and snuffing out those that are incorruptible. 

  You have the right to no monetary policy 

  The CFA racket makes the Mafia look like street punks. It means essentially that the monetary policy of several sovereign African nations is controlled by the French Treasury in Paris.

  The Central Bank of each African nation was initially required to keep at least 65 percent of their annual foreign exchange reserves in an “operation account” held at the French Treasury, plus another 20 percent to cover financial “liabilities.” 

  Even after some mild “reforms” were enacted since September 2005, these nations were still required to transfer 50 percent of their foreign exchange to Paris, plus 20 percent V.A.T.

  And it gets worse. The CFA Central Banks impose a cap on credit to each member country. The French Treasury invests these African foreign reserves in its own name on the Paris bourse and pulls in massive profits on Africa’s dime.

  The hard fact is that more than 80 percent of foreign reserves of African nations have been in “operation accounts” controlled by the French Treasury since 1961. In a nutshell, none of these states has sovereignty over their monetary policy. 

  But the theft doesn’t stop there: the French Treasury uses African reserves as if they were French capital, as collateral in pledging assets to French payments to the EU and the ECB. 

  Across the “FranceAfrique” spectrum, France still, today, controls the currency, foreign reserves, the comprador elites, and trade business. 

  The examples are rife: French conglomerate Bolloré’s control of port and marine transport throughout West Africa; Bouygues/Vinci dominate construction and public works, water, and electricity distribution; Total has huge stakes in oil and gas. And then there’s France Telecom and big banking – Societe Generale, Credit Lyonnais, BNP-Paribas, AXA (insurance), and so forth. 

  France de facto controls the overwhelming majority of infrastructure in Francophone Africa. It is a virtual monopoly. 

  “FranceAfrique” is all about hardcore neocolonialism. Policies are issued by the President of the Republic of France and his “African cell.” They have nothing to do with parliament, or any democratic process, since the times of Charles De Gaulle. 

  The “African cell” is a sort of General Command. They use the French military apparatus to install “friendly” comprador leaders and get rid of those that threaten the system. There’s no diplomacy involved. Currently, the cell reports exclusively to Le Petit Roi, Emmanuel Macron.  

  Caravans of drugs, diamonds, and gold

  Paris completely supervised the assassination of Burkina Faso’s anti-colonial leader Thomas Sankara, in 1987. Sankara had risen to power via a popular coup in 1983, only to be overthrown and assassinated four years later. 

  As for the real “war on terror” in the African Sahel, it has nothing to do with the infantile fictions sold in the West. There are no Arab “terrorists” in the Sahel, as I saw when backpacking across West Africa a few months before 9/11. They are locals who converted to Salafism online, intent on setting up an Islamic State to better control smuggling routes across the Sahel. 

  Those fabled ancient salt caravans plying the Sahel from Mali to southern Europe and West Asia are now caravans of drugs, diamonds, and gold. This is what funded Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), for instance, then supported by Wahhabi lunatics in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. 

  After Libya was destroyed by NATO in early 2011, there was no more “protection,” so the western-backed Salafi-jihadis who fought against Gaddafi offered the Sahel smugglers the same protection as before – plus a lot of weapons.

  Assorted Mali tribes continue the merry smuggling of anything they fancy. AQIM still extracts illegal taxation. ISIS in Libya is deep into human and narcotics trafficking. And Boko Haram wallows in the cocaine and heroin market.  

  There is a degree of African cooperation to fight these outfits. There was something called the G5 Sahel, focused on security and development. But after Burkina Faso, Niger, Mali, and Chad went the military route, only Mauritania remains. The new West Africa Junta Belt, of course, wants to destroy terror groups, but most of all, they want to fight FranceAfrique, and the fact that their national interests are always decided in Paris. 

  France has for decades made sure there’s very little intra-Africa trade. Landlocked nations badly need neighbors for transit. They mostly produce raw materials for export. There are virtually no decent storage facilities, feeble energy supply, and terrible intra-African transportation infrastructure: that’s what Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) projects are bent on addressing in Africa.  

  In March 2018, 44 heads of state came up with the African Continental Free Trade Area (ACFTA) – the largest in the world in terms of population (1.3 billion people) and geography. In January 2022, they established the Pan-African Payment and Settlement System (PAPSS) – focused on payments for companies in Africa in local currencies. 

  So inevitably, they will be going for a common currency further on down the road. Guess what’s in their way: the Paris-imposed CFA. 

  A few cosmetic measures still guarantee direct control by the French Treasury on any possible new African currency set up, preference for French companies in bidding processes, monopolies, and the stationing of French troops. The coup in Niger represents a sort of “we’re not gonna take it anymore.”

  All of the above illustrates what the indispensable economist Michael Hudson has been detailing in all his works: the power of the extractivist model. Hudson has shown how the bottom line is control of the world’s resources; that’s what defines a global power, and in the case of France, a global mid-ranking power.

  France has shown how easy it is to control resources via control of monetary policy and setting up monopolies in these resource-rich nations to extract and export, using virtual slave labor with zero environmental or health regulations. 

  It’s also essential for exploitative neocolonialism to keep those resource-rich nations from using their own resources to grow their own economies. But now the African dominoes are finally saying, “The game is over.” Is true decolonization finally on the horizon? 

  Tyler Durden
  Wed, 09/06/2023 – 02:00

• The Global War On Thought Crime
  The Global War On Thought Crime

  Authored by David James via The Brownstone Institute,

  Laws to ban disinformation and misinformation are being introduced across the West, with the partial exception being the US, which has the First Amendment so the techniques to censor have had to be more clandestine.

  In Europe, the UK, and Australia, where free speech is not as overtly protected, governments have legislated directly.

  The EU Commission is now applying the ‘Digital Services Act’ (DSA), a thinly disguised censorship law. 

  In Australia the government is seeking to provide the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) with “new powers to hold digital platforms to account and improve efforts to combat harmful misinformation and disinformation.”

  

  One effective response to these oppressive laws may come from a surprising source: literary criticism. The words being used, which are prefixes added to the word “information,” are a sly misdirection. Information, whether in a book, article or post is a passive artefact. It cannot do anything, so it cannot break a law. The Nazis burned books, but they didn’t arrest them and put them in jail. So when legislators seek to ban “disinformation,” they cannot mean the information itself. Rather, they are targeting the creation of meaning. 

  The authorities use variants of the word “information” to create the impression that what is at issue is objective truth but that is not the focus. Do these laws, for example, apply to the forecasts of economists or financial analysts, who routinely make predictions that are wrong? Of course not. Yet economic or financial forecasts, if believed, could be quite harmful to people.

  The laws are instead designed to attack the intent of the writers to create meanings that are not congruent with the governments’ official position. ‘Disinformation’ is defined in dictionaries as information that is intended to mislead and to cause harm. ‘Misinformation’ has no such intent and is just an error, but even then that means determining what is in the author’s mind. ‘Mal-information’ is considered to be something that is true, but that there is an intention to cause harm.

  Determining a writer’s intent is extremely problematic because we cannot get into another person’s mind; we can only speculate on the basis of their behaviour. That is largely why in literary criticism there is a notion called the Intentional Fallacy, which says that the meaning of a text cannot be limited to the intention of the author, nor is it possible to know definitively what that intention is from the work. The meanings derived from Shakespeare’s works, for example, are so multifarious that many of them cannot possibly have been in the Bard’s mind when he wrote the plays 400 years ago. 

  How do we know, for example, that there is no irony, double meaning, pretence or other artifice in a social media post or article? My former supervisor, a world expert on irony, used to walk around the university campus wearing a T-shirt saying: “How do you know I am being ironic?” The point was that you can never know what is actually in a person’s mind, which is why intent is so difficult to prove in a court of law.

  That is the first problem.

  The second one is that, if the creation of meaning is the target of the proposed law – to proscribe meanings considered unacceptable by the authorities – how do we know what meaning the recipients will get? A literary theory, broadly under the umbrella term ‘deconstructionism,’ claims that there are as many meanings from a text as there are readers and that “the author is dead.” 

  While this is an exaggeration, it is indisputable that different readers get different meanings from the same texts. Some people reading this article, for example, might be persuaded while others might consider it evidence of a sinister agenda. As a career journalist I have always been shocked at the variability of reader’s responses to even the most simple of articles. Glance at the comments on social media posts and you will see an extreme array of views, ranging from positive to intense hostility.

  To state the obvious, we all think for ourselves and inevitably form different views, and see different meanings. Anti-disinformation legislation, which is justified as protecting people from bad influences for the common good, is not merely patronising and infantilising, it treats citizens as mere machines ingesting data – robots, not humans. That is simply wrong.

  Governments often make incorrect claims, and made many during Covid. 

  In Australia the authorities said lockdowns would only last a few weeks to “flatten the curve.” In the event they were imposed for over a year and there never was a “curve.” According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics 2020 and 2021 had the lowest levels of deaths from respiratory illness since records have been kept.

  Governments will not apply the same standards to themselves, though, because governments always intend well (that comment may or may not be intended to be ironic; I leave it up to the reader to decide). 

  There is reason to think these laws will fail to achieve the desired result. The censorship regimes have a quantitative bias. They operate on the assumption that if a sufficient proportion of social media and other types of “information” is skewed towards pushing state propaganda, then the audience will inevitably be persuaded to believe the authorities. 

  But what is at issue is meaning, not the amount of messaging. Repetitious expressions of the government’s preferred narrative, especially ad hominem attacks like accusing anyone asking questions of being a conspiracy theorist, eventually become meaningless.

  By contrast just one well-researched and well-argued post or article can permanently persuade readers to an anti-government view because it is more meaningful. I can recall reading pieces about Covid, including on Brownstone, that led inexorably to the conclusion that the authorities were lying and that something was very wrong. As a consequence the voluminous, mass media coverage supporting the government line just appeared to be meaningless noise. It was only of interest in exposing how the authorities were trying to manipulate the “narrative” – a debased word was once mainly used in a literary context – to cover their malfeasance. 

  In their push to cancel unapproved content, out-of-control governments are seeking to penalise what George Orwell called “thought crimes.”

  But they will never be able to truly stop people thinking for themselves, nor will they ever definitively know either the writer’s intent or what meaning people will ultimately derive.

  It is bad law, and it will eventually fail because it is, in itself, predicated on disinformation.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 23:40

• Six Red Flags Pointing To China's Economic Slowdown
  Six Red Flags Pointing To China’s Economic Slowdown

  The People’s Republic of China is the world’s second-largest economy, responsible for one quarter of global GDP growth this millennium – so when the country catches a cold, the world notices.

  The past several months have seen an avalanche of bad economic news for China, putting the country’s post-pandemic recovery, and global economic growth, in jeopardy.

  In this visualization, Visual Capitalist’s Chris Deckert looks at six important indicators that point to China’s economy slowing down. Data comes from the National Bureau of Statistics of China, the People’s Bank of China, and the General Administration of Customs, to see what is flashing red.

  

  Six Red Flag Indicators on China’s Economy

  1. GDP

  China’s annual GDP growth rate has averaged 9% since 1978, when the country opened itself up to the global market under Deng Xiaoping.

  However, growth seems to have slowed to a crawl, down to 0.8% (quarter-to-quarter) in the second quarter of 2023 driven by weakness in the Tertiary Sector, which includes retail spending and the troubled real estate sector. This follows a more robust 2.2% figure in Q1, which was driven by pent-up demand released by the end of COVID-era lockdowns.

  On an annual basis, China’s GDP expanded 6.3% year-over-year, below the forecasted 7.3% rate.

  2. Exports

  Exports fell by 14.5% in July, marking the third straight month of declines, and hitting lows not seen since February 2020. Meanwhile, imports fell 12.4%, reflecting the cautious consumer mood.

  On a regional basis, exports fell year-over-year to China’s three biggest customers, ASEAN, the EU, and the U.S., by 17.4%, 15.1%, and 20.8% respectively.

  There was one bright spot, however: exports to sanction-burdened Russia increased 51.8%, but that wasn’t nearly enough to offset the overall downward trend.

  3. Consumer Price Index

  The consumer price index moved into deflationary territory for the first time since 2021, with prices falling 3% year-over-year. The decline was led by Household Articles and Services, Food & Tobacco, and Transportation and Communications.

  At the same time, the prices that producers paid for industrial products (PPI) fell 4.4% (year-over-year), the tenth month in a row with a negative reading.

  4. Youth Unemployment

  And while the headline unemployment rate remained steady at 5.3% in August 2023, up slightly from 5.2% the month before, it papers over serious weakness for urban youth, aged 16 to 24.

  In July, the urban youth unemployment rate reached 21.3%, the highest ever recorded in the country, leading the National Bureau of Statistics of China to suspend future releases.

  5. Yuan vs. USD

  Given the stream of economic bad news, it’s no surprise that the yuan fell to a 16-year low against the U.S. dollar on August 16, 2023 in offshore trading.

  In an effort to stabilize the currency, major state-owned Chinese banks were seen buying up yuan in offshore money markets. At the same time, the spread between the fixed exchange rate set by the People’s Bank of China and the offshore rate, rose to more than 1,000 basis points.

  6. New Loans

  Adding to the dismal economic mood, people borrowed less money according to the most recent figures provided by the government.

  New bank loans fell to ¥346 billion in July, down from ¥3.05 trillion in the month before. This was the lowest reading since late-2009, and less than half of the ¥780 billion economists had forecast.

  What’s Next?

  Foreign Affairs recently published an article with the provocative title “The End of China’s Economic Miracle,” arguing that China’s troubles could be a U.S. opportunity.

  And while this may be somewhat premature, the Middle Kingdom has some serious structural issues to contend with, many of them of their own making. Some of the top challenges include crackdowns on the tech sector, a collapsing real estate market, a larger debt crisis, and a shrinking population.

  But large-scale government intervention does not appear to be in the offing, beyond exhortations for consumers to spend more and blaming Western media for engaging in “cognitive warfare.”

  It’s no wonder that consumer confidence has plunged so low. At least we think so: the Chinese government stopped publishing that too.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 23:20

• Russia, China & North Korea To Launch Trilateral War Games
  Russia, China & North Korea To Launch Trilateral War Games

  Authored by Kyle Anzalone via The Libertarian Institute,

  South Korea’s intelligence services believe that Russia, China and North Korea are preparing to conduct joint military drills. Moscow, Beijing, and Pyongyang have all frequently complained about American war games near their borders.

  According to Yoo Sang-bum, a South Korean legislator, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu likely proposed that North Korean soldiers join Russian and Chinese troops for military exercises during a July meeting with Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un. Yoo says he learned the information during a closed-door discussion with South Korea’s National Intelligence Service.

  

  The report comes as Moscow, Beijing and Pyongyang have become increasingly frustrated with Washington and its allies conducting war games near their borders.

  Last week, US and South Korean soldiers wrapped up the Ulchi Freedom Shield annual joint military exercises which included sending American strategic assets to the Korean Peninsula. In response to the drills, Kim ordered his forces to conduct a test of their nuclear capabilities.

  In the South China Sea, Washington contests Beijing’s territorial claims by sending warships into Chinese waters and claiming the deployment is a “freedom of navigation operation.”

  Prior to the invasion of Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin explained that NATO war games in Ukrainian territory were viewed as an intense provocation by Moscow.

  On Saturday, the Kremlin’s envoy to Pyongyang, Alexander Matsegora, explained North Korea’s participation in joint military exercises with China and Russia was an “appropriate” response to “constant bilateral and trilateral exercises” being held by the US and its “junior partners in Asia.”

  On Monday, Shoigu confirmed Moscow was planning to conduct joint military drills with Pyongyang. When asked about deepening defense cooperation, he said per Reuters:

  “Why not, these are our neighbors. There’s an old Russian saying: you don’t choose your neighbors and it’s better to live with your neighbors in peace and harmony,” Interfax news agency quoted Russia’s Defence Minister, Sergei Shoigu, as saying on Monday.

  When asked about the possibility of joint exercises between the two countries, he said “of course” they were being discussed, it said.

  

  Additionally, the Russian defense minister said Kim was planning to travel to Russia for an upcoming meeting with Putin.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 23:00

• How Student-Teacher Ratios Vary Across The Globe
  How Student-Teacher Ratios Vary Across The Globe

  Around the world, schools have been struggling to recruit teachers before the start of the school year.

  As Statista’s Anna Fleck reports, it’s a phenomenon not only seen in the U.S. but also in Canada, Australia and in Europe, as low salaries, long hours, stress and burnout from the pandemic have led to a mass exodus from the profession.

  

  According to NPR, it is children living in isolated rural areas and big city districts in the U.S. that are particularly impacted. This is because these schools may not be able to compete for teachers with the better-funded suburban schools that can offer higher pay.

  The following chart shows how there are fairly significant differences in class sizes between countries.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Of the OECD countries listed, Norway and Belgium appear as examples of teachers working with smaller classes, with an average of around 10 pupils per teacher in public education (primary and secondary). By contrast, classes are fairly busy in Mexico. The country has the highest student-teacher ratio of the study, with around 24 to 27 students per teacher. In the U.S., there are usually around 15 students per teacher in both public elementary and secondary education.

  Teachers warn that teacher shortages and increased class sizes could lead to a detrimental impact on pupils’ progress, attainment and behavior. This is because it makes it harder to provide adequate provision of learning resources to children, while teachers say they can’t meet the needs of all pupils under those circumstances.

  While the student-staff ratio alone does not guarantee academic success, with teaching styles, teaching methods and extra-curricular choices also influencing factors, many teachers believe it is important.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 22:40

• Pennsylvania High School QB Needs 'Miracle' After Collapsing Mid-Game, Family Says
  Pennsylvania High School QB Needs ‘Miracle’ After Collapsing Mid-Game, Family Says

  Authored by Lorenz Duchamps via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A high school football player in Pennsylvania needs “a miracle” after collapsing on the field in the middle of a game on Sept. 1, according to his family, who said in a health update on Sept. 3 that the 17-year-old has been in critical condition for more than 36 hours.

  

  Mason Martin, a quarterback for Karns City High School, suffered a “significant brain bleed as well as a collapsed lung,” his family told KDKA-TV.

  The matchup between the Karns City Gremlins and Redbank Valley Bulldogs was cut short in the third quarter when referee Mike Vasbinder noticed Martin started to stagger after he received a hit during the game.

  Despite the hit, the quarterback continued to play defense without any apparent issue until he left the field for the extra point and then came back for the return kick-off. However, the referee noticed something was off before the play started, prompting him to blow his whistle as Martin collapsed.

  “I had to talk to him, and when I asked if he was alright, he told me, ‘no,'” Mr. Vasbinder said, according to the Butler Eagle. “So that’s when I knew something was wrong.”

  The game was stopped early and the Redbanks were named the winner as they were leading 35–6 when the incident occurred.

  Mr. Vasbinder said the medical emergency led staff members to enforce a series of protocols, including some of which the referee never had to follow in a game before last week’s incident.

  “When we saw it got to the point where they were bringing on an ambulance, we talked to Redbank Valley’s coach and Karns City’s coach, who was obviously with his player,” he said. “And we just tried to stay back and keep calm, so things didn’t escalate.“

  Martin was taken off the field in a Karns City ambulance before being flown to UPMC Presbyterian Hospital in Pittsburgh in a STAT MedEvac helicopter, D9Sports.com reported.

  His mother, Stacy King Martin, shared an update on her son’s health condition in a statement on social media on Sept. 3, thanking everyone for their love and support.

  “Mason remains in critical condition with little change over the last 36 hours,” her message reads. “The truth is we need a miracle. I’m not saying that to sound grim, but to let you know that we need the strength of your prayers.”

  “No one believes in this kid more than us, but he needs everyone’s strength and prayers,” the message continues. “Right now, we have to wait for the swelling to go down to assess the extent of the damage to the brain. So please pray the way he has always played the game, all out holding nothing back, maybe a little angry, definitely aggressive.”

  The Karns City Gremlin Football Program also issued a lengthy statement after the incident, saying the school has counselors available for students and staff who need to talk to someone after witnessing Martin’s serious on-the-field injury.

  pic.twitter.com/tzrdDgpoo8

  — Karns City Football (@KC_GremlinFball) September 2, 2023

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

  Brittany Thompson, a spectator who was there with her daughter, said the situation was reminiscent of Buffalo Bills safety Damar Hamlin’s collapse during the Jan. 2 game against the Cincinnati Bengals.

  “We’re not from this school district, but my daughter wanted to come to the game,” Ms. Thompson said, the Butler Eagle reported. “It’s just really scary.”

  Mr. Hamlin revealed the official cause of his collapse during a press conference in April, saying he collapsed due to a condition that mostly happens to teenagers playing baseball.

  “The diagnosis of what happened to me was basically commotio cordis. It’s a direct blow at a specific point in your heartbeat that causes cardiac arrest,” he explained. “And five to seven seconds later, you fall out.”

  Cardiac Issues Among Young Athletes

  News of Martin’s medical emergency comes about a month after Lebron James’s son, Bronny James, suffered a sudden cardiac arrest while he was practicing for the USC basketball team.

  A spokesperson for the family said on Aug. 26 that a congenital heart defect likely caused the cardiac arrest. The condition had been identified “after a comprehensive initial evaluation” at the center and follow-up evaluations at the Mayo Clinic and Atlantic Health/Morristown Medical Center.

  “It is an anatomically and functionally significant Congenital Heart Defect which can and will be treated,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

  However, soon after the medical situation, rampant speculation emerged on social media, including a post from X owner Elon Musk suggesting that the cardiac incident was associated with the COVID-19 vaccine.

  “We cannot ascribe everything to the vaccine, but, by the same token, we cannot ascribe nothing. Myocarditis is a known side effect. The only question is whether it is rare or common,” the Tesla CEO said in late July.

  At the same time, CNN interviewed its own medical analyst, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, who asserted that the younger James’s health scare, as well as similar sudden cardiac arrest events involving young athletes, are “more common than people realize.”

  Last month, the death of Caleb White, 17, from Alabama’s Pinson Valley High School also became a hot topic online as inquiries continue into the unclear links between COVID-19, COVID-19 vaccines, and heart issues.

  “24 hours ago, my grandson Caleb White collapsed on the basketball court, went into cardiac arrest and all attempts to resuscitate him failed. This was similar to the illness Labron James’ son experienced as he was working out,” Caleb’s grandfather, George Varnadoe Jr., said in a Facebook post on Aug. 11.

  Studies on Vaccine Risks

  A study funded by the South Korean government has confirmed that COVID-19 vaccines can cause sudden death. In June, authorities said that eight people died suddenly after receiving an mRNA vaccine due to myocarditis.

  All the sudden cardiac deaths (SCD) occurred in people aged 45 and younger. One of the victims was a 33-year-old man who died just one day after he received the second shot of the Moderna vaccine. Another case involved a 30-year-old woman who died three days after getting her first dose of a Pfizer vaccine.

  The results show the need for “careful monitoring or warning of SCD as a potentially fatal complication of COVID-19 vaccination, especially in individuals who are ages under 45 years with mRNA vaccination,” the study said.

  In an interview with The Epoch Times, Dr. Andrew Bostom, a retired professor of medicine in the United States, said that the results show why mandating COVID-19 vaccines for young people was flawed.

  “These are people who ostensibly did not need the vaccine,” he said. “That’s what adds insult to injury.”

  Aldgra Fredly and Naveen Athrappully contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 22:20

• Musk-The-Merciless? SpaceX Launching "80% Of All Earth Payload Mass To Orbit"
  Musk-The-Merciless? SpaceX Launching “80% Of All Earth Payload Mass To Orbit”

  According to Elon Musk, SpaceX has exceeded the previous year’s rocket launch count, delivering 80% of all Earth payload mass to orbit for the year so far. He said China accounts for the other 10%. 

  Great work by the @SpaceX team successfully launching 61 Falcon rocket missions this year!

  If tomorrow’s mission goes well, we will exceed last year’s flight count.

  SpaceX has delivered ~80% of all Earth payload mass to orbit in 2023. China is ~10% & rest of world other ~10%.

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 2, 2023

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

  On Sunday night, SpaceX launched 21 Starlink internet satellites to low Earth orbit atop a Falcon 9 rocket from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center. The mission was the 62nd of the year, setting a new record for the most flights in a year. The previous record was set in 2022 by the company. 

  Musk said, “Aiming for 10 Falcon flights in a month by the end of this year, then 12 per month next year.” 

  Aiming for 10 Falcon flights in a month by end of this year, then 12 per month next year

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 2, 2023

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

  He explained, based on the 2024 launch schedule, “SpaceX will deliver ~90% of all Earth payload to orbit,” adding, “Starship will take that to >99% in future years.” 

  Based on the Falcon launch plan for next year, SpaceX will deliver ~90% of all Earth payload to orbit.

  Starship will take that to >99% in future years.

  These magnitudes are madness to consider, but necessary to make consciousness multiplanetary.

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 3, 2023

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

  Musk’s latest predictions about SpaceX’s rocket launch monopoly come as new aerial images show Starship is preparing for the second test flight (the first flight ended with a bang). 

  On Tuesday, X account RGV Aerial Photography posted a timelapse video of Starship, explaining, “Starship full stack!”

  Timelapse pic.twitter.com/xig5TZ0aZg

  — RGV Aerial Photography (@RGVaerialphotos) September 5, 2023

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

  Musk said the world’s largest rocket underwent a successful static fire in recent weeks. He said, “Getting ready for the next Starship flight.”  

  RGV Aerial Photography posted a list of milestones Starship has completed and what still needs to be achieved ahead of the next launch (list courtesy of blog spacex.information): 

  Milestones for #Starship Integrated Flight Test #2:

  Ship 25
  – Cryogenic Proof Test:✅
  – Engine installation (3 RCs V2 & 3 RVacs V2):✅
  – Spin Prime test:✅
  – Static Fire test:✅
  – Engine shielding installation: ✅
  – Heat Shield installation: ✅

  Booster 9
  – Cryogenic Proof… pic.twitter.com/DVmEQ3HU2y

  — DJ Esmerald (@DJEsmeraldMusic) September 5, 2023

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

  Meanwhile, Musk has managed to infuriate Democrats as they weaponize government agencies, such as the DoJ and SEC, against him… 

  Is this how Dems see Musk?

  

  … and a former Obama administration official recently declared: “The US government needs to end its relationship with Musk immediately.” 

  Good luck with that one. Then no Starlinks for Ukraine. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 22:00

• The Third World Revolt
  The Third World Revolt

  Authored by Christopher Roach via American Greatness,

  Back in my high-school debating days, policy debate teams frequently concluded their arguments with an extreme and somewhat absurd parade of horribles. This was a testament to their intelligence and creativity, plus being dead wrong carried few consequences. Through convoluted chains of logic, they argued that some small change in environmental or trade policy would lead to nuclear war or America’s domination by the “global south.”

  Even then, this all struck me as ridiculous. How could the Third World, with its periodic famines and coups, ever threaten the United States? Back then we were fully dominant over the entire world after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact.

  A lot has changed.

  

  The Birth of the Nonaligned Movement

  During the Cold War, the various nations on the periphery acted, in some ways, as judges of the two competing systems. While the United States and Soviet Union were accused of manipulating the Third World for selfish reasons, the manipulation went both ways. Being coy, Third World leaders often managed to squeeze real benefits, like infrastructure projects, discounted military equipment, and other forms of aid by siding with one side or the other.

  During the Cold War, the nations of the Third World were wary of being compelled to take sides, risking conflicts orthogonal to their own interests and sacrificing their sovereignty through excessive dependence on a patron. This is why the nonaligned movement gained power, with India in particular at the forefront, where it was joined by interested Middle Eastern, African, and Latin American nations.

  These nations, which had gained sovereignty only very recently from their colonial masters, were understandably touchy about their independence. They did not want to exchange a formal colonial structure for an informal one.

  When the Cold War ended, the United States remained the sole superpower for some time, but, rather than achieving worldwide assent, this instead fueled envy, fear, and resentment. No longer able to chart their own path, every nation became subordinate on some level to American power.

  Aggressive Idealism Fuels Anti-Americanism

  At the height of its military power, starting during the Clinton presidency, American leaders began to embrace an aggressive “idealism” that set out to change the character, values, and customs of other countries. Purely “humanitarian” interventions like Kosovo and Somalia became common.

  In Iraq and Afghanistan, this idealism meant feminism and democracy. In Eastern Europe, it meant the promotion of gay rights and secularism, alienating the conservative and religious people who once idealized the United States. In Latin America, idealism demanded capitalism and loosened trade restrictions.

  The invocation of “Freedom” and “Democracy,” while it sounds noble and idealistic to our ears, began to sound like a threat to nations who were out of step with the West’s ruling classes. Unilateral American military intervention in such diverse places as Panama, Iraq, Serbia, Syria, and Libya made nations on the sidelines wary that they could be next.

  Brazil, Russia, China, India and South Africa—the so-called BRICS—do not have much in common. They have diverse economic and political systems, distinct languages, very different histories, and members appeared on both sides of Cold War alliances. But they share a common orientation to American power:  our aspirations to maintain “sole superpower” status threatens their national power and independence.  Perceiving this as a zero-sum game, they seek to pivot world attention, prosperity, and power away from the United States and its Western European allies.

  Among these American competitors, China and Russia stand out most of all. Through their de facto alliance, they now dominate the Eurasian landmass. Their industrial capacity has revealed significant advantages in a war of attrition. And, finally, with their history as former American enemies, they have a habitual and strong resistance to American interference with their destinies.

  While Russia and China’s conduct is easily understood, the growing and diverse anti-American coalition, along with these other nations’ willingness to accept Russian and Chinese leadership, needs explanation.  The heart of the matter is sovereignty. American demands and desires currently constrain each of the BRICS nations and the many smaller nations of the Third World, whether it is in energy, central banking, sanctions, trade, or even domestic policies on issues like feminism and gay rights.

  The proposed “multipolar world” has a lot of momentum because it does not require submission to a particular Chinese or Russian model for internal governance. Russia and China are mostly agnostic about internal affairs, unlike the “idealistic” United States. Rather, the alternative promotes a more organic (and potentially chaotic) distribution of power from the current system.

  Finally, neither Russia nor China could displace the United States. Thus, at most, they can usher in a world of “multipolarity,” where all countries will be less constrained, and larger countries like them have, at most, regional strength.

  Ukraine War Now Existential for the American Empire

  The current war in Ukraine is bringing a lot of things to a head. The United States and Europe imagined the rest of the world would view the conflict as a morality play: a big, powerful bully dominating its innocent and unassuming neighbor. This, indeed, is how most leaders and many people in the West perceive events.

  But this has been a tough sell in the Third World, which is the chief reason sanctions have faced resistance. While Russia is bigger than Ukraine, Ukraine is big relative to its separatist eastern provinces, with whom it has had a conflict since 2014. Since most developing nations began as anti-colonial movements for national liberation, Ukraine’s attempts to forcibly reintegrate the East does not look so different from the types of struggles Brazil and India had during their independence movements.

  Moreover, with Ukraine aligned so closely with the West—using NATO tanks, NATO mercenaries, and NATO money to prosecute its defense—much of the world does not perceive a bully pushing around its stalwart neighbor, but rather an American bully using its Ukrainian lackey for realpolitik designs against Russia. This is a particularly popular view in China, of course. But, judging from editorials and open source comments, it is also widely held in places like Africa and India, where many people view Russia in a positive light because of its opposition to the United States.

  Until now, American power rested on actual American superiority in economics, military power, and cultural influence.  The United States soundly defeated Iraq in the first Gulf War, emerged from the Cold War intact and wealthy, and soon proceeded to project power with great skill in the early days of the Afghanistan and Iraq campaigns. But since that time, we have departed Afghanistan and Iraq without a victory. In parallel, we spread chaos in Libya and Syria, failing to conclude regime change operations in the latter.

  American military prowess is no longer undisputed or inevitable, undermining the broader claim of America as the “sole superpower.” This was all avoidable, but having overextended itself, the visible evidence of American decline is now confirmed. This is what happens when a nation is ruled by disloyal, short-sighted, and foolish people.

  To state the obvious, losing wars is never good for an empire. The Ottoman and Russian empires dissolved under the stresses of the First World War. While part of the victorious allies, World War II cemented the subordinate status of France and the United Kingdom, and their empires fell apart after the war. Finally, and most recently, the Soviet Union broke apart after its costly and controversial campaign in Afghanistan.

  Russia’s attempts to assert power in its near-abroad fueled America’s interest in the current Ukraine War.  The theory was that we would pursue our interests on the cheap, prevent challenges to American hegemony, with the added benefit that Ukrainians would be doing the dying. Because of our military and economic superiority, supporters claimed the war would kill Russians, weaken their military, and destabilize Putin’s hold on power.

  Proponents of the war did not really consider what would happen in the reverse case. What if not Russia, but the United States found itself strained economically, losing critical and hard-to-replace weapons in a war of attrition, visibly demonstrating its impotence and weakness on the world stage? Wouldn’t the same dire consequences intended for Russia now happen to us?

  Indeed, they would. Luckily, actual American security does not depend on the continuation of America’s dominance of the globe, nor does American prosperity. Indeed, our prosperity has declined as the requirements of the military industrial complex and the behemoth welfare state devalue our currency and impoverish taxpayers. Further, our aspirations to maintain sole superpower status has endangered us by fueling anti-Americanism, while encouraging significant moral compromise at home.

  Although losing a war and taking a blow to prestige can be a painful process, the American people’s interests require the dismantling of the American empire. Our current course risks manifesting the dire and once-implausible scenarios popular on the high school debate circuit. It is time to change course.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 21:40

• AirBnBust: New York "Effectively Bans" Short-Term Rentals
  AirBnBust: New York “Effectively Bans” Short-Term Rentals

  Last week, we wrote that the bursting of the AirBnB bubble will also pop the broader housing bubble, which has shown remarkable resilience in the face of the highest interest rates since Volcker (although today’s ominous tumble in homebuilder stocks is certainly a concern), largely the result of a staggering divergence between effective mortgage rates (since almost everyone refinanced into a 30Y mortgage when rates were at record lows a few years back and is locked into a nice, low rate for a long, long time… or until they sell) and current 30Y mortgages, which at 7.5% nobody can afford.

  

  So back to the coming AirBnB fiasco, last Wednesday the real estate experts at RedFin wrote that investor home purchases fell 45% from a year earlier in the second quarter, outpacing the 31% drop in overall home sales. That’s the biggest decline since 2008 with the exception of the quarter before, when they dropped 48%.

  

  The drop in purchases has brought the total number of homes bought by investors below pre-pandemic levels, which is a major concern for a market where investors remained the last remaining support pillar now that most average Americans seeking to buy their first home are simply unable to afford it and are stuck renting indefinitely.

  Real estate investors bought roughly 50,000 U.S. homes in the second quarter, the fewest of any second quarter in seven years, with the exception of the start of the pandemic.

  

  The decline comes as this year’s relatively cool housing and rental markets makes investing in homes less attractive than it was during the pandemic-driven homebuying frenzy of 2021 and early 2022, when record numbers of AirBnB were purchased as hotel and lodging surrogates.

  There is another, more tangible reason why the AirBnBoom is turning into an AirBnBust: starting today, the short-term rental landscape is changing drastically in New York City, and according to the company itself, will be “effectively banned” threatening the entire AirBnB model in the Big Apple, and other big cities to follow. 

  As the RealDeal reports, beginning Tuesday, short-term rental hosts in New York City will be required to register their units, which will likely have a significant impact on platforms like Airbnb and potentially steer travelers toward hotels or New Jersey.

  The new regulation, known as Local Law 18, includes several rules that may prove inconvenient for travelers and hosts:

  • Limit on Guests: Short-term rentals can accommodate no more than two paying guests at a time, regardless of the property’s size or the number of bedrooms.
  • Host Presence: Hosts are required to be physically present while their properties are being rented.
  • Unlocked Doors: Hosts and visitors must leave the interior doors within the rental unlocked, allowing occupants access to the entire unit.

  The measure aims to curb illegal short-term rentals (which is basically every AirBnB listing), enhance guest safety, and alleviate housing market pressures. It could also drive travelers away from short-term rental platforms altogether, as the restrictions effectively eliminate the appeal of staying in apartments, and forces them to share space with strangers or opt for hotel rooms.

  “Unless it is a really big unit, I think a lot of travelers will find it uncomfortable to stay in an apartment that fully complies with and abides by the city’s new regulations,” Sean Hennessey, a professor at New York University’s Jonathan M. Tisch Center of Hospitality, told the outlet. And if there is one thing New York does not have a lot of, it is “really big” apartments.

  For those hoping to follow and comply with the regulatory framework, good luck: as of Aug. 28, the Office of Special Enforcement in New York City had received over 3,250 applications for short-term rental listings. They reviewed 808 submissions, granted 257 certificates, rejected 72, and returned 479 for further information or corrections, according to the Post.

  The OSE also maintains a Prohibited Buildings List of units that can’t be rented short-term due to lease terms or rent regulations.

  Penalties for hosts for violations of these regulations can range from $100 to $1,000 for the first offense, while guests will not face penalties for staying in an illegal property.

  Naturally, Airbnb sued to have the law gutted, claiming it was effectively a ban on short-term rental  but a judge dismissed the lawsuit in August.

  The company said that listings without a registration number will be unable to accept new reservations once the law is activated. To minimize disruptions to existing bookings, Airbnb will honor reservations made before Tuesday for stays through Dec. 1, refunding the service fee. After Dec. 1, Airbnb will cancel and refund reservations at uncertified properties. The platform, along with hosts, are attempting to work with local officials to pass a less-restrictive version of the measure.

  With New York City’s tourism market already experiencing high demand, with more than 63 million travelers expected in 2023, the outlet reported, Airbnb alternatives are rapidly emerging to try and fill the short-term rental gap.  Some of these alternatives, however, will face similar predicaments to the short-term rental giant.

  San Francisco-based Sonder could provide one alternative. The company has units in the Financial District and elsewhere that aren’t covered by the short-term rental law. The company’s business model, however, is reliant on receiving business from other platforms, including Airbnb.

  Additionally, Sonder has had some issues of its own. In the spring, the startup was warned that it had until mid-October to improve its share price or face delisting from Nasdaq. The company, which manages and leases rentals itself (unlike Airbnb), has experienced multiple rounds of layoffs in recent months.

  Kindred is a startup that charges residents to join a cohort of travelers and homesharers to host or swap homes without money changing hands directly. There are more than 1,000 residents registered in the New York metro area, co-founder Justine Palefsky told Crain’s.

  The biggest beneficiaries from the suspension of AirBnB, are traditional hotels, but even some luxury brands are willing to at least partially embrace a short-term rental model. The Ritz-Carlton in NoMad has 16 short-term rental units up for grabs for $9,000 a night.

  Finally, even if the New York crackdown seems too regional to crush the company’s business model, it is the other abovementioned trends that have sealed AirBnB’s coffin, and assure that the short-term rental company will be the proverbial canary in the housemine. And for those who were in kindergarten during the bursting of the 2007 housing bubble and today are AirBnB moguls, the following refresher from BowTiedBroke will be a useful walkthru for what comes next:

  It has begun:

  Since I went through Short Sales, Deed in Lieu’s and straight up Foreclosures with my RE adventures of ‘01-‘09, here is how the process plays out. I firmly believe heavy Airbnb markets are going to feel some pain.

  The question is: How many first time STR owners/over-leveraged STR owners are out there and how will getting their credit ruined affect other markets or sectors in the US. I have no clue how the trickle down will go.

  But, here are the steps:

  1) Cash flow isn’t covering the mortgage and other expenses.

  2) You stop making the payments

  3) The bank QUICKLY reaches out to see what they can do to “help you” continue making payments to them. They won’t call daily, but they do call at least once/week, sometimes every few days.

  4) You have no way to make the payments so the bank may offer to allow you to try a “Short Sale”, selling the home for less than the amount you owe and being forgiven of the difference (maybe).

  5) You get an offer on the home. Bank rejects it. (There are instances where they accept..maybe more so now, but I never had any short sale offers accepted in ‘’08-‘09 by BofA or Wells Fargo)

  6) If no offers are accepted by the bank, the next step is to try a Deed in Lieu. You attempt to hand keys back to the bank for a “sum” and they take over property. You write a check for a negotiated dollar amount, they send you all types of paperwork which will often say “We can still come after you for the forgiven difference one day”.

  7) To do the DIL, the person at bank you’re negotiating with is not the one making the decision. It’s usually their supervisor. So your hardship “story” is usually being relayed to another person that you never even get to talk to who has the final say.

  8) If the DIL is rejected, it’s straight up Foreclosure through the courts.

  9) You get a wonderful 1099-C. Cancelation of Debt Form. Let’s say you owe $1,000,000. They foreclose and resell your property at auction and the bank gets $750,000 for it. They forgave $250,000 of your debt. It’s their “gift” to you. So you get to pay taxes on a $250,000 gift. Fun times.

  The other issue with all of the above: Your credit is shot from the get go. Even in the short sale process, you aren’t making your payments. So each month that passes just dings your credit more and more. Say goodbye to having any ability to purchase anything on credit for around 5 years. At the 7 year mark, it falls off if they finalize your DIL or foreclosure, but your purchasing power is shot for a long time. My credit was 790 in 2008. By 2009, it was 400. Literally everything after this process has to be purchased with cash or some type of high interest hard money loan.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 21:20

• Proud Boys Leader Enrique Tarrio Handed 22-Year Prison Term For Jan. 6 Attack
  Proud Boys Leader Enrique Tarrio Handed 22-Year Prison Term For Jan. 6 Attack

  Authored by Joseph M. Hanneman and Jackson Richman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Henry “Enrique” Tarrio Jr., the Florida-based former chairman of the Proud Boys accused of being the mastermind of a seditious conspiracy to attack the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was sentenced to 22 years in federal prison on Sept. 5 by U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly.

  

  Mr. Tarrio, 39, of Miami, received the longest prison term among all Jan. 6 defendants, eclipsing the previous record of 18 years given to Oath Keepers founder Elmer Stewart Rhodes III in May, and Mr. Tarrio’s co-defendant, Ethan Nordean, on Sept. 1.

  Prosecution of Mr. Tarrio and his Proud Boys lieutenants included the most extended Jan. 6 criminal trial—more than four months—held in the E. Barrett Prettyman United States Courthouse in Washington, D.C.

  Mr. Tarrio was the last of his trial group to be handed a sentence by Judge Kelly, an appointee of former President Donald J. Trump. Mr. Nordean was sentenced to 18 years, Joseph Biggs 17 years, Zachary Rehl 15 years, and Dominic Pezzola 10 years.

  Federal prosecutors sought a 33-year prison term for Mr. Tarrio, described in court documents as a “naturally charismatic leader, a savvy propagandist, and the celebrity chairman of the national Proud Boys organization.” Prosecutors claimed he exhibited “pernicious, violence-oriented leadership.”

  During a nearly four-hour sentencing hearing, defense attorneys said 15 years would be a sufficient prison term.

  Mr. Tarrio expressed remorse for Jan. 6, for letting down his grandfather and his family, and for not respecting law enforcement.

  He asked the judge for leniency so he could return to society and turn away from “my selfish endeavors.” Mr. Tarrio said the trial has humbled him and he no longer wants anything to do with rallies or politics.

  “I am not a political zealot,” he said.

  Calling seditious conspiracy a “serious offense,” Judge Kelly said Mr. Tarrio was the “ultimate leader” of the conspiracy who schemed to have government buildings taken over on Jan. 6. What happened that day was a “disgrace,” the judge said.

  Although Mr. Tarrio was not physically present in Washington on Jan. 6, Judge Kelly applied a sentence enhancement for terrorism based on the attack on Capitol fencing by Mr. Biggs and Mr. Nordean. Judge Kelly said the seditious conspiracy made Mr. Tarrio complicit in the fence destruction and deserving of the terrorism enhancement.

  On May 4, Mr. Tarrio was found guilty by a jury of seditious conspiracy, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to use force, intimidation, or threat to prevent officers of the United States from discharging their duties, interference with law enforcement during civil disorder, and destruction of government property.

  

  Mr. Tarrio was found not guilty of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers. The jury could not reach a verdict on two other counts.

  Much like the Oath Keepers put on trial in 2022 and 2023, Mr. Tarrio was accused of plotting to thwart the “peaceful transfer of power” from President Donald J. Trump to Joseph Biden Jr.

  Defense attorney Sabino Jauregui rejected the idea his client is a terrorist.

  “My client is no terrorist,” Mr. Jauregui said, instead describing Mr. Tarrio as a “misguided patriot.”

  Assistant U.S. Attorney Conor Mulroe disagreed, describing Jan. 6 as a “calculated act of terrorism.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 21:00

• US Officials Say Chinese "Tourists" Engaged In 'Gate-Crashing' US Bases For Espionage
  US Officials Say Chinese “Tourists” Engaged In ‘Gate-Crashing’ US Bases For Espionage

  Fresh reporting in The Wall Street Journal has reviewed and presented a series of instances which are being dubbed low-level Chinese intelligence collection efforts, often involving Chinese nationals posing as tourists who attempt to gain access to military bases in the US, sometimes in bizarre and forceful ways.

  US officials have tracked a dramatic increase in these incidents, citing that they’ve occurred as many as 100 times in recent years. These episodes have also been called ‘grate-crashing’ incidents.

  “The Defense Department, FBI and other agencies held a review last year to try to limit these incidents, which involve people whom officials have dubbed gate-crashers because of their attempts—either by accident or intentionally—to get onto U.S. military bases and other installations without proper authorization,” the WSJ wrote.

  

  Documenting some of the more interesting examples, the report said, “They range from Chinese nationals found crossing into a U.S. missile range in New Mexico to what appeared to be scuba divers swimming in murky waters near a U.S. government rocket-launch site in Florida.”

  The people involved are not likely Chinese intelligence officials themselves, but possibly assets pressed into service by their country while they are in the states. In many cases, the phenomenon appears a low-level and easy attempt at testing security practices at high secure American government installations.

  These instances have reportedly come under renewed scrutiny after the Chinese ‘spy balloon’ shootdown incident off the South Carolina coast in early February.

  The FBI has said, “The Chinese government is engaged in a broad, diverse campaign of theft and malign influence without regard to laws or international norms that the FBI will not tolerate.” But of course, Beijing has responded by rejecting the “groundless accusations” and “Cold War mentality” which the foreign ministry says has been on display by the US. “The relevant claims are purely ill-intentioned fabrications,” the Chinese embassy in D.C. told the Journal.

  According to one example offered in the report:

  Officials described incidents in which Chinese nationals say they have a reservation at an on-base hotel. In a recent case, a group of Chinese nationals claiming they were tourists, tried to push past guards at Fort Wainwright, Alaska, saying they had reservations at a commercial hotel on the base. The base is home to the Army’s 11th Airborne Division, which is focused on Arctic warfare. 

  In numerous other examples, Chinese “tourists” take photos, or even deploy recreational drones, to capture images of sensitive military sites.

  Another example US officials described to the WSJ involved Chinese visitors going to White Sands National Park – only to wander onto the neighboring missile testing range and facility. Similar scenarios have even happened at the White House, where Chinese visitors on group tours appeared to have focused their photo-taking on security guard houses and Secret Service guard infrastructure, before being told to leave.

  “Chinese nationals, sometimes posing as tourists, have accessed US military bases and other sensitive sites as many as 100 times”

  “No cases appear to have resulted in espionage charges.”

  “individuals are typically Chinese nationals pressed into service”https://t.co/PUrcVzV3AM

  — Jeff M. Smith (@Cold_Peace_) September 4, 2023

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

  In a further example…

  In another incident, Chinese nationals appear to have been found scuba diving off Cape Canaveral, home to the Kennedy Space Center. The area is the launch site for spy satellites and other military missions. A spokesman for Homeland Security Investigations’s Tampa, Fla., field office said the incident was part of a continuing investigation and declined to comment further. 

  They were reportedly taking photos near the launch site, but at the same time there’s some ambiguity and “cover” given they simply claimed they were scuba diving and were engaged in harmless recreation in public waters.

  The report says that often the Chinese nationals are only briefly detained and then put on a plane and sent out of the country and back to China early. US officials believe that this is an organized probing effort of the Chinese government and its intelligence services.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 20:40

• Shellenberger: Government Intel & Security Agencies Behind NGO Demands For More Censorship By X/Twitter
  Shellenberger: Government Intel & Security Agencies Behind NGO Demands For More Censorship By X/Twitter

  Authored by Alex Gutentag and Michael Shellenberger via Public Substack,

  Groups leading the advertiser boycott of X/Twitter receive money from and have a history of spying for governments…

  

  Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO, ADL; MP Damian Collins, CCDH Advisory Board Member;  Sasha Havlicek, CEO of ISD

  The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), and the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) are nongovernmental organizations, their leaders say. When they demand more censorship of online hate speech, as they are currently doing of X, formerly Twitter, those NGOs are doing it as free citizens and not, say, as government agents.

  But the fact of the matter is that the US and other Western governments fund ISD, the UK government indirectly funds CCDH, and, for at least 40 years, ADL spied on its enemies and shared intelligence with the US, Israel and other governments.  The reason all of this matters is that ADL’s advertiser boycott against X may be an effort by governments to regain the ability to censor users on X that they had under Twitter before Musk’s takeover last November.

  Internal Twitter and Facebook messages show that representatives of the US government, including the White House, FBI, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), as well as the UK government, successfully demanded Facebook and Twitter censorship of their users over the last several years.

  ADL is waging a very similar campaign against X/Twitter that it successfully waged against Facebook in 2020. In just three days, 800 companies, including $129 billion consumer products giant Unilever, withdrew tens of millions of dollars in ad revenue from Facebook until it agreed to ADL’s censorship demands. “The Facebook caved to far-left pressure groups and now allows them to silently dictate policy in exchange for ad money,” said Musk yesterday. “That is the relationship they’ve had with X/Twitter for many years. Presumably, they have that with all Western search or social media orgs.”

  It’s possible that there has been an increase in hate on X since Elon Musk bought the company. With greater free speech policies comes the possibility of more offensive speech, including racist or antisemitic speech. Bigotry does exist, and it should be challenged.

  But there is no good evidence of that. Public has debunked claims by ISD and CCDH of an increase. And researchers have repeatedly debunked ADL’s claims of rising antisemitism for years. In 2009, an Israeli filmmaker found that ADL could not support its claims of an antisemitism crisis. Wrote NPR in a review of the film, “When he presses ADL staffers for evidence to back up their claims of a sharp spike in North American anti-Semitism in 2007, they can offer only wan transgressions…”

  Eleven years later, Liel Leibovitz noted in Tablet that ADL had, for a report, “counted hundreds of threatening calls to Jewish community centers made by a mentally troubled Israeli teenager. You had to read the report’s fine print to learn that the number of violent attacks against Jews that year had actually decreased by 47%.”

  ADL, ISD, and CCDH have not presented any good evidence that offensive speech online directly causes “hate-motivated violence,” nor that censorship prevents it. Moreover, last week Public reviewed evidence suggesting that the best way to combat hate speech is through open and public debate, which allows people to change their minds, not censorship.

  ADL’s main goal is supposed to be stopping “the defamation of the Jewish people,” but the organization is using the legacy of antisemitism and the Holocaust to justify unrelated censorial advocacy work. This is exploitative, and it is defamatory to say that Jews, in general, need and favor censorship. Many Jews on both the left and the right have argued that ADL does not represent their interests. By claiming to speak for all Jewish people while demanding highly unpopular policies, the ADL may be inadvertently driving antisemitism.

  As troubling as these highly partisan ideological biases are, what’s most dangerous are the past and present ties between ADL, ISD, CCDH, and governments, particularly security and intelligence organizations, which we detail below.

  Neither ADL, ISD, nor CCDH have responded to multiple requests for more information or an interview.

  ADL’s Spying For Governments

  

  FBI Director Robert Mueller gives the keynote speech at the Anti-Defamation League’s 2005 National Commission Meeting November 3, 2005 in New York City. Mueller, who was joined by U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, spoke on terrorism, extremism and other global topics that are the centerpiece of this years ADL National Commission Meeting. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

  Although ADL is currently focused on demonizing Trump supporters as “domestic terrorists,” it has a history of partnering with the state and law enforcement to target the Left. 

  …

  Today, ADL’s ties to intelligence and security organizations are closer than ever. It works with the FBI by holding a training session with agents and hosting FBI Director Christopher Wray as a featured speaker. According to Greenblatt, the FBI works directly with ADL “every day.”

  …

  We do not have firm proof that there is a conspiracy by the intelligence and security agencies of the United States and Britain to control the content on social media platforms like X and Facebook through their control over CCDH, ISD, and ADL. Perhaps ideological, cultural, and political alignment alone explain the remarkable coordination we have documented. Perhaps the US and UK government funding for CCDH and ISD is insignificant compared to their nongovernmental funders.

  But there is enough evidence of conspiracy for members of Congress and Parliament to investigate CCDH, ADL, ISD, and other so-called “nongovernmental” organizations for the advocacy of censorship. Who is funding them? What are their relationships with government officials? What is their role in intelligence and security organizations?

  …

  What’s clear is that we also need to change our view of ADL, CCDH, and ISD. They cannot be considered “nongovernmental organizations.” Their ties to the government, particularly the national security state, are too strong. 

  Public Substack subscribers can read the full note here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 20:20

• CDC Repeatedly Advised People With Post-Vaccination Conditions To Get More Doses
  CDC Repeatedly Advised People With Post-Vaccination Conditions To Get More Doses

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

  A network composed of experts from inside and outside the U.S. government repeatedly recommended that people who suffered adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination receive additional shots, even when the experts could not rule out the vaccines as the cause of the events, documents obtained by The Epoch Times show.

  

  The network, the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Project, is run by a doctor who has received extensive funding from pharmaceutical giants, including the top two COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers, according to other records.

  In one example, CISA was presented with records showing a 63-year-old woman experienced chronic kidney disease, with symptoms including kidney swelling, after receiving a second dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.

  CISA subject matter experts (SMEs) said that the diagnosis could not be definitively confirmed without a kidney biopsy but that they still felt comfortable using a causality algorithm for the presumed diagnosis developed in part by Dr. Kathryn Edwards, CISA’s principal investigator.

  Applying the algorithm to the case resulted in an “indeterminate” designation, or an inability to rule out the vaccine causing the problem, in part because there was no evidence of other causes. But that inability did not stop the program from recommending additional shots.

  “Weighing the potential risks of COVID-19 vaccination and the benefits of preventing COVID-19, the SMEs provided their opinion that the patient should receive future COVID-19 vaccinations,” the Feb. 24, 2023, letter to the patient’s doctor stated.

  At the time, the effectiveness of the vaccines against symptomatic infection had been shown to start low and wane quickly, while protection against severe disease began higher but also rapidly dropped.

  After the woman received her next shot, the CISA experts said, the doctor should check in on her to see if she experienced recurrent hematuria, or blood in her urine.

  “Although the CDC’s subject matter experts claim to have no idea if inflammation of the kidneys in a 63-year-old woman was caused by the mRNA COVID-19 biological, they tell the attending physician to go ahead and give the woman another COVID shot. That amounts to a challenge/re-challenge experiment on a sick woman without informed consent,” Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center, told The Epoch Times in an email.

  “Government officials admitting ignorance about a biological product’s potential side effects but directing a doctor to risk a patient’s life by continuing to inject the product into a patient, who already has suffered an injury following use of that product, is immoral,” she added. “We expect and deserve government health officials to adhere to a higher professional and ethical standard of care.“

  Some people who experience a problem after a dose of a COVID-19 vaccine have experienced a recurrence of the problem following another dose, according to case studies and surveillance data.

  Dr. Edwards, until recently of Vanderbilt University Medical Center, and the CDC did not respond to requests for comment.

  Other Letters

  The Epoch Times obtained, through the Freedom of Information Act, letters sent by CISA to physicians.

  CISA features experts with the CDC and other institutions, including Vanderbilt University, Boston Medical Center, and Johns Hopkins University collaborating to respond to doctors who ask the program to review patient cases and provide recommendations.

  “CISA provides consultations for U.S. healthcare providers with complex vaccine safety questions about their patients and conducts vaccine safety clinical research,” the CDC states on its website.

  The first COVID-19 vaccines were authorized and recommended in December 2020. From Dec. 1, 2020, through June 1, 2023, CISA provided 48 recommendations to doctors dealing with COVID-19 vaccines, the records show.

  In 39.5 percent of the cases, CISA recommended another vaccination. In 23 percent of the cases, CISA recommended against another vaccination. In 14.5 percent of the cases, CISA said there were no reasons patients could not receive more doses. In the remaining cases, CISA advised reassessing the matter down the road or advising a patient who had not yet received a vaccine to receive a vaccine.

  The recommendations for future doses came even in cases where CISA was unable to say the vaccine did not cause the adverse event.

  In a letter dated May 4, 2021, CISA experts said there was “no evidence” to support non-vaccine causes for the patient’s condition but that there was “no definitive known association” between the condition and Pfizer’s vaccine, leading to an indeterminate designation in the causality algorithm.

  While one of the experts said that in a person “with the right immunologic makeup,” the vaccine “could be an initial inciting injury” causing the condition, many of the experts advised the patient to receive another dose.

  The patient might want to receive Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine, which uses different technology than the Pfizer and Moderna messenger RNA shots, CISA said in the letter. “Support for this guidance included that it would avoid the lipid envelope and the mRNA presentation of the antigen to this patient,” they wrote.

  In another letter, dated Jan. 18, 2022, CISA experts also found no evidence for non-vaccine causes for the patient’s condition, which appeared after Pfizer vaccination. But they repeated the claim that there was no definitive association between the vaccine and the condition, leading to an indeterminate designation.

  CISA experts “strongly felt that the risk of COVID-19 infection was higher than the potential risk from another dose of vaccine,” according to the letter, and recommended a second Pfizer dose.

  In a third letter, dated May 23, 2022, CISA experts said the causality algorithm resulted in an indeterminate designation “due to lack of strong evidence against a causal association.” They described a “very perplexing case” and acknowledged the patient’s condition was “not understood.”

  But CISA experts still advised the patient, who suffered an event after a Pfizer dose and had also recovered from COVID-19, to receive another shot.

  “This would be especially important in light of the current surge in circulating Omicron variants,” they wrote.

  Small Number of Causal Determinations

  A small number of cases led to the determination that the vaccination caused an adverse event.

  In six instances, CISA experts determined that the event was “consistent with causal association,” or caused by the vaccination, because the condition suffered by each patient was “a known possible adverse event following immunization.”

  In all six cases, experts recommended against additional doses while advising the doctors caring for the patients to follow up with the patients to figure out which non-COVID vaccines the patients could safely receive.

  CISA experts also advised against additional COVID-19 vaccine doses in five other cases. The designations in those cases were also indeterminate, making the differences between them and those that resulted in recommendations for future doses unclear apart from several involving people who had expressed opposition to receiving more shots.

  In seven other cases, CISA experts said there were no contraindications, or no reasons for not receiving at least one additional dose. The CDC has maintained a short list that currently includes just two contraindications for the COVID-19 vaccines—a history of severe allergic shock or a history of a known diagnosed allergy to a component of one of the shots.

  Patients with other conditions, such as heart inflammation after COVID-19 vaccination, are generally advised to avoid additional doses, the CDC says in the list. But that is only a “precaution,” not a contraindication.

  CISA also advised doctors of nine of the patients to reassess future COVID-19 vaccination down the road and, in two of the cases, told doctors that patients who had not yet received a COVID vaccine could receive one.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 20:00

• Chicago Criminals Get Green Light To Rob, Loot And Steal As Odds Of Punishment Collapse To Near Zero
  Chicago Criminals Get Green Light To Rob, Loot And Steal As Odds Of Punishment Collapse To Near Zero

  By Ted Dabrowski and John Klingner of Wirepoints

  The decision to commit a crime in Chicago has never been easier. Criminals are almost guaranteed to profit because the chances of getting caught and punished have collapsed to near-zero. 

  It’s a big reason why the city is on target to hit a post-pandemic high in major crimes in 2023, currently up 32 percent vs. last year. It’s also why crime is unlikely to slow down significantly any time soon. Mayor Brandon Johnson doesn’t show any signs of imposing a higher cost on the city’s criminals. And Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx and Cook County Chief Judge Tim Evans haven’t changed their soft approach to crime either.

  The math is pretty straightforward. A demoralized, restricted police force. Plus a 1 in 20 arrest rate. Plus a high rate of unreported crime. Plus a dismal 911 response rate. Plus a city leadership that’s soft on crime. All that equals a near-zero chance of criminals ever getting punished.

  Not until the costs of committing crime go way up – and the equation changes – will Chicagoans see any relief. 

  

  Equation inputs

  Arrests

  The chance of getting arrested in Chicago for a major crime collapsed to just 5 percent in 2022. It was already a low 10 percent just four years ago.

  More than 68,000 major crimes were reported in Chicago last year. Only 3,228 of them resulted in arrests. Wirepoints’ calculations are based on the Chicago City Data Portal: Crime – 2001 to Present.

  

  The arrest rate for criminal sexual assault? Just 3 percent. Ditto for Motor Vehicle Thefts. Burglaries were at only 4 percent and Robberies, 5 percent. 

  For thefts over $500, the chance of getting busted is even lower, at just 1 percent. There were just 201 arrests out of 20,041 crimes reported last year. And you’ll avoid arrest 96 times out of 100 across any form of theft, which The New York Times recently reported. 

  Unreported crimes

  It gets even better for Chicago criminals. The above data is just for crimes that are actually reported. The Bureau of Justice Statistics found that nationally in 2019, “Only 40.9% of violent crimes and 32.5% of household property crimes were reported to authorities.” So the real chance of getting caught is even lower than the 5 percent. 

  Soft-on-crime leadership

  Criminals are far more likely to get verbal support for the crimes they’ve committed, not condemnation, from Mayor Brandon Johnson. Kids just being “silly,” he said of the city’s recent teen takeovers. They’re not “mob actions,” he argued. We captured both those moments here and here.

  And there’s the fact that even if criminals do get caught, the chances of being convicted and sentenced are low. State’s Attorney Kim Foxx and Chief Judge Tim Evans continue their light treatment of felony weapons charges and issue plea deals on the cheap.

  Criminals also know they’re less likely to be detained pre-trial, which Wirepoints covered in Close the revolving door for high-risk offenders in Cook County. There are about 800 more violent defendants out on electronic ankle bracelets at any one time – many of them felons – than there were in 2016. There are thousands more defendants out without any tracking. 

  With the SAFE-T Act now law, the number of alleged criminals back on the streets before trial will increase further.

  911 calls

  Yet another part of the calculus is the fact that Chicago’s police aren’t responding to more than half of the urgent 911 calls they receive, part of what are called RAPs, or Radio Assignments Pending. Last year we reported on the 2021 data, which showed just over half of all priority 911 calls weren’t immediately handled.

  It was even worse in 2022. Of the more than 780,000 Priority 1 and 2 911 service calls, 60 percent had no Chicago police available to respond. 

  Those delays included:

  • Over 4,700 robbery-related calls, including 470 robberies in progress

  • Over 19,400 calls of batteries in progress

  • Nearly 2,000 reports of sexual assault, including 150 assaults in progress

  • Over 18,000 reports of a person with a gun

  • Over 1,200 reports of citizens shot

  • Nearly 1,000 reports of citizens stabbed

  

  Making it worse

  The simple calculus of Chicago’s criminals is clear when you look at the city’s latest criminal fad: robberies.

  The ease of stealing cars like Kias and Hyundais, in combination with new laws prohibiting police from foot and car chases, has emboldened criminals even more. 

  Criminals are now using those stolen cars to go on robbery sprees neighborhood to neighborhood, sometimes committing as many as 20 robberies within hours of each other, confident they won’t get caught or even chased.

  That’s resulted in headlines like these:

  • TV news crew robbed while reporting on Chicago robbery sprees; armed men targeted at least 30 people in about 12 hours

  • Armed men rob victim, then carjack a nearby delivery driver in Logan Square during Thursday afternoon crime spree

  • At Least 19 Armed Robberies Hit Logan Square Area In 2 Days, Police Say

  The story that perhaps best captures the restrictions placed on officers to do their jobs is in a recent article by CWB Chicago: At least 23 armed robberies reported Sunday as Chicago cops *again* see a robbery in progress, but don’t chase the offenders:

  …CPD police officers on patrol and in a surveillance camera operations center witnessed an armed robbery in progress in the 6500 block of North Western Avenue. “I can see them right now,” the officer radioed. “They got long guns. There’s a unit on scene.”

  That patrol unit tried to pull the Durango over as they snaked through the North Side. Officers said four men were inside the SUV with their faces covered, bearing at least one rifle. But not long after the unit started to chase the SUV loaded with armed, masked men who had just robbed someone as Chicago police officers watched, a CPD sergeant ordered the squad car to terminate their efforts to stop the Durango.

  At least eleven people were robbed that night, including some after the police supervisor decided to let the group of armed robbers get away.”

  More victims of crime

  Add all the above and it’s easy to see why criminals face a near-zero risk of punishment.

  That also helps explain why the city’s crime numbers continue to rise. Chicagoans have been victimized more than 51,000 times during the first 8 months of 2023 – already more than they were over the entirety of 2019, 2020 or 2021. Only homicides are down compared to last year, by 8 percent – a small decline compared to other major cities.

  If the lawbreaking trend continues, 2023 major crimes will total 78,000, some 17% more than in 2022.

  

  For sure, there’s a lot to be done to solve the crime crisis in Chicago. The social challenges and poor educational outcomes plaguing the city will take years, if not decades, to unwind. 

  But to save lives in the meantime, and to make Chicago safer – one of Mayor Johnson’s key goals – the near-zero cost of committing crimes must rise dramatically. And that means reforging the chain of criminal justice, from arresting to prosecuting to sentencing. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 19:40

• These Are The Most Popular US Undergrad Degress Of The Last Decade
  These Are The Most Popular US Undergrad Degress Of The Last Decade

  In an era of soaring tuition fees and mounting student debt, choosing which undergraduate degree to pursue has become a crucial decision for any aspiring college student. And it always helps to see which way the winds are blowing.

  As Visual Capitalist’s Pallavi Rao shares below, this visualization by Kashish Rastogi, based on data from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), examines the changing landscape of undergraduate degrees awarded between the 2010–2011 and 2020–2021 academic years.

  

  Undergraduate Degrees Growing in Popularity

  The NCES classifies all four-year bachelor degrees into 38 fields of study. Of these fields, 21 saw an increase in graduates in 2020–2021 compared to 2010–2011.

  While only those with more than 30,000 graduates have been shown in the graphic (to prevent overrepresentation of large changes in small pools of graduates), the full list is available below.

  Rank	Field of Study	2010–2011	2020–2021	% Change
  1	Business	363,919	390,781	+7%
  2	Health Professions	143,463	268,018	+87%
  3	Biomedical Sciences	89,984	131,499	+46%
  4	Psychology	100,906	126,944	+26%
  5	Engineering	76,356	126,037	+65%
  6	Computer Sciences	43,066	104,874	+144%
  7	Communication	83,231	90,775	+9%
  8	Security & Law Enforcement	47,600	58,009	+22%
  9	Interdisciplinary Studies	42,473	54,584	+29%
  10	Leisure & Fitness Studies	35,934	54,294	+51%
  11	Public Administration	26,799	34,817	+30%
  12	Physical Sciences	24,338	28,706	+18%
  13	Mathematics	17,182	27,092	+58%
  14	Agriculture Sciences	15,851	21,418	+35%
  15	Natural Resources & Conservation	12,779	20,507	+61%
  16	Engineering Technologies	16,187	18,562	+15%
  17	Transportation	4,941	5,993	+21%
  18	Legal	4,429	4,589	+4%
  19	Military Technologies	64	1,524	+2,281%
  20	Science Technologies	367	532	+45%
  21	Library Science	96	119	+24%

  Note: Field of study names have been edited slightly from their NCES labels for better readability.

  Let’s take a look at the areas of study that were most popular, as well as some of the fastest growing fields:

  Computer and Information Sciences

  Bachelor’s degrees in this discipline have grown by 144% since 2010–2011, with over 100,000 graduates in 2020–2021. The allure of the tech sector’s explosive growth likely contributed to its popularity among students.

  Health Professions

  Undergraduate degrees in health professions saw an 87% increase, attracting nearly 260,000 graduates in 2020–2021. This field accounted for 13% of the total graduating class, reflecting the growing appeal of the healthcare sector.

  Engineering

  There were 50,000 more engineering graduates in the U.S. in 2021, up 65% from 2011. With a median income over $100,000 per year, engineering graduates can usually rely on good wages as well as versatility in future careers, capable of finding jobs in tech, design, and communication fields, and of course, becoming future entrepreneurs.

  Biomedical Sciences

  University graduates in this field, which focuses on the integration of the study of biology with health and medicine, grew by 46%. A subset of this category—epidemiology—has been in the limelight recently thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic.

  Business

  While this category recorded a modest 7% growth in graduates, its popularity has been indisputable in the last decade, representing the largest proportion of the graduating class in both 2011 and 2021.

  Fields with Declining University Graduates (2011‒2021)

  Meanwhile, 17 areas of study experienced declines in the number of completed university degrees. We explore some of the notable ones below:

  Rank	Field of Study	2010–2011	2020–2021	% Change
  1	Social Sciences	142,161	1,37,908	-3%
  2	Visual & Performing Arts	93,939	90,022	-4%
  3	Education	104,008	89,398	-14%
  4	Liberal Arts	46,717	41,909	-10%
  5	English	52,754	35,762	-32%
  6	History	35,008	22,919	-35%
  7	Human Sciences	22,438	22,319	-1%
  8	Foreign Languages	21,705	15,518	-29%
  9	Philosophy & Religion	12,830	11,988	-7%
  10	Architecture	9,831	9,296	-5%
  11	Ethnic, Cultural & Gender Studies	8,955	7,374	-18%
  12	Theology	9,073	6,737	-26%
  13	Communications Tech	4,858	4,557	-6%
  14	Personal & Culinary Services	1,214	594	-51%
  15	Construction Trades	328	221	-33%
  16	Mechanic & Repair	226	221	-2%
  17	Precision Production	43	28	-35%

  English

  Popular in the 1970s, the English undergraduate degree has gone through peaks (80s and 90s) and troughs (2000s and 10s) of popularity in the last 50 years. Between 2010–2011 and 2020–2021, the number of students with an English degree has fallen by a third.

  The state of English’s woes are even making its way to pop culture, like in Netflix’s The Chair, which follows the head of a struggling English department at a major university.

  Education

  The existing teacher shortage in the United States does not seem to be getting fixed by a burgeoning supply of new grads. In fact, the number of university graduates in Education fell 14% between 2011 and 2021. With concerns around stagnant wages, burnout, and little to no support for supplies, many teachers are seeing an already demanding job becoming harder.

  Liberal Arts

  In the classic era, the liberal arts covered seven fields of study: rhetoric, grammar, logic, astronomy, mathematics, geometry, and music. Now, liberal art degrees include several other subjects: history, political science, and even philosophy—but students are meant to primarily walk away with critical thinking skills.

  The modern world rewards specialization however, and a wider-scope liberal arts degree is seeing fewer takers, with a 10% drop in graduating students.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 19:20

• Mainstream Media Finally Wakes Up To The Gaping GDP-GDI Recession Discrepancy
  Mainstream Media Finally Wakes Up To The Gaping GDP-GDI Recession Discrepancy

  Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

  Not exactly timely, Bloomberg notes “The widening gap between gross domestic income and gross domestic product is a worrying signal.”

  The difference between GDP and GDI is the biggest in US history. It should be identical, but it isn’t. pic.twitter.com/erjWHysI1g

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 30, 2023

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

  GDP vs GDI Chart Notes

  • Real means inflation adjusted

  • GDP is Gross Domestic Product

  • GDI is Gross Domestic Income

  • Real Final Sales is the bottom line assessment of GDP. It excludes inventories which net to zero over time.

  GDI was negative for two consecutive quarters and has been weaker than GDP for four quarters. GDI is now positive, but it is subject to greater revisions than GDP.

  

  GDP numbers from the BEA, chart by Mish

  Bloomberg opinion columnist Aaron Brown says Summer’s End Is Ushering In a Recessionary Chill, emphasis mine.

  In theory, GDP and GDI measure the same thing — the total value of goods and services produced in a geographic area and sold to end-users at arms-length prices during a quarter — but in different ways. If the economy had a single cash register, GDP would measure the money coming into the till, GDI would measure where the money went — to wages, supplies, taxes, interest, dividends or left in the till for owners and stockholders. But since the economy has billions of transactions, many complex and not all captured in official numbers, GDP and GDI have different measurement errors, and thus different values. They’re usually pretty close, however, differing by 0.8% on average.

  Using two successive down quarters as the signal for recession, from 1947 to 1973 GDP and GDI agreed all but once. They both signaled four recessions at the same times, and they both missed the 1961 recession. GDP did give one false alarm in 1947.

  Since 1973, however, GDI has done much better. Four times it signaled recession before GDP and once it caught a recession that GDP missed. Twice the two triggered at the same time, and once GDP gave a false alarm.

  There’s been more news recently suggesting that a recession began at the end of 2022. Second-quarter GDP growth was revised down. Job openings are plunging. The labor leverage ratio — the proportion of workers quitting to those let go by employers — is falling as well, suggesting workers fear a weak job market and have little power to get increased wages. Corporate profits are falling as well. If current trends continue, and if GDP declines a significant share of the roughly 1.5% needed to fall in line with GDI, the economic numbers released from late September through October could well prompt the NBER to announce a recession.

  This has three main implications, two political and one economic. Politically, NBER declaring a recession would support the Republican story that the Biden administration hurt the economy and denied obvious economic reality for three years to push left-wing policies. It would make Democratic painting of Bidenomic prosperity seem hollow or even dishonest.

  I have been talking about the GDP vs GDI discrepancy, negative revisions, the discrepancy between jobs and employment, corporate profits, and the job leverage ratio for months, and in far more detail. Let’s take a look at some of my recent posts.

  Negative Revision to 2nd Quarter GDP, Huge Discrepancy with GDI Continues

  The lead chart and the second chart are from my post Negative Revision to 2nd Quarter GDP, Huge Discrepancy with GDI Continues

  

  Real GDI peaked in the third quarter of 2022.

  Discrepancy Between Jobs and Employment

  

  Employment levels and jobs data from the BLS, chart by Mish.

  Payrolls vs Employment Gains Since May 2022

  • Nonfarm Payrolls: 4,377,000

  • Employment Level: +3,185,000

  • Full Time Employment: +1,446,000

  • Only 45.4 percent of the employment gains for the last 15 months was full time employment.

  Jobs Rise by 187,000 But 110,000 Negative Revisions and Unemployment Soars by 514,000

  On September 1, I noted Jobs Rise by 187,000 But 110,000 Negative Revisions and Unemployment Soars by 514,000

  Accounting for negative revisions, jobs effectively increased by 77,000 while unemployment surges as people looking for work can’t find it. Bloomberg labeled this “Goldilocks”.

  Unemployment rose by 514,000. Over half a million people wanted jobs but couldn’t find them.

  Full time employment is down by 150,000 since January of 2023.

  Here is a blurb I have posted in my monthly jobs reports for eight straight months.

  Because of annual benchmark revisions, the way the BLS reports revisions, and the relatively small sample sizes of monthly jobs reports, we cannot, with strong confidence, suggest these reports portray an accurate picture of either jobs or employment.

  Of the 894,000 rise in employment in January, 810,000 was due to annual benchmark revisions. And the BLS does not say what months were revised, just poof, here you go.

  The monthly jobs report by the BLS samples a mere 6 percent of jobs. The Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) payroll employment data represents 95 percent of the data.

  The BLS will not incorporate March of 2023 until January of 2024. Lovely.

  The Labor Leverage Ratio, a Measure of Wage Bargaining Power, Is in Retreat

  

  Data from the BLS, the Labor Leverage Ratio (LLR) is defined as Quits / (Layoffs + Discharges)

  The BLS comments “the quits rate can serve as a measure of workers’ willingness or ability to leave jobs.”

  The LLR is a refinement to the quits rate.

  I have commented on labor leverage several times this year, most recently in The Labor Leverage Ratio, a Measure of Wage Bargaining Power, Is in Retreat

  Philadelphia Fed GDPplus Measure Sure Looks Like Recession Started in 2022 Q4

  

  The Philadelphia Fed has a measure called GDPplus that’s a blend of GDP and GDI, not an average. It appears to lean more heavily on GDI.

  In 100 percent of the cases, with no false signals, no misses, and no lead times more than two quarters, every time GDPplus had two consecutive quarters of negative growth, the economy was in recession.

  On closer inspection, all but once, and the exception was a mere -0.1 percent, every time GDPplus had one quarter of negative growth, the economy was or would soon go into recession. By soon, I mean within two quarters.

  GDPplus accurately forecast the 1961 recession but GDP and GDI both did.

  GDPplus Recession Signals

  

  Mish compilation of recession lead times based on DGPplus data

  GDPplus Recession Signals Synopsis

  • GDPplus signaled every recession

  • GDPplus was on time 4 times, early by a quarter 3 times, and early by 2 quarters twice.

  This makes it appear as if GDPplus is a leading indicator. It isn’t because the data is heavily revised.

  The BEA makes revisions frequently, especially on GDI. Since GDPplus is more reliant on GDI, it also has significant swings. However, GDPplus is the best recession indicator yet.

  One quarter is sufficient and barring positive revisions to GDI and by implication GDPplus, the economy went into recession in the fourth quarter of 2022.

  For more discussion of GDPplus, please see Philadelphia Fed GDPplus Measure Sure Looks Like Recession Started in 2022 Q4

  Mainstream media is finally waking up to these discrepancies, albeit without any detailed analysis.

  It’s quite possible a recession has come and gone. The NBER already had one instance of declaring a recession after it was over so don’t be surprised if it happens again.

  It’s possible that a recession has come and gone with an interlude due to Inflation Reduction Act inflationary Nonsense.

  If so, expect a rare double dip.

  *  *  *

  Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 19:00

• 'In Broad Daylight & In Front Of Kids': Disturbing Video Shows Maryland Cop Getting Into Backseat With Woman
  ‘In Broad Daylight & In Front Of Kids’: Disturbing Video Shows Maryland Cop Getting Into Backseat With Woman

  A viral video shows a police officer in Prince George’s County, a county in Maryland that borders Washington, D.C., taking what appears to be a young woman into the back of his police cruiser in broad daylight while kids play just feet away. It’s unclear what the officer and young woman did in the back of the cruiser. 

  A video posted on TikTok of a Prince George’s County Police officer has gone viral… I think I might know why 🤔 pic.twitter.com/sTX08SsNxh

  — MoCo PG News (@MoCoPGNews) September 5, 2023

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

  Maryland Bureau Chief for 7News DC Brad Bell confirmed on X, formerly known as Twitter, that Prince George’s County Police Department’s “command staff is aware” of the viral video circulating on multiple social media platforms. He said the police department has “opened an investigation into the circumstances.” 

  .@PGPDNews says “command staff is aware” of this viral video and they’ve opened an investigation into the circumstances. https://t.co/XdG4P1BEsc

  — Brad Bell (@Brad7News) September 5, 2023

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

  … and it appears the officer was suspended. 

  #BREAKING: @PGPDNews spokesperson says the department has suspended the officer seen in the viral video of him getting into the back of a police cruiser with a female (unidentified).

  Unclear if PGPD will release the office’s name @fox5dchttps://t.co/St8Be8eUmm
  hicle-with-woman

  — Lili Zheng (@lzhengtv) September 5, 2023

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

  One X user pointed out, “Across the playground in broad daylight is wildd levels of horny.” 

  “Prince George’s County Police sure do love black booty right in front of the immigrants and the kids,” another said. 

  Someone said, “It’s a PG County cop and folks are acting shocked my this…” 

  “In broad daylight where kids were playing at that smh. He couldn’t drive down the street?! And that girl looked MAD YOUNG to me. This is so foul smfh,” X user said. 

  The Prince George’s officer is taking ‘protect and serve’ to a whole other level. None of this is shocking in the Democratic stronghold county that borders DC. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 18:40

• Don't Dismiss The Possibility Of Gold Confiscation
  Don’t Dismiss The Possibility Of Gold Confiscation

  Authored by Jeff Thomas via InternationalMan.com,

  If you hold precious metals in your portfolio, there is a good chance you fear hyperinflation and the crash of fiat currencies.

  You probably distrust governments in general and believe they are self-serving and have no interest in your economic well-being. It is likely that your holdings in gold are your lifeline – your hope to get you through these times while holding on to your wealth.

  But have you ever given any thought to the possibility of having this lifeline confiscated by the authorities?

  

  In my conversations with friends and associates, I have often raised this question. The typical responses:

  “They’d never do that.”

  “I’ll deal with that if and when it happens.”

  “I just wouldn’t give it to them.”

  I consider these “wishful thinking” responses.

  It’s an interesting thought that the greatest threat to gold and silver investment might not be the possibility of losing on the speculation, but the government taking it away from you. It’s a thought that I’ve found few want to even think about, let alone discuss.

  If you fall into this camp, you’re in good company. Some of the forecasters whom I respect most highly also treat it either as unlikely or at best, “something we may need to look at in the future.” To date, in conversing with top advisors worldwide, the two primary reasons they believe gold will not be confiscated are:

  1. “Confiscation would mean the government acknowledges the reality of the value of gold.”

  Yes, this is quite so. They would be changing their official view… which, of course, they do all the time. But I submit that all that they need to do is put the proper spin on it.

  2. “They would meet greater resistance than they did back in ’33.”

  I expect that this is also true, but that a plan will be put in place to deal with that resistance.

  We’ll address both of these assertions in more detail shortly, but first, a bit of history.

  In 1933, Franklin Roosevelt came into office and immediately created the Emergency Banking Act, which demanded that all those who held gold (other than personal jewelry) turn it in to approved banks. Holders were given less than a month to do this. The government then paid them $20.67 per ounce – the going rate at the time. Following confiscation, the government declared that the new value of gold was $35.00. In essence, they arbitrarily increased the value of their newly purchased asset by 69%. (This alone is reason enough to confiscate.)

  Today, the US government is in much worse shape than it was in 1933, and it has much more to lose. The US dollar is the default currency of the world, but it’s on the ropes, which means the US economic power over the rest of the world is on the ropes.

  I think that readers will agree that they will do anything to keep from losing this all-important power.

  The US government has essentially run out of options. At some point, the fiat currencies of the First World will collapse, and some other form of payment will be necessary. Yes, the IMF is hoping to create a new default currency, but that, too, is to be a fiat currency. If any country were to produce a gold-backed currency in sufficient supply, that currency would likely become the desired currency worldwide. Fractional backing would be expected.

  As most readers will know, the Chinese, Indians, Russians, and others see the opportunity and are building up their gold reserves quickly and substantially. If these countries were to agree to introduce a new gold-backed currency, there can be little doubt that they would succeed in changing the balance of world trade.

  That said, the US government is watching these countries just as we are, and they are aware of the threat of gold to them.

  The US government ostensibly has approximately 8,200 tonnes of gold in Fort Knox, although this may well be partially or completely missing. Additionally, it ostensibly holds a further 5,000 tonnes of gold in the cellar of the New York Federal Reserve building. Again, there is no certainty that it is there. In general, the authorities don’t seem to like independent audits.

  In fact, there are rumors that the above vaults are nearly or completely empty and that the above quoted figures exist only on paper rather than in physical form. While there is no way to know this for sure, it’s not out of the question.

  Either way, if the US and the EU could come up with a large volume of gold quickly, they could issue a gold-backed currency themselves. It’s a simple equation: The more gold they have = the more backed notes they can produce = the more power they continue to hold. By seizing upon the private supply of their citizens, they would increase their holdings substantially in short order.

  Either that or they could just give up their dominance of world trade and power… What would you guess their choice would be?

  It is entirely possible that the US government (and very likely the EU) has already made a decision to confiscate. They may have carefully laid out the plan and have set implementation to coincide with a specific gold price.

  So how would this unfold? Let’s imagine a fairly extreme scenario and ask ourselves if it could be pulled off effectively:

  • The evening news programs announce that the economic recovery is being hampered by wealthy private investors who, by hoarding gold, are skewing the value of the dollar and threatening the middle and poorer classes. The little man is being made to suffer while the rich get richer. A press campaign to equate gold ownership with greed ensues.

  • The government announces the Second Emergency Banking Act, advising the public that “the first EBA was instituted by FDR to solve this same problem during the Great Depression. This act was instrumental in helping the little man ‘recover.’” (As the average man on the street doesn’t know his history nor how wrong this statement is, he’ll believe it. Besides, the announcement has a “feel-good” message, and that’s all that matters.)

  • Possessors of gold, who make up a small minority of the population, would become pariahs. It won’t matter that the guy who owns two gold Maple Leafs is not exactly a greedy, rich man. No one will wish to be seen as resisting confiscation. Neither will they wish to go to prison for resisting, no matter how remote the possibility.

  • The US pays for the gold in US dollars, which are rapidly headed south. Yes, the Fed will need to print more fiat dollars in order to pay them off, but this suits their purpose, as it inflates the dollar even more. Those who have turned in their gold will do whatever they can to unload the US dollars as quickly as possible and will need to find another investment at a time when there are very few trustworthy investments other than gold. The stock market would likely rise, showing the public how the gold confiscation program is “working.”

  • One last scary possibility: The government demands that gold is turned in immediately and that settlement will occur following confiscation. After confiscation, it announces that, as there has been such a large number of cases of rich people ripping off the little man, processing them all could take months, possibly even a year or more. A further announcement states that some investors have made an unreasonable profit on the backs of the poor and that they should not be granted this profit. This profit must be returned to the people. (You can almost hear the cheers of the people.) Then it sets about making assessments. The bureaucrats find that most investors do not have formal, acceptable receipts for every coin in their possession. So if you paid $1,200 for a Krugerrand a couple of years ago, you get paid $1,200. If you bought it at $250 in 1999, you get paid $250. But if you have no receipt in an acceptable form, you get a “fair,” median payment, say, $500, regardless of when you bought it.

  • Appeals: Each investor will be allowed up to one year to appeal the decision of the Treasury as to what is owed him. Of course, the investor knows that the dollar is sinking rapidly and that he would be wise to shut up and take what he is being offered.

  Again, this hypothetical scenario is an extreme one.

  The reader is left to consider just how likely or unlikely this scenario is and what that would mean to his wealth.

  But bear this in mind: If the above scenario were to take place soon, the average citizen would have mixed feelings. They would be glad that the “evil rich” had been taken down a peg, but they would worry about the idea of the government taking things by force, because they might be next. It would therefore be in the government’s interests to implement confiscation only after the coming panic sets in – after the next crash in the market, after it becomes plain to the average citizen that this really is a depression and he really is in big trouble. Then he will be only too glad to see the “greedy rich” go down, and he won’t care about the details.

  As terrible as the thought is, it seems unlikely to me that the government will not confiscate gold, as they have little to lose and so much to gain.

  Those who own gold would prefer to think that this cannot happen, but they have quite a lot riding on that hope and precious little evidence to support it.

  It is entirely possible that this scenario will not take place, just as it is possible that confiscation will not take place. The purpose of this article is to spark some serious discussion – both for and against the possibility.

  Investors are, by their very nature, planners. It may take a community of investors to develop a legal plan to deal with the above eventuality. Time to get started.

  The government can’t easily confiscate what’s outside its own borders, which is why it’s working night and day to make it as difficult as possible for you to protect your assets abroad. This sad reality means that you need to take action before it’s too late. Your first step? Learn how to start internationally diversifying your wealth – and your life. From investing in international markets and opening offshore bank accounts to setting up an offshore LLC or annuity.

  *  *  *

  Unfortunately, there’s little any individual can practically do to change the trajectory of broke governments in need of more cash. There are still steps you can take to ensure you survive the turmoil with your money intact. That’s precisely why bestselling author Doug Casey and his colleagues just released an urgent new PDF report that explains what could come next and what you can do about it. Click here to download it now.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 18:20

• People Rarely Transmit COVID-19 Before Experiencing Symptoms: Lancet Study
  People Rarely Transmit COVID-19 Before Experiencing Symptoms: Lancet Study

  Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  In a blow to the COVID-19 “silent spreader” narrative that has been used to push for universal masking, including controversially among schoolchildren, a recent study published in The Lancet suggests that people who are non-symptomatic rarely have the ability to infect others.

  

  Silent transmission is the idea that those who are infected with COVID-19 but show no symptoms can still spread the virus to other people.

  While all relevant studies show that presymptomatic and asymptomatic “silent spreaders” account for some proportion of infections in other people, the degree of silent transmission is less clear.

  A number of early studies—in some cases affected by limitations that may have led to their proportion of presymptomatic transmission to be “artifactually inflated”—suggested that silent transmission accounted for around half of secondary infections, or even more.

  The early studies led public health authorities to argue that everyone should wear a mask at all times when out in public or crowded places. This, in turn, helped drive draconian universal masking policies, including in schools, in a bid to reduce the spread of COVID-19.

  For instance, Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), initially discouraged universal mask-wearing early in the pandemic but later did a U-turn.

  Initially, “we didn’t realize the extent of asymptotic spread,” Dr. Fauci said in July 2020, adding that later, “we fully realized that there are a lot of people who are asymptomatic who are spreading infection.”

  “So it became clear that we absolutely should be wearing masks consistently,” Dr. Fauci said at the time.

  But new research calls into question the significance of the threat of silent transmission, which comes as COVID-19 cases are on the rise in America, driving what some are calling a renewed pandemic “hysteria” and calls for a fresh round of restrictions, including mask mandates.

  ‘Very Few Emissions’ Before Symptom Onset

  The new study, published in the August issue of The Lancet’s Microbe journal, shows that people who are sick with COVID-19 but don’t show any symptoms have a limited ability to spread the virus to other people.

  Participants in the British study, which was carried out by researchers at Imperial College London, were unvaccinated healthy adults aged 18-30 who were intentionally infected with COVID-19.

  The subjects were monitored under controlled circumstances while self-reporting symptoms three times per day, and researchers collected nose and throat swabs from them daily, checking for the presence of the virus.

  The researchers also tested the inside of masks worn by the participants, checked their hands, and examined the air and surfaces of rooms that the subjects were kept in for a minimum of 14 days.

  Ultimately, the researchers found that less than 10 percent of the viral emissions from infected participants took place before the first symptoms emerged.

  “Very few emissions occurred before the first reported symptom (7%) and hardly any before the first positive lateral flow antigen test (2%),” the authors of the study wrote.

  The new study—which takes the form of a rigorous, controlled “challenge study” rather than the earlier modeling studies that relied on subjective inputs and assumptions of researchers—contradicts earlier research that set the tone for much of the prevailing narrative. That early research appears to have inflated the perceived threat of presymptomatic spread.

  The latest study, suggesting that silent transmission is far less significant, comes amid a growing drumbeat of alarm as COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths are on the rise—along with calls in some circles for renewed restrictions.

  By contrast, many are calling for cool heads to prevail—or are urging civil disobedience if lockdowns or other mandates are reimposed.

  ‘Artifactually Inflated’?

  Some early studies, such as one published in August 2020 called “Temporal Dynamics In Viral Shedding and Transmissibility of COVID-19,” suggested that people who were presymptomatic or asymptomatic accounted for a large proportion of secondary infections.

  This particular study estimated that 44 percent of secondary cases were infected during the presymptomatic stage, while concluding that “disease control measures should be adjusted to account for probably substantial presymptomatic transmission.”

  The authors of the study admitted that it had several limitations, however, including potential “recall bias” that may have tended towards a delay in recognizing first symptoms.

  “The incubation period would have been overestimated, and thus the proportion of presymptomatic transmission artifactually inflated,” meaning that the study may have exaggerated the proportion of people who spread the virus before showing symptoms, they said.

  Another study from July 2020 called “The Implications of Silent Transmission for the Control of COVID-19 Outbreaks” went even further, suggesting that people were most infectious during the presymptomatic phase and concluding that silent transmission was the “primary driver of COVID-19 outbreaks and underscore the need for mitigation strategies, such as contact tracing, that detect and isolate infectious individuals prior to the onset of symptoms.”

  That study relied on a range of assumptions and models, with different presymptomatic, asymptomatic, and symptomatic transmission rates calculated based on a complex mathematical model from another study.

  Findings from earlier studies like the ones cited above led public health officials to argue that silent spreaders were a big factor in COVID-19 transmission and so to recommend that everyone should mask up.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 09/05/2023 – 17:40