• The Perpetual War On Free Speech
  The Perpetual War On Free Speech

  Authored by Donald Jeffries via “I Protest” substack,

  The Founding Fathers made the Constitution palatable by including a Bill of Rights.

  Without the First 10 Amendments, the Constitution is just what its early critics, including Patrick Henry and Thomas Jefferson, said it was; a dangerous consolidation of power far less representative of liberty than the Articles of Confederation.

  The First Amendment was always a huge concern with statists of every era.

  

  Those who thirst for power, and will compromise themselves in order to attain it, have never looked favorably upon those critical of them.

  John Adams, the second president of the United States, passed the Alien and Sedition Acts for just this reason.

  He bristled at criticism.

  Fortunately, Thomas Jefferson succeeded him in office and scrapped this tyrannical concept.

  But the notion reared itself again in 1860, with the election of Abraham Lincoln. Adams was a civil libertarian compared to Lincoln. “Honest” Abe didn’t pass any new Alien and Sedition Acts; he just shut down over two hundred newspapers that opposed any of his unconstitutional actions.

  Woodrow Wilson revived these odious acts during World War I. Eugene Debs and others were imprisoned for opposing the pointless shedding of blood, and America’s participation in it. The Supreme Court, in perhaps its worst ruling ever, upheld Wilson’s right to jail antiwar protesters. Great “liberal” justice Oliver Wendell Holmes coined the phrase “yelling fire in a crowded theater” to justify such heinous oppression, placing an ugly asterisk on free speech. Apparently no concerned American asked at the time, just how protesting a war could be construed as yelling fire in a crowded theater. This expression gained great renown across the land, and is forever on the lips of those who seek to censor dissent.

  Franklin Roosevelt built upon the actions of Wilson, who was inspired by the maniacal despot Lincoln. One of the countless unconstitutional agencies created under the New Deal, the Federal Communications Commission was in effect a national Alien and Sedition Act for the radio stations, and would go on to control content in Hollywood and on every television network. It banned selling advertising that discussed “controversial issues.” Vulgarity and “extremist” opinions were strictly forbidden. FDR pushed several inquisitions in Congress, most notably the one chaired by then Senator Hugo Black. You know, the former KKK member who went on to become a “liberal” Supreme Court justice and arbitrarily awarded the 1948 Senate election to “Landslide” Lyndon Johnson, who was the first to court the dead vote.

  The Black Committee and other inquiries attempted to severely curtail the ability of journalists to criticize the New Deal. FDR himself is documented to have personally tried to ruin the careers of his political opponents. And all of this was years before the Pearl Harbor false flag. Once America entered the war, FDR went after draft evaders, and memorably incarcerated American citizens in concentration camps. Not just Japanese Americans, but German and Italian Americans, too. The Roosevelt administration also stole billions in personal property from these poor souls. Much as Lincoln had locked up any northern antiwar voices without any due process, FDR imprisoned those opposed to his war. In 1945, his successor Harry Truman had antiwar poet Ezra Pound arrested, and he spent a decade in a mental institution.

  We must consider today’s “Woke” authoritarianism in its historical context. The precedents are all there.

  

  Cancel culture was born when Lincoln “canceled” his critics in the press, and threw thousands of uncharged citizens into makeshift prisons. Wilson followed this precedent, but FDR expanded it into a totalitarian art form. His administration “canceled” its critics in a variety of ways. FDR used J. Edgar Hoover to target some of them. His administration confiscated millions of telegrams to and from Roosevelt opponents. Long before Richard Nixon’s laughable efforts to use the IRS to monitor his critics, FDR had the fledgling agency audit almost everyone who opposed him. Indeed, FDR led a veritable crusade against free speech.

  The Social Justice Warriors might look different. Tattooed. Pink or purple hair. Transitioned into countless new “genders.” Utterly addicted to name-calling. But they are the logical descendants of those who supported the Alien and Sedition Acts. Who threw citizens into jail that objected to our involvement in faraway wars. Who wanted to use the IRS, and the FBI, to “cancel” critics of the political elite. Not enough tried to stop this onerous censorship in 1860. Or 1918. Or 1939. And too few are trying to stop it now. The January 6 political prisoners are a testament to that, subjected to the cruel and unjust punishment explicitly prohibited by the Constitution, which was inflicted on northern “Copperheads” during the Civil War, and anarchists and “Reds” during World War I, and “Nazi sympathizers” during World War II.

  The crazed adherents of Identity Politics are hardly the first to want to silence their critics. Get them fired from their job, and rendered unemployable. And increasingly, prosecuted for their Thought Crimes. Those opposing Lincoln’s mad war and suppression of civil liberties were the Thought Criminals of their time, long before Orwell gave a name to them. Everyone reading this little missive is a modern day Thought Criminal. There are millions of us. Is there room in their overcrowded prisons for all of us? As Lord Acton, the great lover of liberty who was friends with Robert E. Lee, not Ulysses S. Grant, reminded us; power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Those in power in America 2.0 are absolutely corrupt.

  How many of us truly believe in free speech? Almost everyone has a big “but,” to quote the late Pee Wee Herman. Sure, I’m for free speech but…not for “Holocaust denial.” Disbelievers in the Apollo moon landings. Or their even more extreme bedfellows, the flat earthers. Those who think mass shootings were a hoax, or “fake news.” White people outraged by the Great Replacement. Just referring to the Great Replacement can get you canceled, unless you’re supporting such a thing. Which all of our horrific leaders do. Try mentioning how the average American woman today weighs what the average American man did sixty years ago, and see what happens. There are a lot of caveats to the mainstream ideal of “free speech.”

  The symbolic prosecutions, these figurative “fire in a crowded theater” abridgements of free speech, are in full swing. Alex Jones supposedly owes nearly a billion dollars to selective Sandy Hook parents. And now any mention of Sandy Hook is even more anathema to public discourse than the Great Replacement is. Jones also apologized for “Pizzagate.” Which was ridiculous; look at those disturbing pictures on Instagram, and the Podesta emails published by Wikileaks. If Donald Trump had paintings of children with freshly spanked bottoms on the walls of Mar-a-Lago, do you think it might be reacted to differently than it was in the case of Podesta’s brother? Now Rudy Giuliani owes almost $150 million to two particular “offended” election poll workers?

  The only acknowledged exceptions to free speech at one point were overtly slanderous or libelous comments. This is understandable; people do have a right to protect their reputation. But it’s a slippery slope, and obviously applied in a wildly unfair manner. There’s a fine line between libel and justified criticism. Donald Trump, think whatever you want to think of him, has been the object of slander from numerous national figures. This includes physical and even death threats. But if Trump ever brought a slander suit against the Fake Media he rages against, it would be laughed out of every courtroom. Because it’s Trump, not because it isn’t slander. Obama, Clinton, Biden- they’d all be treated much more respectfully by this hopelessly corrupt, Tik Tok “justice” system of ours. Some slander is more equal than others.

  But slander and libel have been supplanted now by the Orwellian term “hate speech.” Which has been accepted by almost everyone, even though the very term immediately destroys any concept of free speech. And now “disinformation” and “misinformation,” entirely subjective terms (like “hate speech”), are being bandied about as potential “crimes.” This is essentially what Jones and Trump are being prosecuted for; the notion that they are misleading others with speech that the State finds “offensive,” or “racist,” or “disinformation/misinformation.” Trump is being tried in court for contesting the results of an election. And for exaggerating the value of his assets. That doesn’t seem to worry most Americans. They need to remember that whole, “First they came for the Communists” thing. Don’t think they won’t come after you.

  If we were really protected by the First Amendment, then there would be no possibility of being prosecuted for our views on an election. Or a virus. Or a vaccine. Or any historical event. Every opinion is protected under the First Amendment. Well, theoretically. If you say something “offensive” to any of the groups and individuals that are allowed to be perpetually “offended,” then you are now subject to a politicized prosecution. No one should want to go anywhere near one of our Orwellian courtrooms. They’re nearly as dangerous as hospitals. Thought Criminals, by definition, are not being pursued for their actions. They aren’t robbers. Or rapists. Or murderers. It’s a difficult task to prosecute the thoughts of others. But our authoritarian leaders are up to that task. And millions are complicit by their silence.

  Today, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube ban, suspend and “cancel” those users who have unwelcome views. First Amendment be damned. As the “conservative” defenders of the cancel culture remind us, “They’re private companies! They have a right to ban people!” As I would respond, you mean like restaurants, for instance? So did business owners in the segregated south have a right to deny service to certain people? They don’t need a reason, right? After all, they’re private companies! What exactly is the difference between denying admission to a restaurant, or a store, or a neighborhood, on the basis of skin color, or on the basis of political philosophy? Or even simply wearing a MAGA hat? It’s a selective discrimination thing, you wouldn’t understand.

  It isn’t easy being a true supporter of free speech, in a society that doesn’t value it. Where more people than not are fine with stipulations on it. “The First Amendment doesn’t protect hate speech,” their nauseating mouthpieces in our state controlled media will bleat, as effortlessly as they will bleat “Oswald killed Kennedy” or “Diversity is our Strength.” The word “hate” doesn’t appear anywhere in the Bill of Rights, or the Constitution itself. But there is no one there to counter them when they make these statements, which are disinformation if anything is. I’ll be waiting for someone, perhaps a member of the loyal “opposition,” to point that out. But fewer people have probably read the Constitution than have read the Bible.

  I thought the internet was beyond their control. They let us have unfettered access to true diversity of thought for a few decades. But the social media conglomerates gave them their opening. FDR “canceled” the editors and radio commentators of his day. Now, the “Woke” leftists can get big tech to deny access to crucial internet platforms to those who write or say discouraging words. Many in the alt media cheered the de-platforming of Alex Jones. YouTube and Facebook are shells of their former selves. Many like me are “shadow banned.” They restrict our access to a larger audience. That’s one way to control the competition. FDR and Lincoln would have loved it. What they ideally want is an FCC to control internet content. Millions of Americans don’t believe in God. So they don’t value rights that the Founders said come from God.

  The Right, though victimized by politicized prosecutions in America 2.0, hardly believe in true free speech. Witness their reaction to the mostly nonwhite students on college campuses, protesting Israel’s brutal retaliation against the Palestinians. At Harvard, these students were “doxxed,” just like so many right-wingers have been. Their names were published, and powerful Jewish businessmen tried to blacklist them from employment. Most conservatives, being Zionist defenders of Israel, applauded this particular “canceling” on campus. It was educational to watch the Ben Shapiros and Meghan Kellys of the world display such obvious hypocrisy. Everyone seems fine with suppressing some speech. Who supports all speech?

  We are at war. I’m not referring to the continuous interventionism in other, smaller sovereign nations, which is the foundation of our disastrous “bipartisan” foreign policy. Our leaders are at odds with the concept of free speech. They hate it more than they supposedly hated any foreign bogeyman. I don’t know why they just don’t treat the Bill of Rights like a troublesome Confederate memorial, and remove it from the Constitution. All they’d have to do is declare it’s “racist,” and the majority of White people would start cucking and jiving. If sleep, and birds, and proper grammar, are “racist,” why not free speech? If you don’t have free speech, you don’t have a free country. No one to “hate us for our freedom.” Democracy isn’t threatened by any speech.

  But we are threatened by those who don’t believe in freedom of speech.

  

  Maybe we can start up a new American Civil Liberties Union. One that is, you know, actually concerned about the protection of civil liberties. Civil liberties begins with free speech. If you can’t say what you want, it’s obvious you can’t do what you want. The mass arrests after the truly mostly peaceful January 6 protest demonstrated that we don’t have the right to peacefully assemble, as is guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Well, some do. BLM, for instance. It’s not about protest, or speech, itself. It’s about what the speakers and protesters are speaking or protesting.

  Abridged speech is not free speech. If you don’t support speech you disagree with, you don’t support free speech. Some speech is not more equal than others.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 23:40

• Cyberattack Hits Second Largest US-Non Bank Mortgage Lender
  Cyberattack Hits Second Largest US-Non Bank Mortgage Lender

  US mortgage lender loanDepot confirmed in an 8k filing on Monday that it is the latest victim of a cyberattack that has brought critical systems offline. 

  

  California-based loanDepot, which is the second-largest non-bank mortgage lender behind Rocket Mortgage, wrote in a filing that it “recently identified a cybersecurity incident affecting certain of the Company’s systems.” 

  “Upon detecting unauthorized activity, the Company promptly took steps to contain and respond to the incident, including launching an investigation with assistance from leading cybersecurity experts, and began the process of notifying applicable regulators and law enforcement.

  “Though our investigation is ongoing, at this time, the Company has determined that the unauthorized third party activity included access to certain Company systems and the encryption of data. In response, the Company shut down certain systems and continues to implement measures to secure its business operations, bring systems back online and respond to the incident.” 

  Shares of loanDepot are down 5% in premarket trading in New York. 

  

  The lender noted it will “continue to assess the impact of the incident and whether the incident may have a material impact on the Company.” 

   

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 23:20

• Plastic Chemicals Causing Infertility, Diabetes Found 'Widespread' In Common Food Items: Report
  Plastic Chemicals Causing Infertility, Diabetes Found ‘Widespread’ In Common Food Items: Report

  Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Many of the foods consumed by Americans are contaminated with harmful plastic chemicals that contribute to health complications like diabetes, cardiovascular disorders, and infertility, said a recent report by the nonprofit group Consumer Reports (CR).

  

  CR tested 85 food items from 11 categories—beverages, canned beans, condiments, dairy, fast food, grains, infant food, meat and poultry, packaged fruits and vegetables, prepared meals, and seafood, according to the Jan. 4 report. Researchers examined the presence of plasticizers—a chemical used to boost the durability of plastics. The group analyzed two to three samples from each food item, looking for two types of common plasticizers—bisphenols and phthalates—as well as some of their substitutes.

  They found that these chemicals remained “widespread” in our food products despite “growing evidence” of health risks. CR discovered that 79 percent of tested samples had bisphenols while 84 out of 85 items had phthalates.

  Exposure to such plasticizers can cause severe health issues, like for example in children, bisphenol A (BPA) exposure can negatively affect the brain and prostate glands as well as their behavior. BPA has also been linked with type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and high blood pressure.

  Phthalates have been associated with obesity, type 2 diabetes, lower sperm motility and concentration, early puberty in girls, and cancer.

  Both bisphenols and phthalates have been shown to be endocrine disruptors, meaning they can interfere with the generation and regulation of hormones. Disruptions to hormone levels can lead to cardiovascular disease, infertility, diabetes, and neurodevelopmental disorders.

  Exposure to these chemicals can come from the environment, food, and packaging, right from dust in the house to the printed receipt from a grocery store.

  CR found that the levels of BPA and other bisphenols were “notably lower” compared to when the group last tested for BPA in 2009. This suggested that “we are at least moving in the right direction on bisphenols,” said James E. Rogers, who oversees product safety testing at the organization.

  However, there wasn’t “any good news” on phthalates. Not only were they present in almost all foods, but their levels were also “much higher” compared to bisphenols.

  Some of the top food items with the highest level of phthalate contamination as discovered by CR’s tests are as follows:

  • Beverages: Brisk Iced Tea Lemon, Coca-Cola Original, Lipton Diet Green Tea Citrus, and Poland Spring 100 percent natural spring water.
  • Canned Beans: Hormel Chili with Beans, Bush’s Chili Red Beans Mild Chili Sauce, and Great Value (Walmart) Baked Beans Original.
  • Condiments: Mrs. Butterworth’s Syrup Original and Hunt’s Tomato Ketchup.
  • Dairy: Fairlife Core Power High Protein Milk Shake Chocolate, SlimFast High Protein Meal Replacement Shake Creamy Chocolate, Yoplait Original Low Fat Yogurt, and Tuscan Dairy Farms Whole Milk.
  • Fast Food: Wendy’s Crispy Chicken Nuggets, Moe’s Southwest Grill Chicken Burrito, Chipotle Chicken Burrito, Burger King Whopper With Cheese, Burger King Chicken Nuggets, and Wendy’s Dave’s Single With Cheese.
  • Grains: General Mills Cheerios Original and Success 10 Minute Boil-in-Bag White Rice.
  • Infant Food: Gerber Mealtime for Baby Harvest Turkey Dinner, Similac Advance Infant Milk-Based Powder Formula, Beech-Nut Fruities Pouch Pear, Banana & Raspberries, and Gerber Cereal for Baby Rice.
  • Meat and Poultry: Perdue Ground Chicken Breast, Trader Joe’s Ground Pork 80% Lean 20% Fat, Premio Foods Sweet Italian Sausage, and Libby’s Corned Beef.
  • Packaged Fruits and Vegetables: Del Monte Sliced Peaches in 100% Fruit Juice, Green Giant Cream Style Sweet Corn, and Del Monte Fresh Cut Italian Green Beans.
  • Prepared Meals: Annie’s Organic Cheesy Ravioli, Chef Boyardee Beefaroni Pasta in Tomato and Meat Sauce, Banquet Chicken Pot Pie, Campbell’s Chunky Classic Chicken Noodle Soup, and Chef Boyardee Big Bowl Beefaroni Pasta in Meat Sauce.
  • Seafood: Chicken of the Sea Pink Salmon in Water Skinless Boneless, King Oscar Wild Caught Sardines in Extra Virgin Olive Oil, and Snow’s Chopped Clams.

  Some of these foods had far higher levels of phthalates compared to others.

  For instance, Annie’s Organic Cheesy Ravioli had 53,579 nanograms of phthalates per serving, which is more than double what was found in Chicken of the Sea Pink Salmon in Water Skinless Boneless, Moe’s Southwest Grill Chicken Burrito, Burger King Whopper With Cheese, and Fairlife Core Power High Protein Milk Shake Chocolate.

  Dangerous Chemicals, Autism

  CR pointed out that regulators from the European Union and the United States have set a threshold for BPA and some of the phthalates. None of the 85 food items exceeded these limits. However, this doesn’t mean that the tested foods are safe for consumption.

  “Many of these thresholds do not reflect the most current scientific knowledge, and may not protect against all the potential health effects,” said Tunde Akinleye, the CR scientist who oversaw the tests. “We don’t feel comfortable saying these levels are okay. … They’re not.”

  For instance, some studies have associated high blood pressure, insulin resistance, and reproductive issues with phthalates even when the level of the plasticizer was below the thresholds set by European and American authorities, CR noted.

  Because people can be exposed in a wide range of ways, it can be difficult to quantify a safe limit for the chemicals in any single food.

  “The more we learn about these chemicals, including how widespread they are, the more it seems clear that they can harm us even at very low levels,” said Mr. Akinleye.

  A study published in September found that BPA was directly linked to two key disorders during childhood—autism and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). In children with these conditions, the body’s ability to detoxify BPA was found to be reduced.

  Bisphenol-S (BPS), a BPA substitute, was found to potentially increase the risk of cardiovascular disease according to a 2022 study. “Although BPA, BPS, and BPF share similar chemical properties, BPS and BPF are not safe alternatives for BPA,” it warned.

  A study published at the National Library of Medicine in June 2022 found that phthalates in high concentrations in certain medications could raise the risk of childhood cancer.

  Overall, childhood phthalate exposure was associated with a 20 percent higher risk of childhood cancer. The risk of developing lymphoma or blood cancer doubled while the risk of developing osteosarcoma, a bone cancer, rose by almost three times.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 23:00

• UAE President Tells Netanyahu: "Ask Zelensky For Money"
  UAE President Tells Netanyahu: “Ask Zelensky For Money”

  Via The Cradle,

  Emirati President Mohammed bin Zayed (MbZ) refused a request by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to pay unemployment stipends to Palestinian workers from the occupied West Bank and instead told his ally to go “ask Zelensky” for money during a recent phone conversation, according to informed officials who spoke with Axios.

  Since the historic attack on southern settlements by Hamas in Gaza on October 7, Tel Aviv imposed a closure on the occupied West Bank and banned about 150,000 Palestinian workers from entering Israel.

  

  As concerns grew that a worsening Palestinian economy would exacerbate the violent escalation in the West Bank, Netanyahu refused calls by the defense ministry and Shin Bet to put the issue of paying unemployment stipends to a vote in the security cabinet. Instead, he turned to his allies in Abu Dhabi.

  During a phone call with MbZ a few weeks ago, Netanyahu “broadly asked for help in regards to the Palestinians,” the sources tell Axios. However, the conversation turned sour once the Israeli premier “specifically asked if the UAE would be willing to pay the Palestinian workers,” leaving the UAE leader “stunned.”

  “MbZ told Netanyahu he couldn’t do it, and then sarcastically suggested the Israeli prime minister turn to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky instead,” the sources said, adding that the Emirati leader remarked that “Zelensky gets a lot of money from many countries, so maybe he would be able to help.”

  “The notion that Arab countries will come in to rebuild and pay the bill for what’s currently happening is wishful thinking,” an Emirati official told Axios.

  In mid-December, Netanyahu reportedly told Knesset officials that Saudi Arabia and the UAE would foot the bill to rebuild Gaza.

  “The first step in Gaza will be to defeat Hamas. After that, I believe that the UAE and Saudi Arabia will support the rehabilitation of the Strip,” Netanyahu said during a closed-door testimony to the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.

  Remarkable.

  UAE normalized relations with Israel. Netanyahu asked UAE to pay Palestinian workers Israel kicked out > Oct 7.

  MBZ, leader of UAE said ‘Ask Zelensky.’

  # of ME countries friendly to Israel dwindling.

  Blinken can’t see ‘forest for trees.’

  https://t.co/rhVQYpjMHK

  — Dr Nazreen Kadir (@lettywho1) January 8, 2024

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

  On Tuesday, Israeli media repeated these claims, reporting that US officials seeking to revive a Saudi-Israel normalization deal believe this would secure Saudi funding to “rebuild Gaza.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 22:40

• Mega-Rich Are Forcing Out Millionaires On 'Billionaires Bunker" Island
  Mega-Rich Are Forcing Out Millionaires On ‘Billionaires Bunker” Island

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Modernity.news,

  The mega rich are forcing out millionaires as ‘billionaire bunker’ island, Indian Creek in Miami, Florida, increasingly becomes a private enclave of the uber elite.

  

  A local historian told Bloomberg that even wealthy people can no longer afford to live on the island because they are being priced out by people like Amazon’s Jeff Bezos.

  “Only the very wealthy, the billionaires can afford to live in Indian Creek now. Hundreds of millions aren’t gonna cut it anymore,” said Paul George.

  Bezos already owns multiple properties on the island and is looking to buy three more, having bought two neighboring homes on the island for a total of nearly $150 million last year.

  Inside Florida’s ‘billionaires bunker’ where the ultra-rich like Jeff Bezos is pushing out millionaire locals – as the Amazon tycoon looks to snag three more properties

  Billionaires on the island of Indian Creek in Miami, Florida, are said to be forcing out previous owners… pic.twitter.com/BTUvEyfhk7

  — News News News (@NewsNew97351204) January 5, 2024

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

  Why anyone would need five or more properties on one single small island is up for debate, is it just so Bezos can avoid people or is he trying to construct something similar to Mark Zuckerberg, who keeps expanding his secretive Koolau Ranch hideout in Hawaii?

  Zuckerberg is building a 5,000-square-foot underground doomsday shelter, something that Bezos is almost certainly trying to emulate.

  The privacy of Indian Creek is a big draw for the ultra high net worth, as is the private police force, which “patrols the community around-the-clock by foot, sky, and land.”

  The island can only be accessed via a single, guarded bridge and its famous residents have included Ivanka Trump, Carl Icahn, Colombian banker Jaime Gilinski, Jay-Z and Beyoncé.

  The waterfront properties are ironically owned by many of the same people who push the narrative that man-made climate change is going to cause apocalyptic sea level rises.

  Apparently, they’re going to be just fine though.

  As we document in the video above, billionaires are busy buying up private islands in places like Hawaii, Fiji and New Zealand to prepare for what they call ‘the event’.

  ‘The event’, whatever it ultimately ends up being, will likely be driven by mass resentment towards the very world they created.

  When this earth-shattering ‘event’ happens, the billionaires will scurry away into their underground doomsday bunkers which they have been carefully preparing for years.

  *  *  *

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

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 22:20

• China Dominates The Supply Of US Critical Minerals List
  China Dominates The Supply Of US Critical Minerals List

  Most countries have, for many decades, kept a record of their own critical minerals list.

  For example, the U.S., drew up a list of “war minerals” during World War I, containing important minerals which could not be found and produced in abundance domestically. They included: tin, nickel, platinum, nitrates and potash.

  Since then, as the economy has grown and innovated, critical mineral lists have expanded considerably. The Energy Act of 2020 defines a critical mineral as:

  “A non-fuel mineral or mineral material essential to the economic or national security of the U.S., whose supply chains are vulnerable to disruption.”

  – ENERGY ACT, 2020.

  Currently there are 50 entries on this list and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimates that China is the leading producer for 30 of them. From USGS data, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu visualizes China’s share of U.S. imports for 10 critical minerals.

  

  What Key Critical Minerals Does the U.S. Import From China?

  The U.S. is 100% import-reliant for its supply of yttrium, with China responsible for 94% of U.S. imports of the metal from 2018 to 2021.

  A soft silvery metal, yttrium is used as an additive for alloys, making microwave filters for radars, and as a catalyst in ethylene polymerization—a key process in making certain kinds of plastic.

  China is a major supplier of the following listed critical minerals to the U.S.

  

  Note: China’s share of U.S. critical minerals imports is based on average imports from 2018 to 2021.

  Meanwhile, the U.S. also imports nearly three-quarters of its rare earth compounds and metals demand from China. Rare earth elements—so called since they are not found in easily-mined, concentrated clusters—are a collection of 15 elements on the periodic table, known as the lanthanide series.

  ℹ️ Yttrium and scandium exhibit similar rare-earth properties, and are found in the same ore bodies. They are often grouped together with the lanthanide series.

  Rare earths are used in smartphones, cameras, hard disks, and LEDs but also, crucially, in the clean energy and defense industries.

  Does China’s Dominance of U.S. Critical Minerals Supply Matter?

  The USGS estimates that China could potentially disrupt the global rare earth oxide supply by cutting off 40–50% production, impacting suppliers of advanced components used in U.S. defense systems.

  A version of this sort of trade warfare is already playing out. Earlier this year, China implemented export controls on germanium and gallium. The U.S. relies on China for around 54% of its demand for both minerals, used for producing chips, solar panels, and fiber optics.

  China’s controls were seen as a retaliation against the U.S. which has restricted the supply of chips, chip design software, and lithography machines to Chinese companies.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 22:00

• Trump Allies Demand Accountability From Fauci, Not The Former President
  Trump Allies Demand Accountability From Fauci, Not The Former President

  Authored by Philip Wegmann via RealClear Wire,

  House Republicans were eager to cross-examine Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former chief White House medical adviser, about his response to the COVID-19 pandemic. They remained silent, however, about Donald Trump, the former president who stood by the architect of the lockdown strategy.

  “It is time for Dr. Fauci to confront the facts and address the numerous controversies that have arisen during and after the pandemic,” said Ohio Republican Rep. Brad Wenstrup, who chairs the select subcommittee on the coronavirus pandemic that will grill the doctor behind closed doors.

  

  Nine Republicans sit on the subcommittee. All of them love to loathe Fauci. Four of them have already endorsed Trump as he seeks the presidency a third time, including Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has said publicly that the doctor “should be in jail.”

  Fauci was the face of the White House COVID task force, prescribing masking and school closures and lockdown measures during the pandemic, often as Trump stood at his side. The relationship was fraught. Trump frequently contradicted the doctor he deputized, occasionally even grousing about him publicly on Twitter. But in the end, Trump still awarded Fauci a presidential commendation for his work.

  The focus on the decisions Fauci made, and not on the president who empowered him, has exasperated Trump rivals like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. “Are we going to have some type of accountability?” DeSantis asked during a recent interview with RealClearPolitics. “Are we going to have a reckoning for this, or are we just going to act like everyone did such a great job?”

  Reps. Debbie Lesko of Arizona, John Joyce of Pennsylvania, and Ronny Jackson of Texas will also get a chance to cross-examine Fauci. Each has criticized the doctor. All of them still endorsed the former president who presided during his tenure. None returned RCP’s request for comment.

  “He will, once again, put America and Americans first,” Lesko said in a statement two days after Christmas to announce her endorsement of the Republican president who oversaw Fauci as he prescribed lockdowns and mask mandates from the White House podium.

  Ahead of Fauci’s testimony Monday, the Arizona Republican retweeted a post from the subcommittee calling for “serious answers” from the now-retired doctor. “It’s time,” she wrote.

  At issue is whether in 2020 Trump delegated far too much authority to Fauci, who pushed hard for extensive pandemic lockdowns. “For an executive widely known for being able to fire people,” wrote Dr. Scott Atlas, who joined the White House COVID task force that summer, “it was shocking that this president allowed the incompetence of the nation’s Task Force advisors to continue.”

  Trump has given different accounts for why he deferred to Fauci’s judgment. During remarks last summer, the former president insisted that he once listened to Fauci, but “whatever he said, I did the opposite.”

  When conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt later asked why he never removed Fauci, Trump replied that he was “not allowed to fire him” and claimed that Fauci “wasn’t a big player in my administration.”

  Pressed by Megyn Kelly on why he awarded Fauci a presidential commendation, Trump pled ignorance, saying during a September interview on Sirius XM, “I don’t know who gave him the commendation. I really don’t know who gave him the commendation. Someone probably handed him a commendation.”

  Multiple former Trump officials found that answer far-fetched and said publicly that any type of commendation would require a signature from the president. Regarding the suggestion that Fauci be fired, however, several former officials told RCP that is easier said than done. They note that the other members of the COVID task force had a “resignation pact”: If one person was fired, all would resign.

  Atlas was the single dissenting voice from that group. A neuro-radiologist and senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, he publicly railed against lockdowns and called for a different strategy that was eventually adopted in large part in Florida.

  DeSantis rose to national prominence largely because of how he handled the pandemic in that state, and the governor regularly rails against “Faucism” on the campaign trail. Nonetheless, he’s lagging behind Trump by double digits in each of the early primary states, according to the RealClearPolitics Average.

  “The 21st century. The three biggest events: 9/11 and the wars that followed, the Great Recession, and then COVID,” DeSantis told RCP. The virus, he continued, “had a broader impact than the other two events combined. And yet, here we are. We’re not even discussing that.”

  Polling suggests that the Republican electorate is more concerned with current issues, such as inflation, than a pandemic that began nearly four years ago. Trump’s compounding legal trouble and his vow to deliver “retribution” upon his enemies also seem to overshadow any questions of accountability concerning his handling of the pandemic.

  The Trump campaign did not return a request for comment about Fauci’s testimony. A spokesman for the campaign previously told RCP, however, that anyone criticizing Trump’s handling of COVID “couldn’t manage a Little League baseball team let alone manage a global pandemic crisis caused by China.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 21:40

• Blinken To Israel: Number Of Civilians Killed, 'Particularly Children,' Is 'Far Too High'
  Blinken To Israel: Number Of Civilians Killed, ‘Particularly Children,’ Is ‘Far Too High’

  US Secretary of State Antony Blinken gave a press briefing from Israel on Tuesday, after meeting with Israeli leaders including PM Netanyahu and President Herzog, reportedly delivering a message urging restraint. 

  He issued the following blunt but bizarrely understated words: the “daily toll on civilians in Gaza, particularly children, is far too high,” Blinken said.

  

  It’s the year 2024 and the top US diplomat just asked America’s closest ally in the Middle East politely to… stop killing so many children.

  “The situation for men, women, and children in Gaza remains dire. Far too many Palestinians have been killed, especially children. Far too many remain incredibly challenged in terms of…access to food, water, medicine, the essentials of life,” the top diplomat described while in Israel.

  He did add this which seemed somewhat in justification of Israeli military actions: “We know that the enemy who hides and fires from schools and hospitals bases is an incredible challenge.”

  “As Israel’s campaign moves to a lower intensity phase in northern Gaza and as the IDF scales down its forces there, we agreed today on a plan for the U.N, to carry out an assessment mission,” Blinken said during his visit

  “It will determine what needs to be done to allow displaced Palestinians to return safely to the north,” he added, indirectly addressing growing calls from within Israel’s government to encourage a mass migration into other countries.

  According to regional media:

  Blinken said the United States rejected any proposals advocating a resettlement of Palestinians outside Gaza and stressed that the Palestinian Authority has the responsibility to reform itself.

  He said that many countries in the Middle East are ready to invest in the future of Gaza, but only with a clear pathway to a Palestinian state.

  Meanwhile, the top U.S. diplomat also said Washington believes South Africa’s genocide submission against Israel is “meritless.”

  His comments addressing the Hamas ‘day after’ – which has been subject of disagreement between Tel Aviv and Washington of late, included the following: “Many countries in the region are prepared to invest when the conflict is over in [Gaza’s] reconstruction and security,” Blinken said. “But it is essential to them that there also be a clear pathway to the realization of a Palestinian political state.”

  

  This week the Gaza Health Ministry has estimated over 23,000 deaths, mostly civilians, as a result of the IDF air and ground operation to eradicate Hamas. International reports, citing Palestinian sources, have said that some two-thirds of these are women and children.

  Blinken highlighting the plight of Palestinian children in such an unusually frank fashion signals a change in White House messaging. After all, the reality is that children in the Gaza Strip were dying and being wounded at a high rate even from the opening week of the conflict in the wake of the Oct.7 Hamas terror attack. Thus Blinken’s words clearly represent growing albeit very belated pressure from the Biden administration. But it’s too little, too late given the astounding and tragic death toll.

  The White House has also failed to address the real elephant in the room, however: the fact that so many children are dying with American weapons, and this is all being funded by the US taxpayer. Blinken while in Tel Aviv still consistently underscored the long-running administration message, saying the US stands by Israel’s “right to prevent another October 7 from occurring.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 21:20

• FDA Commissioner Promotes Products Off Label, An Illegal Pharma Marketing Scheme Long Criticized By Democrats
  FDA Commissioner Promotes Products Off Label, An Illegal Pharma Marketing Scheme Long Criticized By Democrats

  Authored by Paul Thacker via The Disinformation Chronicle,

  During his first stint as FDA Commissioner during the Obama administration, Dr. Robert Califf proposed allowing companies to advertise their products off-label. This marketing practice is illegal under FDA’s regulations that cover drug advertising, and Dr. Califf received pushback from Senator Ed Markey who sent him a stiff letter demanding that he address off label use of opioids.

  

  “The FDA must not become complicit in the growing prescription fentanyl problem this country is combating,” Senator Markey wrote. Indeed, Pfizer pled guilty to a U.S. criminal charge and paid a record $2.3 billion in 2009 for illegally marketing over a dozen drugs off label. Multiple federal agencies investigated Pfizer at that time, including the FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations (OCI).

  “We expect this agreement to increase integrity in the marketing of pharmaceuticals,” the Justice Department claimed in the settlement’s announcement.

  When Biden chose Dr. Califf to run the FDA a second time in 2021, The New York Times reported that Obama officials had actually killed Dr. Califf’s attempt to allow increased off label promotion. “[T]he proposal, which many public health experts considered dangerous, was blocked by others in the Obama administration, according to a person familiar with it.”

  But with his critics now in the rearview mirror, Dr. Califf is speeding forward with his “dangerous” proposal. And this time, the Commissioner himself is promoting products off label. A week before the Christmas break, Commissioner Califf posted a message on X, promoting COVID vaccines off label to allegedly protect children against long COVID.

  

  “The FDA-approved and authorized coronavirus vaccines are indicated for active immunization to prevent COVID-19 caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2),” an FDA official emailed me. “The vaccines are not approved or authorized as a treatment for long COVID.” In follow up email, FDA clarified that the COVID vaccines are also not approved or authorized to “prevent” long COVID.

  In his promotional post on X, Commissioner Califf linked to a news article in Nature Magazine as proof the vaccines prevent long COVID. And here’s where the story gets even weirder.

  Nature’s news story discusses a small, observational study that had been presented at a conference some months prior and has not been peer reviewed. Even more disturbing, Nature’s reporter supported this slim study with positive quotes sprinkled throughout the article from Dr. Jessica Snowden, a pediatric infectious-disease specialist at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences. However, Nature failed to provide readers with one rather important detail: Pfizer has disclosed paying Dr. Snowden to provide marketing talks for their COVID vaccine and she serves on the company’s advisory board. 

  “She clearly should have disclosed her Pfizer funding, especially as her commentary could contribute to increased sales of Pfizer’s vaccines,” said Dr Barbara Mintzes, a professor of evidence-based pharmaceutical policy, at the University of Sydney. “Companies choose who to fund. They don’t fund experts who highlight a product’s limited effectiveness or have serious safety concerns.”

  Science news or pharma advertising?

  The December news article in Nature reported on a presentation given last October at a medical conference and that was led by a medical officer at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The study evaluated mRNA COVID-19 vaccines’ impact on children getting long COVID, but relied on self-reports of long COVID, not a physician’s diagnosis. The results that found a positive correlation with vaccination were based off 28 kids who either self-reported or were reported by a parent to have long COVID.

  “This is really important data,” Dr. Snowden told Nature in one of her many quotes littered throughout the article. “This will demonstrate to families how important it is that we protect our kids, not just from acute COVID, but from the longer-term impacts of COVID as well.”

  In a 2018 report, Nature Magazine editor Richard Monastersky stated that Nature was updating their news section’s conflict-of-interest and ethics policies to make them more comprehensive. Last week, I sent several questions to Monastersky asking why Nature had not included Dr. Snowden’s ties to Pfizer and whether Nature reporters are required to look into an experts’ financial ties before quoting them in news pieces.

  Read the rest here… (including details on payments from Pfizer)

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 21:00

• Illegal Aliens Tried Buying Guns 48,000 Times In 25 Years
  Illegal Aliens Tried Buying Guns 48,000 Times In 25 Years

  Over the past 25 years, illegal aliens have attempted to purchase firearms at gun shops just under 48,000 times – only to be denied, according to a group that monitors border security policy.

  

  The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) reported on Jan. 2 that the FBI has nearly 14 million records of firearms applications that failed a national background check due to “unique prohibiting events.” Of those, 47,930 denials were issued to illegal aliens according to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) between Nov. 1998 and Nov. 2023.

  “While the 13.9 million unique prohibiting events cataloged in the FBI database represent events—not individual illegal aliens—the data point to large numbers of migrants in the market for firearms. Whatever the total may be, one is one too many,” according to FAIR, which added that “the dangers posed by largely unvetted illegal aliens possessing firearms has been vastly exacerbated over the past three years, as the Biden administration has presided over record numbers of new illegal aliens entering our country.”

  “At the same time, federal policies and the proliferation of sanctuary jurisdictions that prohibit the sharing of critical law enforcement information will inevitably result in more Americans falling prey to criminal aliens.”:

  Meanwhile, US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reported the seizure of 547,610 illegal weapons in 2023 alone, including ammunition, gun parts, scopes, silencers and body armor, the Epoch Times reports. In 2022, there were 1,147,497 weapons seizures.

  “We’ve got plenty of laws; criminals are criminals,” Arizona gun shop owner Charlie Bollenbaugh told the outlet. “They’re going to find ways around them.”

  Mr. Bollenbaugh added that there’s “no real way of telling” who is a U.S. citizen the moment they walk through the door to purchase a gun.

  But there is a legal process to weed out the ineligible buyers, he said.

  In Arizona, as in other states, the gun buyer must first show a valid state driver’s license or government-issued photo ID along with proof of age and residency and have no felony convictions.

  Federal law requires that each buyer fill out and sign a Form 4473 national background check under penalty of perjury. The form is submitted by the gun store electronically through the NICBS, and the results are known within minutes. -Epoch Times

  “If they are legally allowed to purchase a firearm, and they’ve come here correctly, the government tells me to go ahead and proceed,” Bollenbaugh told the Times. “They can’t buy a firearm without going through a valid background check and presenting a government-issued ID.”

  

  More via the Epoch Times;

  In 2019, the Democrat-controlled U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that mandated federal background checks for all legal firearms sales and transfers.

  Included in the bill was a Republican-sponsored amendment that would have required gun dealers to report to federal immigration when an illegal alien attempted to purchase a firearm.

  The provision failed passage in the Senate in a heavily partisan vote.

  “In rejecting this amendment, the Democrats have shown their true colors,” said U.S. Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.), sponsor of the amendment, in a written statement after the vote.

  “It is clear they are not interested in preventing gun violence or stopping the illegal purchase of firearms, but rather they are only interested in limiting the rights of law-abiding citizens to advance their political agenda.”

  In southern border states such as Texas, crime involving illegal aliens is a serious problem.

  The DHS reported more than 422,000 criminal aliens were booked into Texas jails between June 1, 2011, and Dec. 31, 2023, according to the Texas Department of Public Safety (TDPS).

  

  Nearly 300,000 were classified as illegal aliens by DHS.

  The TDPS added that illegal aliens committed more than 509,000 criminal offenses, including homicide, burglary, drug offenses, theft, sex crimes, and kidnapping.

  In the first few days of 2024, there were 3,104 noncitizen arrests by CBP, 48 involving weapons violations. In 2023, there were 15,267 arrests, with 307 for weapons offenses, according to CBP data.

  Mr. Bollenbaugh said illegal gun purchases by criminals happen “all the time” despite serious efforts by law enforcement to track every firearm transaction and serial number in the United States.

  He said it is illegal for a U.S. citizen to purchase a firearm for a person who is not authorized to own a gun, which includes illegal aliens.

  A gun purchase by proxy is known as “straw purchase,” he said.

  “The definition of a straw purchase is you are knowingly filling out the 4473 and background check because you know the person that wants the gun can’t obtain it legally,” Mr. Bollenbaugh said.

  At MPP Guns in Phoenix, gun manager Henry Escobar said the rules are clear when purchasing a firearm.

  “Our policy here is if you come in with more than one person—two or three people—we’re going to ask everybody for ID,” he said. “Even if they come in with an ID from another state, we’re going to turn them down.”

  He said that many people enter the store simply to inquire about purchasing a gun.

  “We ask if they’re a citizen, from out of state, or a permanent resident,” Mr. Escobar told The Epoch Times.

  While federal background checks work for the most part, he said: “If they come in and lie saying they’re a U.S. citizen, and they fill out the form”—hopefully, “there’s a way for [the ATF] to catch that,” he said.

   

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 20:40

• UMich Now Has Over 500 Jobs Dedicated To DEI, Payroll Exceeds $30 Million
  UMich Now Has Over 500 Jobs Dedicated To DEI, Payroll Exceeds $30 Million

  Authored by Jennifer Karbany via The College Fix,

  The University of Michigan continues to exponentially grow the number of staffers dedicated to advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion, with at least 241 paid employees now focused on DEI and payroll costs exceeding $30 million annually, according to an analysis conducted for The College Fix.

  

  The payroll costs are $23.24 million for salaries and $7.44 million for benefits, or $30.68 million, an amount that would cover in-state tuition and fees for 1,781 undergraduate students.

  Thirteen DEI staff members earn more than $200,000 and 66 earn more than $100,000 when factoring in benefits.

  In addition, 76 faculty or staff members work part-time as “DEI Unit Leads” advancing diversity efforts in one of UM’s 51 schools, colleges, and units, bringing UM’s core DEI headcount to 317, said economist Mark Perry, who conducted the analysis.

  The number of positions at Michigan’s flagship university advancing DEI exceeds more than 500 when including those who work full-time or part-time on DEI and factoring in open and unfilled positions, as well as employees who serve as “DEI Unit Leads” and others who serve on dozens of DEI committees, Perry said.

  “That brings the total number of UM employees who advance DEI on either a paid or unpaid basis to well more than 500 and possibly as high as 600,” said Perry, a paid consultant for The Fix who used public salary and website data for the analysis.

  University of Michigan disputes the findings, arguing in a statement to The College Fix they are “flawed and misleading” since they include employees whose primary duties are not solely DEI-related.

  “Diversity, equity and inclusion are core values at the University of Michigan. As such, there is not a specific budget set aside for diversity outreach and recruitment,” said Colleen Mastony, university spokesperson, in an email Monday to The College Fix.

  “Most employees working on DEI are not solely dedicated to DEI efforts but do so in addition to their other roles and responsibilities.”

  “…The university’s DEI efforts are appropriate to the size, scope, and complexity of our university – spanning the university, including 51 units over our three campuses, our academic medical center, and our over 100,000 students and employees. Although some work is done centrally, much of it is done at the unit and department level,” Mastony said.

  Today, the public university employs at least 241 paid staff members whose main duties are to provide DEI programming and services as a primary job responsibility, according to Perry.

  This list of DEI employees at the University of Michigan compiled by @Mark_J_Perry for @CollegeFix is longer than a @BillAckman tweet: https://t.co/l8Etmh3DMC pic.twitter.com/gjNdg6P2hx

  — Steve McGuire (@sfmcguire79) January 9, 2024

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

  As part of UM’s ambitious five-year Diversity, Equity & Inclusion (DEI) 2.0 Plan, the university’s 19 academic schools and colleges and its 32 non-academic units must now also implement DEI plans. Non-academic units include the school’s three libraries, art museum, botanical gardens, IT department, athletics, development, audit services and more.

  “UM’s five-year diversity central plans are reminiscent of the Soviet Union’s and Communist China’s five-year central plans to achieve ‘Ideal Communist Societies’ which are examples of top-down oppressive bureaucratic blueprints to socially engineer outcomes decided by the top leadership of the dictatorial regimes,” Perry said.

  “UM has become a DEI ideological complex with a university attached,” he said, referring to Warren Buffett’s comment calling GM is a health and benefits company with an auto company attached.

  The $30.68 million cost to fund the 241 DEI employees does not include indirect costs, such as computers, phones, printers, travel expenses, conference expenses and overtime.

  Perry said the full number of DEI positions likely exceeds 500 when taking into account: full-time or part-time DEI staffers at 241; employees who serve as DEI Unit Leads at 76; DEI positions currently open or unassigned, roughly 130; and employees serving on dozens of DEI committees in various departments, schools, colleges, and units at 150 or more.

  DEI staff is well compensated with salaries as high as $402,800 for the university’s chief diversity administrator, Tabbye Chavous Sellers. She is paid almost two times more than the average full professor, about 2.5 times more than the governor, and about three times more than the average assistant or associate professor.

  Michigan’s Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s salary is $159,300, and the average salaries for assistant, associate, and full professors at UM are $129,500, $148,300, and $206,500, respectively.

  The average DEI salary at UM is $96,400; factoring in fringe benefits, 144 DEI employees at UM receive a total compensation of more than $100,000.

  The 2023-24 totals are a huge increase from last year’s figures, which came in at 142 DEI employees at a payroll cost of $18 million annually, a spike that can in part be traced to UM’s recent and sweeping five-year Diversity 2.0 Plan, which “outlines UM’s diverse, inclusive future” over the next five years from 2023 to 2028.

  UM’s new DEI 2.0 plan comes on the heels of its first $85 million 5-year DEI 1.0 Plan from 2016 to 2021. According to the January 2023 column “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of DEI 1.0” in the Michigan Review, that plan failed miserably.

  The independent student newspaper reported that campus climate surveys conducted in 2016 and 2021 found that UM students became less happy since the beginning of DEI 1.0 on nearly every metric.

  The survey results show “DEI 1.0 has been a failure, and it is not because of a lack of resources. If the largest number of diversicrats in the country cannot improve life on campus, there is something wrong at the heart of the effort,” argued then-student Charles Hilu.

  Hilu, a former contributor to The College Fix, said last week the new figures are even more disheartening.

  “Given the program’s track record, it is unfortunate that the DEI bureaucracy is ballooning even further,” he said via email.

  “As I had pointed out before, nearly every measure of student well-being declined after DEI 1.0, and students became less likely to interact with their peers who had different backgrounds,” he said.

  “The first effort certainly did not have a lack of resources. I hope that the University of Michigan has truly assessed why DEI 1.0 yielded the poor results it did, given the amount of money and staff they are now throwing at their diversity programs.”

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 20:20

• Analysts See "Uranium's Third Bull Market" Through 2024
  Analysts See “Uranium’s Third Bull Market” Through 2024

  So far this week, spot prices for yellowcake – uranium concentrate used in nuclear power generation – reached a new 16-year high, climbing to $92.45 per pound. Reflecting on our December 2020 note to readers in “Buy Uranium: Is This The Beginning Of The Next ESG Craze,” yellowcake prices have risen 217%. 

  The uranium market is only getting hotter, and continued tightness could push prices over $100, analysts from Bank of America and Berenberg Bank wrote in two separate notes. 

  

  BofA’s metals and mining team said tightness in uranium markets could extend well into 2025, indicating that prices could run higher through this year. The team of analysts has increased their uranium spot price price targets to $105 per pound in 2024 and $115 in 2025. 

  They outlined three near-term catalysts that could propel prices higher:

  1. Higher electricity prices make higher uranium prices more absorbable
  2. Investment fund volumes continue to increase
  3. Inventories are lower than previously thought while production slippages also remain a risk

  

  The analysts pointed out: “Uanium’s third bull market set up for a promising 2024.” 

  On a separate note, Berenberg analysts said the requirement for some uranium users to diversify away from Russian supply could be a major price driver. They said prices will likely normalize around $70 per pound for the long term. 

  Soaring prices have buoyed stocks of mining companies like Cameco up nearly 300% since December 2020. The Sprott Uranium Miners ETF (URNM is also up almost 300%. And supplier Uranium Energy Corp is up 416%. 

  

  According to uranium market data firm UxC, uranium demand is surging as contracts signed by utilities reached 160 million pounds last year – the highest annual volume since 2012. 

  “The uranium market is only getting tighter,” Jonathan Hinze, president of UxC, told The Wall Street Journal. 

  It only took 13 years after the Fukushima disaster to put nuclear energy back into the spotlight as the world races to decarbonize power grids. 

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 20:00

• US Appeals Court Blocks California From Banning Guns In Most Public Places
  US Appeals Court Blocks California From Banning Guns In Most Public Places

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A U.S. appeals court on Jan. 6 allowed a judge’s ruling that blocked California from enforcing a new gun-control law that bans the carrying of firearms in most public places on the grounds that it was unconstitutional.

  

  The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dissolved an order by a different 9th Circuit panel from a week earlier that suspended an injunction issued by a judge who concluded that the Democrat-led state’s law violated the right of citizens to keep and bear arms under the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment.

  “The administrative stay previously entered is dissolved,” the court wrote in May v. Bonta. “The emergency motion under Circuit Rule 27-3 for a stay pending appeal and for an interim administrative stay is denied pending further order of the court.”

  Last week’s order temporarily stayed the injunction. It allowed the law to take effect on Jan. 1. Gun rights groups then asked the 9th Circuit to reconsider, and on Jan. 6, a different panel of judges dissolved the order, suspending the injunction.

  “So the politicians’ ploy to get around the Second Amendment has been stopped for now,” C.D. Michel, a lawyer for the gun rights groups, said in a statement.

  California’s appeal of the injunction will now be heard in April. The state’s attorney general, in court papers, had argued that “tens of millions of Californians will face a heightened risk of gun violence” if the law were blocked.

  The law was enacted after the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in June 2022 that expanded gun rights nationwide. The high court, in that case, struck down New York’s strict gun permit regime and declared for the first time that the right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment protects a person’s right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense, establishing a legal precedent for future cases.

  In December, U.S. District Judge Cormac J. Carney handed down a preliminary injunction against the gun law after he found that it would “unconstitutionally deprive” people with carry permits because they would not then have the “constitutional right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense.”

  The judge also said California, with the law, intentionally undermined and ignored the landmark 2022 Supreme Court ruling.

  “The law’s coverage is sweeping, repugnant to the Second Amendment, and openly defiant of the Supreme Court,” Judge Carney, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, wrote in his ruling. “The law designates twenty-six categories of places, such as hospitals, public transportation, places that sell liquor for on-site consumption, playgrounds, parks, casinos, stadiums, libraries, amusement parks, zoos, places of worship, and banks, as ‘sensitive places’ where concealed carry permitholders can’t carry their handguns.

  The law, known as SB2, would make “every public place in California into a ‘sensitive place,’ effectively abolishing the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding and exceptionally qualified citizens to be armed and to defend themselves in public,” he wrote.

  Kostas Moros, a lawyer for one of the plaintiffs in the case—the California Pistol and Rifle Association—told The Reload that the earlier appeals court ruling meant that the “right to carry in California was unconstitutionally eliminated for almost a week.” He hailed the court’s recent decision to block the law.

  “We are relieved the status quo has been restored, and Californians with CCW permits, who are among the most law-abiding people there are, can resume carrying as they have for years,” he said, referring to concealed carry weapon permits.

  In a statement to news outlets on Jan. 6 in response to the court order, a spokesperson for California Gov. Gavin Newsom said the move is “dangerous” and “puts the lives of Californians on the line,” adding, “We won’t stop working to defend our decades of progress on gun safety in our state.”

  The SB2 law was signed by Mr. Newsom, a Democrat, in September of last year. The 9th Circuit will hear arguments for the case in April.

  Responding to the decision, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat, wrote on social media: “We’ve ensured California’s common-sense concealed carry weapons law—prohibiting concealed firearms in sensitive places like playgrounds and hospitals—takes effect tomorrow & while we appeal the lower court’s dangerous decision.”

  Reuters contributed to this report.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 19:40

• Office Vacancies Hit Record High Across US Cities As CRE Downturn Worsens
  Office Vacancies Hit Record High Across US Cities As CRE Downturn Worsens

  Courtesy of the Federal Reserve’s most aggressive interest rate hiking cycle in a generation, a surge in remote work in a post-Covid world, and imploding Democrat-run cities with radical progressives in City Halls who fail to enforce common sense ‘law and order,’ the office sector is reeling and faces an accelerated downturn. 

  New data from Moody’s Analytics shows that 19.6% of office space across major US metro areas was not leased as of the fourth quarter of 2023, exceeding the previous high of 19.3% in the commercial real estate downturn between 1986 and 1991. 

  

  “The bulk of the vacant space are buildings that were built in the 1950s, ’60s, ’70s, and ’80s,” Mary Ann Tighe, chief executive of the New York tri-state region at real-estate brokerage CBRE, told The Wall Street Journal. 

  The new record directly reflects the remote and hybrid work trends that have surged since Covid as companies reduce overall corporate footprints.

  

  Kastle Systems, the gold-standard measure of office-occupancy trends via card-swipe data, has yet to recover from pre-Covid levels. 

  

  Another driver of rising office vacancy, but not mentioned in the WSJ report nor other legacy corporate media outlets covering the new Moody’s Analytics data, is that failed social justice reforms in Democrat cities have forced companies to shift operations to safer areas. This is a topic widely ignored by woke journos. 

  

  In a previous report, the Mortgage Bankers Association found that $117 billion in CRE office debt needs to be repaid or refinanced this year. This debt is concentrated in Democrat cities like New York City (Manhattan), San Francisco, Chicago, and Los Angeles. 

  

  Unless the Fed aggressively begins cutting rates in March, building owners’ ability to obtain financing for previous loans will have trouble rolling over that debt. 

  This will only mean regional banks with high exposure to the CRE space could face a tsunami of credit losses over delinquent CRE loans.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 19:20

• "We No Longer Need As Many People": Duolingo Fires 10% Of Contractors, Will Replace Them With AI
  “We No Longer Need As Many People”: Duolingo Fires 10% Of Contractors, Will Replace Them With AI

  It’s what Goldman’s head of TMT trading, Peter Callahan, calls the story of the day: almost a year after IBM said it would stop hiring for roles that can be replaced by AI, with Goldman estimating that some 300 million non-menial, highly paid workers could be made redundant thanks to AI (which will automate up to one-fourth of current work tasks)…

  

  … overnight, Bloomberg reported that Duolingo, maker of language-learning software, is cutting 10% of contracted workers while using generative artificial intelligence to create more content, the latest sign that companies are handing off tasks typically handled by (paid) workers to (largely free) AI tools. It is, according to Callahan, one of the first “efficiency gains on the back of A.I” headlines that he recall seeing (“even if this is small in scope, it is a notable datapoint for the GenAI theme.”)

  “We just no longer need as many people to do the type of work some of these contractors were doing. Part of that could be attributed to AI,” a Duolingo spokesperson said, confirming that 10% of contractors were “offboarded.”

  Chief Executive Officer Luis von Ahn said in a November letter to shareholders that the company is using generative AI to produce “new content dramatically faster,” such as the scripts to shows that help teach languages. The company also uses AI to generate voices within the app and has introduced a premium tier, Duolingo Max, with AI-generated feedback and conversations in other languages.

  Naturally, the market rewarded this announcement, pushing DUOL stock 3% higher after more than tripling in 2023. This, of course, guarantees that most publicly-traded companies will follow suit and fire all non-critical workers in coming months, sparking an avalanche of new layoffs and forcing the Fed to actively consider how the coming Universal Basic Income wave will be funded.

  As Bloomberg notes, the intense interest in generative AI has led employee groups and unions to question whether businesses will use the technology as an excuse to reduce their workforce (spoiler alert: they will). A report published in April by the World Economic Forum estimated that AI would cause “significant labor-market disruption” over the next five years, though the net impact may be positive as employers seek workers with more technical skills to navigate the use of the technology. Actually, the net impact will be catastrophic and will lead to mass riots around the world and certainly in China where labor protests just hit a 7 year high in 2023.

  

  Last month, Microsoft responded to those concerns and announced an alliance with the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, which is made up of 60 unions that represent 12.5 million workers, to train people about AI and look at how the technology may affect employment.

  At an event announcing the partnership, Microsoft President Brad Smith said the goal is to bring industry and labor to the table to “enhance” the way people work.

  “I can’t sit here and say that AI will never displace a job,” Smith said the event. “I don’t think that would be honest. AI is well-designed to accelerate and eliminate some of the parts of people’s jobs that you might consider to be drudgery.”

  Translation: AI will displace millions of jobs… and since the large language models behind AI are trained using such leftist garbage as WaPo, NYT and Business Insider, the results will be nothing short of hilarious.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 19:20

• Biden Admin Vows To Hunt Down 'All' Jan. 6 Suspects – Even Those Who Weren't There That Day
  Biden Admin Vows To Hunt Down ‘All’ Jan. 6 Suspects – Even Those Who Weren’t There That Day

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

  The Biden administration has pledged to continue to pursue and convict all people who broke the law in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol incident, including those who never entered the building or who weren’t even present at the U.S. Capitol that day.

  

  Prosecutors have, to date, charged over 1,250 people with various crimes related to Jan. 6, ranging from being present on Capitol grounds without authorization, to assault of a police officer, to seditious conspiracy.

  Former President Donald Trump has said on several occasions that he thinks Jan. 6 detainees are being mistreated by the Biden administration and has vowed to issue pardons for many of them.

  President Trump rallied his base in Iowa on the eve of the Jan. 6 anniversary.

  “The J6 hostages, I call them. Nobody has been treated ever in history so badly as those people,” President Trump said at a rally in Iowa on the eve of the Jan. 6 anniversary, where he pledged to pardon a “large portion” of imprisoned Jan. 6 defendants.

  President Joe Biden, by contrast, last week celebrated the jailing of Jan. 6 defendants in a speech to mark the third anniversary of the Capitol breach.

  “Collectively, to date, they have been sentenced to more than 840 years in prison,” he said.

  “And what has Trump done? Instead of calling them ‘criminals,’ he’s called these … insurrectionists ‘patriots.’ And he promised to pardon them if he returns to office,” he added.

  ‘All Jan. 6 Perpetrators’ To Be Targeted

  Off the campaign trail, the country’s top prosecutor has made clear that the DOJ under President Biden has no intention of letting Jan. 6 participants off easy—including those who weren’t even there that day.

  “We have initiated prosecutions and secured convictions across a wide range of criminal conduct on January 6, as well as in the days and weeks leading up to the attack,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a speech on Friday.

  Prosecutors have, to date, secured over 890 convictions in connection to the Jan. 6 incident, with Mr. Garland vowing to press ahead to cast the DOJ dragnet widely.

  “Our work continues,” he said. “As I said before, the Justice Department will hold all January 6 perpetrators, at any level, accountable under the law—whether they were present that day or were otherwise criminally responsible for the assault on our democracy.”

  “We are following the facts and the law, where they lead,” he added.

  

  ‘Prosecutorial Discretion’

  Nearly two-thirds of the 890-plus convicted Jan. 6 participants have received some time in prison.

  The longest prison sentence—22 years—was handed down to Enrique Tarrio, the former Proud Boys national chairman who was convicted of seditious conspiracy for allegedly plotting with others to forcibly prevent the transfer of power between then-President Trump and then-President-elect Joe Biden.

  

  Dozens of Jan. 6 detainees are still languishing in jail awaiting trial three years after the Capitol incident.

  Matt Graves, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia who is leading the ongoing Jan. 6 prosecutions alongside special counsel Jack Smith, said last week that the DOJ had so far focused its prosecutorial efforts mostly on those who entered the Capitol or took part in violent acts in and around the building.

  “We have used our prosecutorial discretion to primarily focus on those who enter the building or those who engaged in violent or corrupt conduct on Capitol grounds,” Mr. Graves said.

  “But if a person knowingly entered a restricted area without authorization, they have already committed a federal crime,” he continued.

  “Make no mistake, thousands of people occupied an area that they were not authorized to be present in,” he added.

  

  In light of Mr. Garland’s remarks that the DOJ would continue to hunt down “all Jan. 6 perpetrators” whether or not they were at the Capitol that day, Mr. Graves’s statements reinforce the view that prosecutors intend to expand their dragnet to people who never entered the building—or weren’t even there that day.

  ‘Cast Their Net Far Too Broadly’

  But while the Biden administration seems intent on broadening its hunt of Jan. 6 suspects, a former attorney general said he thinks things have already gone too far.

  Bill Barr, who served as attorney general under President Trump, told Fox News in a recent interview that he believes some people involved in the Jan. 6 incident—like those who attacked police and broke into the Capitol building—deserve to be punished.

  However, Mr. Barr said he believes the DOJ has already cast its Jan. 6 prosecutorial net too widely.

  “There were people that should have been prosecuted,” Mr. Barr said. “But I think they cast their net far too broadly.”

  He said the DOJ under President Biden “has been hounding people that really, you know, just walked into open doors in the Capitol and hung around.”

  “I think they just took it too far,” he said. “But that being said, I don’t minimize what happened up there. While I don’t think it was an insurrection, it clearly was a shameful episode and some of the people involved should be prosecuted.”

  

  Meanwhile, on the same day that the interview with Mr. Barr aired, the FBI announced that it had arrested three “January 6 fugitives,” individuals who were indicted for various alleged crimes committed three years ago at the U.S. Capitol, including assault and resisting arrest, but failed to show up at trial.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 19:00

• Another Hezbollah Senior Commander Reportedly Taken Out In Israeli Airstrike
  Another Hezbollah Senior Commander Reportedly Taken Out In Israeli Airstrike

  Another senior Hezbollah official has been killed in a targeted Israeli drone strike, the day following the killing of elite Hezbollah special forces commander Wissam Hassan Al-Tawil. 

  Tuesday’s strike killed Ali Hussein Barji, widely described as the commander of Hezbollah’s aerial forces in southern Lebanon. He reportedly oversaw Hezbollah’s drone forces, which has sent hundreds of explosive-laden UAVs as well as drones for for the collection of surveillance over Northern Israel in the last months.

  While the death was widely reported in international media, Hezbollah later in the evening denied that Barji had been killed. According to Reuters, Hezbollah denies the Israel Defense Forces killed Ali Hussein Barji, the terror group’s drone commander in southern Lebanon, saying in a statement that “the commander was never subjected to any assassination attempt as the enemy claimed.”

  

  The attack reportedly happened in the town of Khirbet Selm, within hours before Al-Tawil’s funeral procession. Israeli media had characterized the hit as direct retaliation for an earlier drone attack on a northern Israeli base:

  Barji was killed hours after an explosives-laden drone launched by Hezbollah blew up in the IDF Northern Command headquarters in Safed. Barji was involved in the attack on the base.

  Hezbollah claimed responsibility for the attack, which struck a major IDF command center, and said it had launched “a number of explosive attack drones” at the base in response to the alleged Israeli assassinations of al-Tawil on Monday and top Hamas official Saleh al-Arouri in Lebanon last week.

  An Israeli government spokesman has complained that “Hezbollah is dragging Lebanon into a totally unnecessary war.” The spokesman, Eylon Levy, said in a Monday press briefing, “We are now at a fork in the road.”

  Tuesday saw additional IDF airstrikes in various parts of south Lebanon. The rapid and growing pace of the tit-for-tat, with major events and assassinations now occurring daily, suggests an all-out war could be around the corner.

  But by almost all accounts of military observers and regional monitors, Hezbollah is much more formidable that Hamas, having several times the military capability to sustain a fight with the Israeli army in terms of manpower and weaponry.

  #Hezbollah claims it responded to the killing of #Hamas al-Arouri, and the killing of one of Wassim al-Tawil (one of the commanders of the Radwan force), by firing drones at the Israeli military’s northern command HQ in Tsfat.

  One impact has been reported. pic.twitter.com/ARLatCcjIb

  — Michael A. Horowitz (@michaelh992) January 9, 2024

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

  A full Israel-Hezbollah war would be a nightmare for the whole region, and would also drag the country of Lebanon into further suffering, amid the severe economic crisis of the last few years. Iran would also likely get more deeply involved.

  If things slide to that point, among Israel’s first targets would likely be Beirut International Airport, which is precisely what happened in the 2006 war.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 18:40

• Trans Professor With 'Be Gay, Do Crimes' Tattoo Appointed To WHO Taskforce
  Trans Professor With ‘Be Gay, Do Crimes’ Tattoo Appointed To WHO Taskforce

  Authored by Micaiah Bilger via The College Fix,

  Law professor will help create health guidelines for ‘trans, gender diverse people’

  A Canadian transgender professor who sports a “be gay, do crimes” tattoo recently was appointed to a World Health Organization group tasked with developing healthcare guidelines for “trans and gender diverse people.”

  Florence Ashley, an assistant law professor at the University of Alberta, is one of 21 individuals on the new taskforce, and about half of them identify as transgender, The Post Millennial reports.

  Ashley uses “they, them, that, bitch” pronouns, according to the report.

  

  Scheduled to meet in February, their goal is to develop international guidelines that will increase “access and utilization of quality and respectful health services by trans and gender diverse people,” according to a Dec. 18 announcement from the WHO.

  The Post Millennial reports more:

  The group includes two former presidents of WPATH, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, which in their latest guidelines stated there should be no age-limit on sex changes for minors.

  Ashley, a criminal law assistant professor at the University of Alberta, is on board with that, believing that “puberty blockers ought to be treated as the default option” for all minors, regardless of gender identity, so that kids can “choose” their gender instead of growing up naturally and without intervention because natural development “strongly favours cis embodiement by raising the psychological and medical toll of transitioning.”

  Ashley also has told children on TikTok to “be gay and do crime,” according to the X account Libs of TikTok.

  After the comments sparked backlash on social media, the law professor got a “be gay, do crimes” tattoo to “be gay and do crime even harder,” The Post Millennial‘s Libby Emmons wrote Sunday.

  In which a criminal law professor from Alberta who was just appointed by the World Health Organization retaliated against mean tweets from Jordan Peterson and Libs of TikTok by getting a tattoo saying “be gay, do crimes.”

  pic.twitter.com/Haj0DcRiy9

  — Libby Emmons (@libbyemmons) January 7, 2024

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

  The new WHO taskforce that Ashley serves on is a project of the WHO Departments of Gender, Rights and Equity – Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, Global HIV, Hepatitis and Sexually Transmitted Infections Programmes, and Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research.

  When the group meets, the WHO states that they will work to develop guidelines in five areas, including the “provision of gender-affirming care,” “health workers education and training for the provision of gender-inclusive care,” and “legal recognition of self-determined gender identity.”

  According to The Post Millennial, this means “sex change surgeries for all people, including minors,” “medical staff using pronouns, encouraging sex change drugs and surgeries,” “eliminating sex-segregated domestic violence and rape crisis centers,” and more.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 18:20

• Claudine Gay Is Only Digging Deeper: Victor Davis Hanson
  Claudine Gay Is Only Digging Deeper: Victor Davis Hanson

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via RealClear Wire,

  It is understandable that Claudine Gay is furious over her forced resignation, her calamitous fall from grace, and the public consensus about the great damage done to Harvard by her presidency.

  

  But still, playing the wounded fawn is no excuse or defense.

  Thus Claudine Gay’s recent New York Times disingenuous op-ed alleging racism as the prime cause of her career demise was, to quote Talleyrand, “worse than a crime, it was a blunder.” And her blame-gaming will only hurt her cause and reinforce the public’s weariness with such boilerplate and careerist resorts to racism where it does not exist.

  Gay knows that her meteoric career trajectory through prestigious Phillips Academy, Princeton, Stanford, and Harvard was not symptomatic of systemic racism, but rather just the opposite – in large part through institutional efforts to show special concern, allowances, and deference due to her race and gender.

  And she knows well that her forced resignation was not caused by a conspiracy of conservative activists. It came at the request also of liberal op-ed writers in now embarrassed left-wing megaphones like the New York Times and the Washington Post, black intellectuals, and academics – and donors who usually identify, like the vast majority of Harvard philanthropists, as liberal Democrats.

  Gay knows, too, that in her now notorious congressional testimony, had she just offered an independent assessment of the epidemic of antisemitism on her campus and a Harvard plan to stop it (rather than joining in the finger-in-the-wind groupthink of the other two presidents), and had she not been guilty of long-standing, serial, and flagrant plagiarism, she would still have her job.

  Gay knows that other white university presidents have recently been forced to resign for far less culpable behavior than her own. Pennsylvania president Liz Magill was forced to quit after her Dec. 5 seeming inability or unwillingness to act against blatant antisemitic speech and conduct on her own campus, or Stanford’s president Marc Tessier-Lavigne for co-authoring, some decades earlier, scientific papers whose results were not always based on authenticated data.

  Again, as for Gay’s insinuations of a cabal that took her down, she also knows that such a charge is no more true or false than the public outrage, both liberal and conservative, over Magill’s obtuseness, or the largely left-wing effort to remove the white male Tessier-Lavigne.

  Gay knows that she herself has disciplined and censored lots of Harvard professors, among them preeminent black scholars, such as Roland Fryer and Ronald Sullivan, on speculative allegations far less egregious than her own serial plagiarism and inconsistent policies of addressing “hate speech.” Did anyone suggest she was then a “racist”?

  Gay knows that as president she oversaw a code of behavior that routinely severely disciplined students, staff, and professors for plagiarism of a nature far less serial and systematic than her own.

  Gay indeed knows that her plagiarism was far more serious than suggested by her half-hearted defense of her scholarship (“I have never misrepresented my research findings, nor have I ever claimed credit for the research of others”).

  In fact, when anyone – again and again – copies word-for-word whole paragraphs without attribution or quotation marks, or lifts entire sentences and appropriates the thoughts of another without sufficient footnotes, that is precisely “misrepresentation” and claiming “credit” where credit is not due. If a Harvard president and full professor makes such a defense of intellectual theft, what will it say in the future about Harvard?

  Gay knows that her claim of being proactive in correcting some lifted passages was not proactive at all. It was entirely reactive and came only in response to criticism of her scholarly methods.

  Gay knows that she has done irrevocable damage to Harvard; given the Harvard Corporation, its legal team, its 700 supportive faculty letter-signers, and its satellite freelancers leave to embarrass themselves further; and gravely eroded the institution’s reputation and credibility by going out of their way to defend the indefensible solely on her behalf:

  • By threatening legal action against the New York Post for airing the legitimate charges of plagiarism
  • By creating a new, ad hoc vocabulary to legitimize her plagiarism (“duplicative language”/“missteps”)
  • By also echoing her charges of racism (and in surreal fashion without any self-awareness that if such charges were true, then Harvard would not have forced her to resign or at least would have refused her resignation)
  • By claiming that anonymous complaints of her intellectual theft were somehow illegitimate by virtue of their whistleblower status
  • By absurdly insinuating that plagiarism is not plagiarism if the plagiarized does not complain

  There was one key issue that Gay neither raised nor much less resolved: Given that now Professor Gay has made no effort to explain item by item all the allegations of decades-long and habitual plagiarism, does she feel now exempt from such charges as a Harvard professor of political science?

  And if so, is her faculty exemption of the sort usually accorded other professors and students under similar suspicion of plagiarism?

  In the end, was it really asking too much of a Harvard president just to do two things? 1) Explain to Congress why there was a problem of antisemitism at Harvard, and then outline the concrete steps she would take to stop the spread of growing antisemitic speech and conduct at her campus, and 2) Don’t plagiarize the work of other scholars?

  This article originally appeared on X, formerly Twitter, Jan. 4, 2024.

  Tyler Durden
  Tue, 01/09/2024 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• CNN Admits All Gaza Coverage Is Run Past Team Under Israeli Military Censor
  CNN Admits All Gaza Coverage Is Run Past Team Under Israeli Military Censor

  Authored by Julia Conley via Common Dreams,

  CNN has long been criticized by media analysts and journalists for its deference to the Israeli government and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in its coverage of the occupied Palestinian territories, and the cable network admitted days ago that it follows a protocol that could give Israeli censors influence over its stories.

  A spokesperson for the network confirmed to The Intercept that its news coverage about Israel and Palestine is run through and reviewed by the CNN Jerusalem bureau—which is subject to the IDF’s censor.

  

  The censor restricts foreign news outlets from reporting on certain subjects of its choosing and outright censors articles or news segments if they don’t meet its guidelines.

  Other news organizations often avoid the censor by reporting certain stories about the region through their news desks outside of Israel, The Intercept reported.

  “The policy of running stories about Israel or the Palestinians past the Jerusalem bureau has been in place for years,” the spokesperson told the outlet. “It is simply down to the fact that there are many unique and complex local nuances that warrant extra scrutiny to make sure our reporting is as precise and accurate as possible.”

  The spokesperson added that CNN does not share news copy with the censor and called the network’s interactions with the IDF “minimal.” But James Zogby, founder of the Arab American Institute, said the IDF’s approach to censoring media outlets is “Israel’s way of intimidating and controlling news.”

  A CNN staffer who spoke to The Intercept on condition of anonymity confirmed that the network’s longtime relationship with the censor has ensured CNN’s coverage of Israel’s bombardment of Gaza and attacks in the West Bank since October 7 favors Israel’s narratives.

  “Every single Israel-Palestine-related line for reporting must seek approval from the [Jerusalem] bureau—or, when the bureau is not staffed, from a select few handpicked by the bureau and senior management—from which lines are most often edited with a very specific nuance,” the staffer said.

  Jerusalem bureau chief Richard Greene announced it had expanded its review team to include editors outside of Israel, calling the new policy “Jerusalem SecondEyes.” The expanded review process was ostensibly put in place to bring “more expert eyes” to CNN’s reporting particularly when the Jerusalem news desk is not staffed.

  In practice, the staff member told The Intercept, “‘War-crime’ and ‘genocide’ are taboo words. Israeli bombings in Gaza will be reported as ‘blasts’ attributed to nobody, until the Israeli military weighs in to either accept or deny responsibility. Quotes and information provided by Israeli army and government officials tend to be approved quickly, while those from Palestinians tend to be heavily scrutinized and slowly processed.”

  Meanwhile, reporters are under intensifying pressure to question anything they learn from Palestinian sources, including casualty statistics from the Palestinian Ministry of Health.

  The Ministry of Health is run by Hamas, which controls Gaza’s government. The United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees said in October, as U.S. President Joe Biden was publicly questioning the accuracy of the ministry’s reporting on deaths and injuries, that its casualty statistics have “proven consistently credible in the past.”

  Despite this, CNN’s senior director of news standards and practices, David Lindsey, told journalists in a November 2 memo that “Hamas representatives are engaging in inflammatory rhetoric and propaganda… We should be careful not to give it a platform.”

  Another email sent in October suggested that the network aimed to present the Ministry of Health’s casualty figures as questionable, with the News Standards and Practices division telling staffers, “Hamas controls the government in Gaza and we should describe the Ministry of Health as ‘Hamas-controlled’ whenever we are referring to casualty statistics or other claims related to the present conflict.”

  WHETHER REPORTING FROM the Middle East, the United States, or anywhere else across the globe, every CNN journalist covering Israel and Palestine must submit their work for review by the news organization’s bureau in Jerusalem prior to publication…
  https://t.co/TmgnlXncK0

  — Alice Rothchild, MD (@AliceRothchild) January 8, 2024

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

  Newsroom employees were advised to “remind our audiences of the immediate cause of this current conflict, namely the Hamas attack and mass murder and kidnap of Israeli civilians” on October 7.

  At least 22,600 people have been confirmed killed in Gaza and 57,910 have been wounded in Israeli attacks on Gaza since October 7. Thousands more are feared dead under the rubble left behind by airstrikes. In Israel, the death toll from Hamas’ attack stands at 1,139.

  Jim Naureckas, editor of the watchdog group Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting, noted that the Israeli government is controlling journalists’ reporting on Gaza as it’s been “credibly accused of singling out journalists for violent attacks in order to suppress information.”

  “To give that government a heightened role in deciding what is news and what isn’t news is really disturbing,” he told The Intercept. Meanwhile, pointed out author and academic Sunny Singh, even outside CNN, “every bit of reporting on Gaza in Western media outlets has been given unmerited weight which not granted to Palestinian reporters.”

  “Western media—not just CNN—has been pushing Israeli propaganda all through” Israel’s attacks, said Singh.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 23:40

• Secretary Of Defense Lloyd Austin Must Resign
  Secretary Of Defense Lloyd Austin Must Resign

  Authored by Joe Buccino via RealClear Wire,

  The news that the U.S. Department of Defense failed to inform the American public that its Secretary of Defense was hospitalized in Walter Reed for four days represents a stunning breach of transparency standards. It is also a measure of reputational damage from which Secretary Lloyd Austin will never recover. He must be forced to resign.

  

  The original admission – dropped at the end of a Friday to minimize exposure – that the Secretary received multi-day treatment for an unidentified elective surgery introduced immediate and intense scrutiny from national security reporters. It drew a formal admonishment from the Pentagon press.

  The issue may have died there, but the subterfuge further grew the story. Additional reporting revealed some critical details not released by the Pentagon in its Friday announcement: Austin was in in-patient intensive care, generally reserved for those in immediate danger. Meanwhile, his Deputy Secretary of Defense, Kathleen Hicks, was vacationing in Puerto Rico.

  Many questions now must be answered: Who was adjudicating the Pentagon’s support for the war in Gaza? Who was coordinating with Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant on behalf of the U.S. military? Who approved the Jan. 4 strike into Baghdad that killed a militia leader believed responsible for attacks on American troops? Who coordinated that strike and its aftermath with defense officials in the Middle East? These are the kinds of actions that require leadership from inside the Pentagon. Why did the Deputy Secretary of Defense remain on vacation with the Secretary incapacitated?

  Further, still – what is the health status of our Secretary of Defense? Only a severe condition would introduce multi-day hospitalization amidst multiple crises in the Middle East, a log-jammed war in Ukraine, and new Chinese threats against Taiwan. The statement Austin released late Saturday in an attempt to tamp down the controversy reveals he is “on the mend” – whatever that means – and looks forward to “returning to the Pentagon soon.” How long is he out? This seems much more serious than elective surgery – the line the Pentagon press officers are sticking with. What is his medical status at age 70?

  More questions still: What did the Pentagon press officers know, and when did they know it? Surely, they are aware of the protocol for publicly announcing medical procedures for cabinet officials. Who was in on the deception? The Secretary of Defense travels with an entire operations center around him at all times: note-takers, communications experts, and intelligence analysts. These people all report to defense officials, who report to other defense officials. It’s hard to believe the Pentagon’s press office was unaware that the Big Boss was in the hospital. In fact, hiding the Secretary of Defense during a tumultuous work week for the American military surely involved the collusion of multiple senior officials.

  The Pentagon could have avoided all these questions and all of this controversy with a press statement upon Austin’s entering the hospital and updates throughout. U.S. Air Force Major General Pat Ryder held two press briefings during Austin’s hospital stay – he could have provided updates on his boss’ condition from behind the podium. More importantly, he should have told us who was running the Pentagon. It’s unclear how the nation is to believe anything coming out of the Pentagon press office in the coming months.

  The American Secretary of Defense walks the earth with the most essential information any of us can have. He renders decisions on behalf of this country that kill many people in other countries. Lloyd Austin represents American power to much of the world. He runs an enterprise that costs American taxpayers north of $840 billion and employs more than three million workers. We get to know where our Secretary of Defense is at all times. We get to know when he’s on vacation. We get to know when he’s in the hospital.

  Lloyd Austin cannot recover from this breach of trust. In fact, he cannot be trusted any longer. If he wants to keep his hospital visits private, he should be allowed to do so – as a private citizen.

  ---

  Joe Buccino is a retired U.S. Army Colonel public affairs officer and the former communications director of U.S. Central Command. He also served as the spokesman for Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick M. Shanahan.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 23:00

• 3-In-4 Asians Expect China To Keep Slowing, & An End To Japan's NIRP In 2024
  3-In-4 Asians Expect China To Keep Slowing, & An End To Japan’s NIRP In 2024

  A survey among Nikkei Asia readers shows what events respondents from the region find most likely to occur in 2024.

  

  As Statista’s Katharina Buchholz reports, in the eyes of three quarters of Asians, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is sure to extend his time in office in a year that observers have called one of the most important for elections ever.

  But respondents were even more sure that the Japanese leadership would be forced to abandon its zero interest policy after almost a decade of negative rates. While in Europe and the U.S., the legacy of the global financial crisis of 2008 has been left behind, Japan has refused to follow suit despite the global inflation crisis. The country might be an outlier in terms of consumer price increases – due to businesses’ timid growth strategies and companies and consumers rejecting price increases alike – but 2024 might be the year the facade finally cracks.

  Another three quarters of respondents to the Nikkei survey see China’s GDP growth continuing to stay behind former boom years.

  Less popular but still intriguing predictions for Asia’s 2024 include North Korea’s first nuclear test since 2017 and China debuting a 5-nanometer chip after August’s reveal of the Chinese 7-nanometer chip caused a sensation. Both events are thought likely by 57 percent of respondents.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Around half of survey takers predict that Chinese electric car maker BYD will enter the U.S. market to challenge rival Tesla. In Q4 of 2023, the company shipped more EVs than Tesla for the first time – supporting the hunch of the respondents who answered the question in December before this information was revealed in early 2024.

  Somewhat fewer – around 45 percent – of respondents expect 2024 to see more legalizations of same-sex marriage in Asia. Out of all that found this likely, half expect new laws to be passed in Thailand, while 20 percent thought they would be introduced in Japan.

  Another prediction for outside of Asia was made on the re-election of former U.S. President Donald Trump in the super election year of 2024. More than 60 percent of Asian respondents believe Trump will prevail in November.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 22:40

• Did Loosening Gun Control Cause A Nationwide Drop In Homicides?
  Did Loosening Gun Control Cause A Nationwide Drop In Homicides?

  Submitted by Gun Owners of America,

  According to a recent study, the homicide rate in the United States plummeted in 2023. The drop was so drastic in fact, the study’s author was quoted saying that this is likely one of the fastest declines in homicides ever recorded.

  But is there a reason for the decline? We think so. It’s possible that the removal of gun control may have played a critical role in this decline.

  

  In 2022, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in the case NYSRPA v. Bruen.

  If you need to get more familiar with Bruen, the case focused on the petitioners’ struggle to obtain a concealed carry permit in New York. Obtaining a New York concealed carry permit was notoriously hard to achieve because of New York’s restrictive “may issue” system for permitting.

  In the Bruen ruling, the Supreme Court removed the State’s power to refuse concealed firearm permits to law-abiding citizens. Following this ruling, there was a massive surge in concealed carry permit applications in states known for tight regulations, like Maryland, California, and New York.

  

  With the increase in concealed carry permits, criminals no longer could have confidence that their victims would be unarmed. This may likely have contributed to the drop in homicides nationwide.

  In addition, more states like Nebraska and Alabama adopted constitutional carry laws in 2023, while Florida passed a law allowing permitless carry. This all happened while the homicide rate nationwide drastically decreased.

  Honestly, this goes to show how backwards gun control is in the first place. Violent crime fell even while gun control restrictions were being loosened!

  In contrast, in areas with very strict gun control, like Washington, D.C., we’ve seen a different trend: the homicide rate went up by 36%. Perhaps it’s time for these places to rethink their laws and give citizens a better chance to defend themselves against criminals.

  Meanwhile, California, the State that prides itself on being the most restrictive State for gun ownership in the country had the first mass shooting of 2024 according to the gun control group The Gun Violence Archive.

  

  One of our cases, May v. Bonta, focuses on California’s efforts to further restrict concealed carry. The State argued that allowing concealed firearms endangers public safety. How could this be true with millions of Americans already armed and carrying every day?

  Concealed Carry permit holders are some of the most law-abiding groups in the nation. The idea that those who have obtained government-issued permits to carry firearms would make the country less safe is not only misleading but lacks credibility.

  🚨 HUGE WIN against California gun control ⤵️ https://t.co/a6ZtcXQoYe

  — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) January 7, 2024

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

  Either way, we’re dedicated to ensuring that your Second Amendment right is unimpeded by the tyrants in governments like California and New York with our fights in the Courts and Congress.

  Watch: More Guns, Less Crime

  *   *   *

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 22:20

• IRS: Venmo, PayPal And CashApp Freelancers Face 2024 Reporting Requirements
  IRS: Venmo, PayPal And CashApp Freelancers Face 2024 Reporting Requirements

  After delaying for two years, the IRS is planning to finally start implementing its new 1099-K reporting requirement for anyone earning income via third-party payment apps such as PayPal, Venmo, Zelle or Cash App.

  

  The rule, which was originally slated to take effect in 2022 and was delayed for 2023, means that a 1099-K form “could be sent to anyone” using those services who makes over $600 per year, according to the agency.

  “We spent many months gathering feedback from third-party groups and others, and it became increasingly clear we need additional time to effectively implement the new reporting requirements,” said IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel several weeks ago in delaying the rule again.

  Prior to the rule, third-party apps only sent 1099-K forms to people who received $20,000 or more in commercial payments across more than 200 transactions.

  The IRS has delayed this new reporting rule for two years in a row to give payment apps more time to prepare for the change. One sticking point: Distinguishing between taxable and nontaxable transactions through third-party apps isn’t always easy. For example, money your roommate sends you through Venmo for dinner is not taxable. Money received for graphic design work you tackled is. The IRS paused implementation to avoid confusion and incorrect earnings being reported. –CNET

  The IRS will begin with a phased rollout, requiring payment apps to report income by freelancers and business owners with earnings over $5,000 vs. $600 in the hopes that raising the threshold will reduce ‘noise’ from inaccuracies, while eventually working towards the $600 minimum. 

  “Taking this phased-in approach is the right thing to do for the purposes of tax administration, and it prevents unnecessary confusion,” said Werfel. “It’s clear that an additional delay for tax year 2023 will avoid problems for taxpayers, tax professionals and others in this area.”

  As the Epoch Times notes further; A provision in the American Rescue Plan requires users to report transactions through payment apps, including Venmo, Cash App and others, for goods and services meeting or exceeding $600 in a calendar year. Before that provision—and now for this year—the reporting requirement applied only to selling goods and services to taxpayers who received over $20,000 and had over 200 transactions.

  “The Form 1099-K could be sent to anyone who’s using payment apps or online marketplaces to accept payments for selling goods or providing services. This includes people with side hustles, small businesses, crafters and other sole proprietors,” the IRS said. “However, it could also include casual sellers who sold personal stuff like clothing, furniture and other household items that they paid more than they sold it for.”

  “Reporting requirements do not apply to personal transactions such as birthday or holiday gifts, sharing the cost of a car ride or meal, or paying a family member or another for a household bill. These payments are not taxable and should not be reported on Form 1099-K,” the agency added.

  There has been confusion about what taxpayers should do if they sell an item at a loss. Those scenarios shouldn’t be taxed but may still generate forms to send to taxpayers.

  “Selling items at a loss is not actually taxable income but would have generated many Forms 1099-K for many people with the $600 threshold. This complexity contributed to the IRS decision to delay the additional year to provide the agency time to update its operations to make it easier for taxpayers to report the amounts on their forms,” the agency said.

  Starting this month, the IRS will plan a phased rollout of the plan and will require third-party payment apps and services to report business and freelancer earnings of more than $5,000 rather than $600, according to the IRS.

  “This means that for 2023 and prior years, payment apps and online marketplaces are only required to send out Forms 1099-K to taxpayers who receive over $20,000 and have over 200 transactions. For tax year 2024, the IRS plans for a threshold of $5,000 to phase in reporting requirements,” said the agency.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 22:00

• Jim Bovard: Biden Says Vote For Me Or Hitler Wins
  Jim Bovard: Biden Says Vote For Me Or Hitler Wins

  Authored by Jim Bovard,

  “Endless hysteria will keep you free,” said none of the Founding Fathers. But President Joe Biden missed that message before his absurdly overheated speech last Friday near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. Biden draped himself in Revolutionary War virtue as he demanded that Americans quiver in fear at the prospect of his reign ending. Biden invoked the third anniversary of the January 6 Capitol clash to effectively call for canceling the 2024 presidential election.

  At a minimum, Biden wants to turn the November election into a referendum on Adolf Hitler. Biden boasted, “We are still a nation that gives hate no safe harbor.” A few minutes before that uplifting assertion, Biden accused Donald Trump of “echoing the same exact language used in Nazi Germany.” CNN reported last week that Biden campaign aides plan to go “full Hitler” on Trump, making “a direct comparison to the Nazi leader rather than couching their attacks by saying Trump ‘parroted’ him.” A few weeks ago, the Biden campaign posted a graphic on Twitter comparing Trump and Hitler’s rhetoric.

  Biden continually equated democracy with freedom. And whatever is good for democracy is “close enough for government work” to freedom. Biden declared, “Democracy means having the freedom to speak your mind.” Unless Team Biden disapproves of your thoughts, of course.

  

  Biden neglected to explain why his vision of democracy justifies the near-total suppression of freedom of speech for his opponents. On July 4, Federal Judge Terry Doughty condemned the Biden administration for potentially “the most massive attack against free speech in United States history,” and a federal appeals court condemned Team Biden for “suppressing millions of protected free-speech postings by American citizens”—mostly by conservatives and Republicans.

  “If only Uncle Joe had known about that abuse,” right? Like hell. Biden’s Justice Department is fighting tooth and nail at the Supreme Court to preserve his power to secretly censor anyone the feds claim is spouting disinformation, perhaps including denying that Biden is God’s gift to America.

  Another key to Biden’s vision of democracy is that the president is entitled to imprison peaceful protestors who opposed him. Biden proved the villainy of Trump supporters by touting case numbers from January 6: “Since that day more than 1,200 people have been charged for the assault on the capitol, and nearly 900 of them have been convicted and they have been sentenced to more than 840 years in prison.”

  Biden neglected to quote the bombshell Washington Post report today revealing that vast numbers of the January 6 charges have been crap cases. Federal judges have rejected Biden Justice Department sentencing demands in almost 90% of the January 6 cases—an astounding record. If those cases were not being tried by juries overstocked with federal employees and NPR devotees, the prosecutions would have crashed and burned long ago.

  The Supreme Court may obliterate many of the cases. More than 320 of the convictions against J-6 protestors hinge on a bizarre contortion of the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley law enacted after corporations destroyed documents sought by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

  “The average sentence for those convicted of obstructing an official proceeding has been 39 months,” the Post reported. Former federal prosecutor Gene Rossi warns that the Supreme Court taking that case is a “red flag and a loud gong” because that law was the “North Star” used by prosecutors. If the Supreme Court strikes down the Biden twist of the 2002 law, that will make the January 6 prosecutions look like one of the worst witch hunts in American history.

  Yet, according to Team Biden, the real problem is that not enough lives have been ruined for sinful thoughts on January 6. Last Thursday, Matthew Graves, Biden’s chief prosecutor for the District of Columbia, issued a warning of potentially thousands of more January 6 indictments: “If a person knowingly entered a restricted area [near the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021] without authorization, they already committed a federal crime. Make no mistake: Thousands of people occupied that area that they were not authorized to be present in in the first place.” Talking about hounding people who merely were in the general vicinity of the Capitol confirms that for Team Biden, “Trespassing plus thought crimes equals terrorism.”

  Actually, Biden’s FBI already classifies all the people arrested for January 6 Capitol clash offenses as domestic terrorists—even people busted for “parading without a permit.” The FBI presumes that any American suspected of supporting the January 6, 2021 protests forfeited his constitutional rights. An FBI whistleblower revealed in congressional testimony in May 2023 that FBI headquarters pressured FBI agents to treat anyone who attended the January 6 protests as a criminal suspect. Roughly 2,000 pro-Trump protestors (including an unknown number of undercover agents and informants) entered the Capitol that day. But an FBI analyst exploited the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to unjustifiably conduct warrantless searches on 23,132 Americans citizens suspected of January 6 offenses “to find evidence of possible foreign influence, although the analyst conducting the queries had no indications of foreign influence,” according to FISA Chief Judge Rudolph Contreras.

  Biden assured the audience that “we still believe that no one, not even the president, is above the law.” Okay, but what if the president or the vice president uses the names Robert Peters, Robin Ware, and JRB Ware as email aliases to hustle business deals for a family member? Is it OK for them to slip the law then?

  The only way to assume that Biden is not “above the law” is to assume that his decrees alone are the law. The Supreme Court struck down his COVID vaccine mandate, his moratorium for evicting deadbeat renters, his $500 billion federal student loan forgiveness scheme, and numerous other Biden policies.

  Joe Biden is calling Trump a “dictator” while simultaneously supporting his chief political opponent getting kicked off the ballot pic.twitter.com/dER9htucqu

  — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) January 5, 2024

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

  Biden spent half an hour fearmongering and then closed by promising “freedom from fear.” This is the famous Biden two-step—demagoguing to his heart’s content and then closing with a few schmaltzy uplift lines, entitling the media to re-christen him as an idealist.

  Biden castigated Trump as the “Election Denier in Chief,” a new offense not yet been codified in the statute book. Biden endlessly warned that Trump posed a deadly threat to both freedom and democracy. Biden campaign masterminds were clever enough to permit an unknown local politician to deliver the “takeaway” from the day’s events. Biden was preceded at the podium by Dauphin County commissioner candidate Justin Douglass, who proclaimed that “Donald Trump represents a clear and present danger” to democracy. Since Trump is the ultimate enemy of the Constitution, anything that Biden and his campaign does to banish Trump from the ballot will be pro-democracy.

  Obviously, if Americans value democracy, then the presidential candidate favored by the most voters in recent polls must not be allowed on the ballot. Team Biden favors a version of “Guardian Democracy” where voters are only permitted to cast ballots for candidates that the ruling class approves. This is part and parcel with the Democratic Party’s plan to let all future elections be determined by ballot harvesting and tsunamis of unverified mail-in ballots.

  Why should we believe that democracy dies unless Biden gets four more years to violate the Constitution, censor and jail his opponents, and domineer practically every aspect of Americans’ lives (“step away from that gas stove before we have to hurt you”)?  As Thomas Jefferson declared long ago, “An elective despotism is not the government we fought for.”

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 21:40

• Family Of Ashli Babbitt Files $30 Million Wrongful-Death Action
  Family Of Ashli Babbitt Files $30 Million Wrongful-Death Action

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  The long-awaited tort action from the family of Ashli Babbitt has now been filed in Southern California. Babbitt was shot and killed on Jan. 6th and her family is seeking $30 million in a wrongful death action.

  Equally important, the lawsuit could force additional answers to why Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd shot and killed the unarmed protester as she attempted to climb through a window near the House Chamber.

  

  I have previously raised concerns over the shooting as conflicting with governing standards on the use of lethal force.

  I also noted contradictions in Byrd’s own statements and the government’s conclusion that this was a justified killing.

  The complaint below adds some troubling facts to these prior concerns.

  Babbitt, 35, was an Air Force veteran and Trump supporter who participated in the riot three years ago.

  She was clearly committing criminal acts of trespass, property damage, and other offenses.  However, the question is whether an officer is justified in shooting a protester when he admits that he did not see any weapon before discharging his weapon.

  Just to recap what we previously discussed in the earlier column:

  When protesters rushed to the House chamber, police barricaded the chamber’s doors; Capitol Police were on both sides, with officers standing directly behind Babbitt. Babbitt and others began to force their way through, and Babbitt started to climb through a broken window. That is when Byrd killed her.

  At the time, some of us familiar with the rules governing police use of force raised concerns over the shooting. Those concerns were heightened by the DOJ’s bizarre review and report, which stated the governing standards but then seemed to brush them aside to clear Byrd.

  The DOJ report did not read like any post-shooting review I have read as a criminal defense attorney or law professor. The DOJ statement notably does not say that the shooting was clearly justified. Instead, it stressed that “prosecutors would have to prove not only that the officer used force that was constitutionally unreasonable, but that the officer did so ‘willfully.’” It seemed simply to shrug and say that the DOJ did not believe it could prove “a bad purpose to disregard the law” and that “evidence that an officer acted out of fear, mistake, panic, misperception, negligence, or even poor judgment cannot establish the high level of intent.”

  While the Supreme Court, in cases such as Graham v. Connor, has said that courts must consider “the facts and circumstances of each particular case,” it has emphasized that lethal force must be used only against someone who is “an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and … is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight.” Particularly with armed assailants, the standard governing “imminent harm” recognizes that these decisions must often be made in the most chaotic and brief encounters.

  Under these standards, police officers should not shoot unarmed suspects or rioters without a clear threat to themselves or fellow officers. That even applies to armed suspects who fail to obey orders. Indeed, Huntsville police officer William “Ben” Darby was convicted for killing a suicidal man holding a gun to his own head. Despite being cleared by a police review board, Darby was prosecuted, found guilty and sentenced to 25 years in prison, even though Darby said he feared for the safety of himself and fellow officers. Yet law professors and experts who have praised such prosecutions in the past have been conspicuously silent over the shooting of an unarmed woman who had officers in front of and behind her on Jan. 6.

  Byrd went public soon after the Capitol Police declared “no further action will be taken” in the case. He proceeded to demolish the two official reviews that cleared him.

  Byrd described how he was “trapped” with other officers as “the chants got louder” with what “sounded like hundreds of people outside of that door.” He said he yelled for all of the protesters to stop: “I tried to wait as long as I could. I hoped and prayed no one tried to enter through those doors. But their failure to comply required me to take the appropriate action to save the lives of members of Congress and myself and my fellow officers.”

  Byrd could just as well have hit the officers behind Babbitt, who was shot while struggling to squeeze through the window.

  Of all of the lines from Byrd, this one stands out: “I could not fully see her hands or what was in the backpack or what the intentions are.” So, Byrd admitted he did not see a weapon or an immediate threat from Babbitt beyond her trying to enter through the window. Nevertheless, Byrd boasted, “I know that day I saved countless lives.” He ignored that Babbitt was the one person killed during the riot. (Two protesters died of natural causes and a third from an amphetamine overdose; one police officer died the next day from natural causes, and four officers have committed suicide since then.) No other officers facing similar threats shot anyone in any other part of the Capitol, even those who were attacked by rioters armed with clubs or other objects.

  The complaint below has some interesting additional facts. For example, it alleges that Babbitt’s hands were in plain sight and empty.

  “Ashli could not have seen Lt. Byrd, who was positioned far to Ashli’s left and on the opposite side of the doors, near an opening to the Retiring Room, a distance of approximately 15 feet and an angle of approximately 160 degrees. Sgt. Timothy Lively, one of the armed officers guarding the lobby doors from the hallway, later told officials investigating the shooting, “I saw him . . . there was no way that woman would’ve seen that.” Lt. Byrd, who was not in uniform, did not identify himself as a police officer or otherwise make his presence known to Ashli. Lt. Byrd did not give Ashli any warnings or commands before shooting her dead.”

  That is significant. There were officers in front, behind, and to the sides of Babbitt but she was given no warning and likely did not see Byrd pointing his weapon at her.

  However, the most interesting allegation is this one:

  “At 2:45 p.m., or within one minute after shooting Ashli, Lt. Byrd made the following radio call: 405B. We got shots fired in the lobby. We got shots shots fired in the lobby of the House chamber. Shots are being fired at us and we’re sh, uhh, prepared to fire back at them. We have guns drawn. Please don’t leave that end. Don’t leave that end. Approximately 35 seconds later, Lt. Byrd made another radio call, stating, “405B. We got an injured person. I believe that person was shot.” In fact, no shots were fired at Lt. Byrd or his fellow officers. The only shot fired was the single shot Lt. Byrd fired at Ashli. He heard the loud noise of the gunshot. He saw her fall backwards from the window frame.”

  So Byrd allegedly gave a false report of shots being fired after he shot Babbitt.

  Here are the seven counts (the second count on negligence is the most detailed and multifaceted):

  COUNT I Assault and Battery (Intentional Shooting and Killing of Ashli by Lt. Byrd – ESTATE OF ASHLI BABBITT)

  COUNT II Negligence (Lt. Byrd – ESTATE OF ASHLI BABBITT)

  COUNT III Negligence (Timothy Lively, Kyle Yetter, Christopher Lanciano Steven Robbs, Don Smith, Brandon Sikes, Mike Brown Jason Gandolph – ESTATE OF ASHLI BABBITT)

  COUNT IV Negligent Supervision, Discipline, and Retention of Lt. Byrd (Capitol Police, Capitol Police Board, et al. – ESTATE OF ASHLI BABBITT)

  COUNT V Negligent Training (Capitol Police, Capitol Police Board, et al. – ESTATE OF ASHLI BABBITT)

  COUNT VI Survival Action (Assault and Battery; Negligence; Negligent Supervision, Discipline, and Retention; Negligent Training – ESTATE OF ASHLI BABBITT)

  COUNT VII Wrongful Death (Assault and Battery; Negligence; Negligent Supervision, Discipline, and Retention; Negligent Training – AARON BABBITT)

  The complaint, in my view, raises credible allegations that warrant serious review. The Justice Department is likely to seek threshold grounds for dismissal, but the case could offer needed answers to a number of questions. Many of us were not satisfied with the review of the government of the shooting. Discovery would allow for a new review of the underlying record.

  The family is being represented by Judicial Watch.

  Here is the complaint: Babbitt v. United States

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 21:00

• Parks Service Seeks To Remove William Penn Statue To Make Philadelphia More "Welcome And Inclusive"
  Parks Service Seeks To Remove William Penn Statue To Make Philadelphia More “Welcome And Inclusive”

  New mayor, same woke insanity. 

  The National Park Service in Philadelphia is now looking for public comment on its plans to “rehabilitate” Welcome Park in the Old City section of Philadelphia by removing the park’s statue of William Penn. In other words, we’re back to tearing down statues again…

  After all, why keep a racist, misogynistic, totally un-woke monument honoring the patriarchy of William Penn at……the park located at the site of of William Penn’s former home? It’s not like he founded the province of Pennsylvania or something…

  

  The “Welcome Park” site was completed in its current form back in 1982, according to 6ABC, who says that park officials want to “reenvision the park and expand the interpretation of the Native American history of Philadelphia to make it more welcoming and inclusive for visitors.”

  This initiative has involved consultation with representatives from various indigenous groups such as the Haudenosaunee, Delaware Nation, Delaware Tribe of Indians, Shawnee Tribe, and Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma.

  The NPS is seeking public comment on the proposed plan here. “The reimagined Welcome Park maintains certain aspects of the original design such as the street grid, the rivers and the east wall while adding a new planted buffer on three sides, and a ceremonial gathering space with circular benches,” their website says.

  Most people just want to know when the insanity is going to stop…

  hey new @PhillyMayor who i am giving a chance to, isn’t it time to stop this nonsense and focus on issues that matter, like crime?

  — Quoth the Raven (@QTRResearch) January 7, 2024

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

  …and why the National Park Service is spending and re-spending our tax money to build and then tear down statutes…

  If @SpeakerJohnson had a backbone, rather than a collar connected to Schumer’s leash, he would have already called for defunding the @NatlParkService https://t.co/tnq48QmIkU

  — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) January 8, 2024

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

  Perhaps its another job for the Italians in South Philly who took mattes into their own hands defending the Christopher Columbus statue at Marconi Plaza some years back. As a refresher, here’s how they handled the complaints of the woke:

  South Philly guys are defending the Christopher Columbus statue and just slashed the bike tires of an Antifa guy who was harassing them pic.twitter.com/wsm4ijYADl

  — Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) June 14, 2020

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 20:40

• Shale Tycoon Harold Hamm Wants To Lure Gen Z To The Oil Industry
  Shale Tycoon Harold Hamm Wants To Lure Gen Z To The Oil Industry

  By Charles Kennedy of OilPrice.com

  Shale tycoon Harold Hamm and U.S. and European supermajors are looking to support university courses in petroleum engineering and related disciplines in a bid to attract young talent to the industry that’s not viewed favorably by Millennials and Generation Z.   

  

  Harold Hamm, the U.S. shale pioneer who founded Continental Resources, has donated to establish the Hamm Institute for American Energy at Oklahoma State University. At the end of 2021, the Harold Hamm Foundation and Continental Resources announced a combined $50 million gift to create the Hamm Institute for American Energy.   

  “We believe in a world where every person has access to the reliable, affordable and sustainable energy they need to thrive,” says Hamm, who is chairman of the Hamm Institute for American Energy.  

  Speaking to the Financial Times last week, Hamm said that “We are going to be using oil for the next 50 years and ‘clean burning’ natural gas probably for the next 100 or 150 years.”

  “We want to get the next generation of gamechangers involved,” Hamm told FT.

  A shortage of skilled workers drove last year inflationary pressures on energy projects in the U.S. and in Texas, along with higher interest rates and higher costs of materials. Some major LNG projects in the Gulf area in Texas could struggle to find enough skilled workers to execute the projects on time and on budget.

  “Labor availability is a big issue in blue-collar areas. It is hard to find employees, and wage rate requirements continue to increase,” one executive at an oil and gas support services firm said in comments in the Dallas Fed Energy Survey for the second quarter of 2023.  

  Another executive, at an exploration and production (E&P) firm, commented,

  “Labor is hard to find. Dirty-fossil-fuels stigma drives younger talent away.”

  Some of those who are not driven away by the “dirty business” stigma are being poached by technology firms, data centers, Tesla, SpaceX, and other jobs in computing and engineering.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 20:20

• These Are The Best US Cities For Entry-Levels Jobs
  These Are The Best US Cities For Entry-Levels Jobs

  The anxieties around a first-job are immense: fear of the unknown, performance pressure, and the need to navigate new professional environments.

  But good pay can help manage these worries. Lots and more has been written on which careers are the highest-paid, but how does geography factor into the equation?

  To find the best U.S. city and state for well-paid entry-level jobs, NeoMam Studios and Visual Capitalist’s Pallavi Rao visualize data from Resume.io showing the percentage of local entry-level job listings that offer a salary above (and below) a city or state’s median hourly wages.

  

  Ranked: 50 U.S. Cities By Entry-Level Job Pay

  This dataset covers each U.S. state, as well as Washington, D.C. and 50 major cities. Median wage data is sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the number of entry-level jobs and their pay rates from Indeed.com.

  Bozeman, Montana (nicknamed “Boz Angeles” for its constant stream of celebrity visitors) and Iowa City both have nearly 88% of their entry-level jobs promising above their state’s median pay.

  For an apples-to-apples comparison however, Iowa City’s median wage comes in slightly higher at $22.52/hour compared to Bozeman’s $20.71/hour.

  Note: Toggle the embedded table between U.S. cities and states ranked by best entry-level jobs.

  Another Midwestern urban center, Kansas City, ranked fourth, promises a high likelihood of above-media pay for first-job hunters (83.1%).

  Generally, the more populous the city, the more jobs, and the higher the likelihood of beating median pay. However larger cities that are not the state capital also seem to do well on this metric: Fort Smith, Arkansas (ranked 5th), Lexington, Kentucky (6th), New Haven, Connecticut (7th), and Oakland, California (8th).

  Ranked: U.S. States By Entry-Level Job Pay

  Click to view this graphic in a higher-resolution.

  

  In South Dakota, and Montana, ranked first and second in the state by best entry-level pay ranks, more than three-quarters of junior role listings offer pay above the state’s median wage.

  This works out more than $19.17/hour ($39,900/year) for South Dakota and $20.29/hour ($42,200/year) for Montana for their entry-level jobs.

  In fact the first nine states on the ranks, where nearly 70% of the entry-level job listings offer above-state-median pay, are from the Midwest or West.

  Kentucky, ranked 10th, has 67% of their starter job openings stating above median pay ($40,200/year), the highest from the American South.

  Predictably, states with higher median pay (California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Washington, New York) have lower numbers of entry-level job openings which promise pay above that level.

  However, exceptions occur. For example, Wyoming’s median pay comes in around the same as Maine ($21.80/hour) but 68% of its entry-level job listings offer median-beating pay, compared to Maine’s 57%.

  Hawaii is the worst state for a decent starting salary, with two-thirds of the analyzed listings offering below the median pay of $48,600/year. Most of the state’s jobs are concentrated in the tourism industry, part of the service sector, known for long hours, seasonal work, and low pay.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 20:00

• Former NRA Executive Pleads Guilty To Fraud, Agrees to Testify In NY Civil Trial
  Former NRA Executive Pleads Guilty To Fraud, Agrees to Testify In NY Civil Trial

  Authored by Allan Zhong via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  A settlement was reached on the same day as Wayne LaPierre, longtime NRA head, resigned.

  

  Joshua Powell, former operations director of the National Rifle Association (NRA), has reached a settlement with the New York attorney general’s office over civil claims of fraud and abuse.

  Mr. Powell was employed by the NRA between 2016 and January 2020.

  The lawsuit brought by Letitia James, New York attorney general, alleged that Mr. Powell breached his fiduciary duties and failed to administer the charitable assets entrusted to his care by using his powers as an officer and senior executive of the NRA to covert charitable assets for the benefit of himself and his family members.

  He admitted the alleged wrongdoing and agreed to pay $100,000 to the NRA, to not serve as an officer in a nonprofit or charitable organization, and to testify against the NRA at the demand of Ms. James’s office, according to the settlement.

  Mr. Powell’s settlement was filed on the same day as the resignation of Wayne LaPierre, the longtime head of the NRA.

  “Joshua Powell’s admission of wrongdoing and Wayne LaPierre’s resignation confirm what we have alleged for years: the NRA and its senior leaders are financially corrupt,” Ms. James said in a statement. “More than three years ago, my office sued the NRA and its senior management for financial abuse and mismanagement. These are important victories in our case, and we look forward to ensuring the NRA and the defendants face justice for their actions.”

  NRA officials didn’t respond by press time to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.

  

  Ms. James sued Mr. LaPierre and three co-defendants—NRA general counsel John Frazer, retired finance chief Wilson Phillips, and Mr. Powell—in 2020, alleging that they cost the organization tens of millions of dollars from questionable expenditures that included lucrative consulting contracts for ex-employees and gifts for friends and vendors.

  Mr. LaPierre is accused of setting himself up with a $17 million contract with the NRA if he were to exit the organization and spending NRA money on travel consultants, luxury car services, and private flights for himself and his family—including more than $500,000 on eight trips to the Bahamas over three years.

  As punishment, Ms. James is asking that Mr. LaPierre and the other defendants be ordered to reimburse the NRA and that they be banned from serving in leadership positions of any charitable organizations conducting business in New York, which would bar them from any NRA involvement.

  The trial is scheduled to start on Jan. 8.

  LaPierre Resigns

  Mr. LaPierre, the NRA’s executive vice president and CEO, announced on Jan. 5 that he’s resigning, just days before the start of the trial over allegations that he treated himself to millions of dollars in private jet flights, yacht trips, African safaris, and other extravagant perks at the powerful gun rights organization’s expense.

  “With pride in all that we have accomplished, I am announcing my resignation from the NRA,” Mr. LaPierre said in a statement released by the organization, which he said he was exiting for health reasons. “I’ve been a card-carrying member of this organization for most of my adult life, and I will never stop supporting the NRA and its fight to defend Second Amendment freedom. My passion for our cause burns as deeply as ever.”

  Andrew Arulanandam, a top NRA lieutenant who has served as Mr. LaPierre’s spokesperson, will take on his roles on an interim basis, according to the organization.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 19:40

• Here’s Where COVID Mask Mandates Are Coming Back Across The US
  Here’s Where COVID Mask Mandates Are Coming Back Across The US

  Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Some hospitals and local governments have opted to reimpose mask mandates at health care facilities as officials have cited a rise in various respiratory illnesses such as the flu and COVID-19.

  

  The mandates have been imposed in the past week or so in New York, California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Washington state, and more.

  Pennsylvania

  Over the past weekend, four hospital systems implemented masking requirements in and around the Philadelphia area. Visitors and staff at Cooper University Health Care facilities have to wear face coverings in examination rooms and patient rooms starting Jan. 5.

  On Jan. 6, Jefferson Health said that it would temporarily require all staff members in certain locations to wear masks until Jan. 29, and the University of Pennsylvania Health System has said it will require masks during all patient care and patient-facing procedures.

  “Patients who tested positive for COVID-19 in the past 10 days or who have symptoms of COVID-19—cough, fever, sore throat, nasal congestion—must wear a mask,” the hospital said in a statement, according to CBS News. “Visitors who tested positive for COVID-19 in the past 10 days or who have symptoms of COVID-19 are not allowed to enter any facility, even with a mask.”

  Main Line Health also said it would start mandating masks starting Jan. 4, including for patients and visitors, it was reported.

  California

  Los Angeles County announced last week that it will require masking in certain hospital settings when the county hits a medium level for COVID-19 hospitalizations, which it and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) defines as 10 to 10.9 new hospital admissions for every 100,000 people over a seven-day period.

  “Over the past week in Los Angeles County, there have been notable, yet not unexpected, increases in COVID-19 reported cases, hospitalizations, and deaths,” the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health said in a statement.

  It added, “While recent increases are significant, they remain considerably below last winter’s peak and common-sense protections are strongly recommended to help curb transmission and severe illness as the new year begins.”

  Also in California, several counties around the San Francisco Bay Area have implemented a mask mandate that started in early November because of an anticipated rise in respiratory illnesses over the winter season. That mandate will end in April, officials have said. Near Los Angeles, officials in San Luis Obispo County issued a similar mandate last year.

  New York

  New York City’s government implemented a mask mandate for all of its 11 public hospitals and various health care and long-term care centers across the five boroughs, according to an announcement several days ago.

  “What we don’t want is staffing shortages, right?” the city’s health commissioner, Ashwin Vasan, told local media outlet WABC TV on Jan. 3. “When we saw the omicron wave in 2022, the biggest issues were not only people getting sick, but that we had a lot of front-line health workers, they were out with COVID.”

  Last month and in the fall of 2023, several upstate and western New York hospitals reimplemented mask mandates during an earlier, smaller rise in COVID-19.

  Illinois

  Several hospital systems and companies also started requiring masks in recent days. And Cook County Health, which encompasses Chicago, and Endeavor Health in the Chicago area, is again requiring masks at its facilities. The requirement came after the Illinois Department of Public Health sent a letter to hospitals suggesting they reimpose masking.

  Other States

  Hospitals in Wisconsin, North Carolina, Delaware, and Washington state have imposed similar mask requirements, according to reports.

  In North Carolina, Cape Fear Valley Health said it would require masks for all patients and visitors. Meanwhile, UNC Health, Duke Health, and WakeMed started restricting young visitors from some inpatient areas last week, local media reported.

  Kaiser Permanente said last month that it would reimpose mask mandates at locations across Washington state. However, that rule affects only staff who work with patients.

  In Delaware, TidalHealth announced on Dec. 28, 2023, that it’s mandating masks for all hospital visitors in patients’ rooms. That rule was initiated in “an effort to protect the most vulnerable of our population from close contact with persons that may be contagious but not yet have symptoms,” according to the hospital.

  Several hospitals in Wisconsin also imposed face-covering requirements starting late last month.

  While officials at the hospitals have said that COVID-19 cases are on the rise, the CDC’s historical data suggest that the number of cases is smaller than a year ago. For the week ending Dec. 30, 2023, hospitalizations stood at about 34,800; on Dec. 31, 2022, the number was more than 44,500.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 19:20

• Victor Davis Hanson: A Culture In Collapse
  Victor Davis Hanson: A Culture In Collapse

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

  In the last six months, we have borne witness to many iconic moments evidencing the collapse of American culture.

  The signs are everywhere and cover the gamut of politics, the economy, education, social life, popular culture, foreign policy, and the military. These symptoms of decay share common themes.

  Our descent is self-induced; it is not a symptom of a foreign attack or subterfuge. Our erosion is not the result of poverty and want, but of leisure and excess. We are not suffering from existential crises of famine, plague, or the collapse of our grid and fuel sources. Prior, far poorer, and war-torn generations now seem far better off than what we are becoming.

  What is happening to us is not due to an adherence to a too strict conservative tradition but is almost exclusively the wage of the progressive project.

  In short, we are seeing fissures that America has not experienced in our cultural history since the Civil War. The radical Left apparently feels such chaos, anarchy, and nihilism are necessary to topple past norms and customs and thereby adhere to a socialist, equity agenda that no one in normal times would stomach.

  Some of the decay is existential and fundamental; some anecdotal and illustrative. But either way, while decline came about gradually over decades, its sudden and abrupt chaos during the three years of Biden’s presidency has shocked Americans.

  

  Financial Implosion

  As long as interest rates were de facto zero, both parties ran up gargantuan debt. Now the national debt has hit $34 trillion. But two odd things have also happened under the Biden administration that are beginning to undermine the very existence of the U.S. financial system:

  1) Interest rates have soared from de facto zero and are on a trajectory to 5.5%—meaning that the interest on the debt, in theory, in the not too distant future will require 20 percent of the annual budget, squeezing out both entitlements and defense.

  2) Yet the upcoming rendezvous with economic Armageddon has not slowed a Biden administration intent on borrowing nearly $2 trillion in the current fiscal year.

  The public is baffled: is the Left playing chicken with us? Is the strategy to “gorge the beast,” thereby demanding even higher federal taxes, which, combined with many state taxes, now exceed 50 percent of one’s income?

  Is the goal massive “redistribution” by ensuring “equity” by gouging the middle class and rich? Or is the left’s goal more nihilistic: to force a remedy for insolvency by ensuring high inflation, renouncing government debt, or government appropriation of private capital?

  Military Crises

  Americans have lost deterrence abroad.

  Confusion reigns among the public over why the Biden administration fled from Afghanistan, leaving behind billions of dollars of munitions and equipment in the hands of Taliban terrorists. Why did it allow a Chinese spy balloon to traverse the continental U.S. with impunity?

  And why did Biden signal to Russia when preparing an invasion of Ukraine that our reaction would depend on the magnitude of Putin’s offensive? Why has military recruitment cratered, shorting the Pentagon of thousands of soldiers?

  Why do Iranian proxies attack almost daily U.S. installations abroad and ships in the Red Sea, apparently without fear of reprisal? Why did Hamas slaughter Israelis on October 7? What explains our indifference or ennui?

  Is the answer a deliberate effort to curb supposed American “arrogance” by once more leading from behind? Are we rebooting the Obama Administration’s bankrupt idea of empowering an Iranian crescent from Teheran to Damascus to Beirut to Gaza to ensure “creative tension” between Israel and the moderate Arabs and Persian-led theocratic Shiites?

  Why do our officer classes rotate in and out of lucrative military consultantships, lobbying billets, and board membership on corporate defense contractors—as if their innate talents rather than their lifelong contacts with current serving procurement officers earned their exorbitant fees?

  Why did our retired four stars with disdain violate the uniform code of military justice by serially and publicly trashing the commander in chief? Why has the Pentagon revolutionized the entire system of recruitment, promotions, and tenure in the armed forces by predicating them in large part on race, gender, and sexual orientation rather than merit or battlefield efficacy? Did we learn anything from the old Soviet commissariat system? Would we prefer to lose a war by promoting equity than win one by ensuring liberty?

  Why did the top brass go after supposedly “insurrectionist” white males (who died at twice their demographics during combat in Iraq and Afghanistan) in the military, only to discover from their own internal investigations that no such cabal of “domestic terrorists” existed, and only to drive out thousands more of the maligned by stupidly requiring COVID vaccinations from those with naturally acquired immunity?

  In sum, the U.S. will either undergo a post-Vietnam-like revolution in the military or, in late Roman imperial fashion, our armed forces will be unable to defend the interests or indeed, the very safety, of the U.S.

  Race

  Why, when so-called non-white ethnicities and races were achieving parity with or exceeding the majority population in per capita income and when racial intermarriage was commonplace, did we blow up the values of the civil rights movement and revert to precivilizational tribalism? Who were the sophists who convinced us that racially segregated dorms, safe spaces, and graduations, or using race as an arbiter of admissions and hiring, were not racist?

  When did we lump together an entire cadre of diverse ancestries, ethnicities, religions, politics, classes, and values and dub them all “white,” and then smear them collectively in stereotypical fashion? When did we calibrate race as the chief determinative factor in our identities? Have we become premodern tribal people—feuding clans right out of the Norse sagas, ghosts of the Balkans nursing ancient grievances and hatreds? Since when in history has a nation’s “diversity” ever been preferable to its “unity”?

  The Sexes

  Did anyone in, say, 2004 believe that in just twenty years, the Left would try to mainstream the previously rare medical malady of gender dysphoria into a transgendered civil rights issue by insisting on three rather than two sexes?

  Would anyone have believed that leftists, gays, and feminists would have done their best to destroy a half-century of female athletic achievement by allowing biological males to compete in women’s sports and thereby erase the record performances of three generations of women?

  Would anyone have believed that a feminist and accomplished swimmer like Riley Gaines would be cornered, swarmed, threatened, and barricaded in at a university for the crime of daring to state the obvious: that transgendered women are still, in terms of their musculoskeletal physiques and frames, males and thereby have no business competing in women’s sports?

  Would anyone have believed that a gay senate aide would have engaged in passive, unprotected sex in a public and hallowed Senate chamber, filmed in graphic detail his act of sodomy, had it circulated among friends and social media, and then, when outrage followed, claimed victimhood by accusing those offended of being homophobic toward him and his active homosexual partner?

  Lawlessness

  We are witnessing the steady erasure of jurisprudence, both civil and criminal. Does the law as we knew it a mere decade ago still exist? Massive looting with impunity is now largely exempt from justice in our major blue-state cities. In Compton, a van slams into a Mexican bakery as waiting crowds swarm, loot, and destroy the business. And for what? Some free pies and cakes? Or the nihilist delight in ruining the livelihood of a hardworking family business?

  Such smash-and-grabs rob stores of billions of dollars in revenue each year. Can we even comprehend that employees and security guards are now ordered to stand down, as if the apprehension of such thieves might in some way seem illiberal or racist?

  Does anyone even care that pro-Hamas protestors—many in America as guests on green cards and student visas—shouted support for the October 7 massacre of Jews, screamed for the destruction of Israel and the Jews in it, shut down the Manhattan and Golden Gate Bridges, defiled the Lincoln Memorial and White House gates, and disrupted Christmas celebrations in our major cities with complete exemption? Is storming the California legislature, and disrupting it in session, now a felony in the manner of those convicted after January 6, or do we have two sets of laws, dependent on ideology, race, and party affiliation?

  In one of the most chilling videos in memory, Las Vegas Clark County District Court Judge Mary Kay Holthus was recently violently attacked by an unshackled career felon defendant (with three prior violent felony convictions and facing additional new felony counts). The assailant, Deobra Redden, leaped over the justice’s bench with ease and began beating her and pulling her hair before two bailiffs, with great difficulty, managed to restrain him. Why was Redden out on parole given his violent record, and why was he not shackled given his toxic past? His self-admitted effort to kill the judge, his ability nearly to pull it off, and the record of past leniency accorded him are a commentary on a sick society.

  But then again, in our major cities, George-Soros-subsidized prosecutors have all but destroyed civil society. They have been systematically releasing felons with violent criminal records on the same day they are arrested, freeing convicted felons early from prisons and jails, and sabotaging the law by arbitrary enforcement on the grounds that it is inherently either unfair or racist.

  The post civilization civil bookend to that precivilizational subterfuge was a systematic legal effort, for the first time in American history, to remove in an election year the leading primary and general election candidate Donald Trump from various state ballots. The Soviet-like charge was that he was guilty of “insurrection,” a crime he has never been charged with, much less convicted of. Meanwhile, three state prosecutors and one special federal counsel—all leftists and some previously bragging in their own election campaigns of their intention to destroy Trump—have charged candidate Trump with an array of felonies. The vast majority of Americans agree Trump would never have been so charged had he just not sought to seek reelection—or had been a liberal Democrat.

  Education

  In ancient times, the President of the Harvard Corporation was a signature scholar and intellectual, befitting Harvard’s own self-regard as the world’s most preeminent university. No longer.

  Now-resigned president Claudine Gay’s meteoric career was based on a flimsy record of a mere 11 articles—the majority of them plagiarized. Her entire career was fueled by the tired pretext that the privileged Gay was somehow deserving of special deference given her race and gender.

  Confronted with such corruption, the Harvard Corporation, its legal team, and 700 faculty sought to downplay Gay’s intellectual theft. Indeed, they smeared her critics as racist—only then to deal with her new billet as a professor of Political Science with a long record of plagiarism that was exempt from the sort of punishments dealt out to students and faculty for less egregious defenses.

  How did Ivy League degrees so quickly become mostly certifications of ideological and woke orthodoxy? Or is it worse than that? Does a Stanford history major or Yale literature graduate know anything, respectively, about the Civil War or Shakespeare’s plays? Do they even know that we, the public, know that they don’t know?

  Was Elizabeth Warren really Harvard’s first law professor of color? Was Claudine Gay truly an impressive and respected scholar of political science? Are the governing members of the Harvard Corporation the nation’s best and brightest?

  How in less than five years did our elite universities destroy meritocracy, abolish SAT requirements, require DEI oaths and pledges, and mirror the worst commissariat institutions of the old Warsaw Pact nations and Soviet Union? How and why these elite universities blew themselves up in a mere decade will baffle historians for decades to come.

  The End of Sovereignty

  The Biden administration has shattered federal immigration law, as some 10 million illegal entries will have crossed unlawfully and with impunity in the first Biden term—all by intent. The southern border is not merely porous; it no longer even exists.

  Did the Left want new constituents? New entitlement recipients to grow government and raise taxes on the clingers and deplorables?

  Did it want a larger DEI base to replace the steady exodus of non-whites from left-wing agendas? Does it shun sovereignty, preferring a global village without arbitrary borders? Do these utopians in Malibu and Martha’s Vineyard similarly feel their own yards and grounds need no walls, no barriers, and no boundaries to deny the underprivileged their rights to enjoy what the predatory classes possess?

  In this new America of ours, Joe Biden is hale and savvy, while Hunter did nothing wrong.

  Our heroes are Dylan Mulvaney, Gen. Rachel Levine, and the two Sams, Bankman-Fried and Brinton.

  In today’s America, Karin Jean-Pierre is truthful, while Alejandro Mayorkas is honest. An innocent and saintly George Floyd was randomly murdered; his death proof of systemic police racism. And defunding the police brought calm and quiet, in the way our border is secure and the homeless are mere victims.

  Dr. Jill is an impressive academic. Oprah and LeBron are the downtrodden and victimized. Gen. Mark Milley is a brave maverick, and so is Adam Schiff. The flight from Afghanistan marked a brilliantly organized retreat.

  The Chinese balloon really did not take too many pictures of sensitive areas. January 6 was an armed insurrection, preplanned by fiery conspirators and revolutionaries. Ashli Babbitt deserved to be blasted in the neck for entering a broken window.

  Kamala Harris is a wordsmith. Russian collusion really happened. So did Russian laptop disinformation. Christopher Steele’s dossier was mostly true, in the fashion of Claudine Gay’s dissertation and Barack Obama’s memoir. And 51 former intelligence authorities bravely came forward to offer their expertise in certifying that Hunter’s laptop was cooked up in Moscow.

  With all this, what do we think the Iranians, Putin’s Russians, the communist Chinese, the Houthis, Hezbollah, and Hamas now think of the United States?

  That we are the nation that won World War II or fled from Afghanistan? Did the eight million who broke our laws and simply walked across our border respect us, fear us, admire us, or come here to manipulate and use us? Did Hamas appreciate the hundreds of millions of dollars we gave them, in the same way Iran was friendlier after we lifted the sanctions?

  In sum, American civilization has been turned upside down, and we have a rendezvous soon with the once unthinkable and unimaginable.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 19:00

• Massive Explosion At Fort Worth Hotel Leaves 11 Injured
  Massive Explosion At Fort Worth Hotel Leaves 11 Injured

  At least 11 people were injured after a suspected natural gas explosion that blew out at least two floors of a 20-story high-rise hotel in downtown Fort Worth on Monday afternoon.

  🚨#UPDATE: The ATF says the explosion at the Sandman Signature Hotel in Fort Worth, Texas was caused by natural gas witnesses inside of the hotel said they smelt something like paint burning before the explosion occurred pic.twitter.com/Yyc9V919s0

  — R A W S A L E R T S (@rawsalerts) January 8, 2024

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

  Nine people were hospitalized – with two of the injured in serious condition, and one in critical condition.

  Authorities say witnesses smelled something like paint burning before the explosion occurred, which officials chalked up to a natural gas leak.

  

  “There is a smell of gas here in downtown. We’re not sure if the smell of gas was caused from the explosion and the fire itself or if that’s what caused the explosion. But that’s what we’re looking at,” said Fort Worth Fire Department spox, Craig Trojacek.

  MedStar said nine people were hospitalized. Four of those patients were sent to John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth.

  Fort Worth Fire said they have firefighters inside the building searching for survivors who may be trapped. Trojacek said they’ll assess the stability of the building after search and rescue is complete. One person reportedly remains unaccounted for.

  From Texas Sky Ranger, glass and part of the building’s facade from at least the first two floors on multiple sides of the building were visible along 8th Street and in a parking lot on the building’s west side. –NBC DFW

  One witness working at a nearby coffee shop told NBC 5 that he heard the explosion and saw debris and white smoke coming from the building. Another witness, a valet named Adam, said he was walking in the area when another valet told him to avoid 8th street.

  🚨 BREAKING: Explosion at Fort Worth, Texas hotel with mass casualty incident declared pic.twitter.com/vMZaIZ3wA5

  — Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) January 8, 2024

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

  “The whole first floor, the Sandman Hotel, right next to the garage where we park our cars … it’s like, everything is blown up. People coming out of the building … it was kinda scary. I don’t know what to think. I was 3 to 5 seconds from turning down the street. It could have been me. I seen [sic] a lady she was walking down that street as well and she got caught up in it. It’s very sad,” he said.

  Explosion at Fort Worth hotel this afternoon, 11 injuries reported, one missing (🎥 IG/ curious.earthlings) pic.twitter.com/4uNtViheYF

  — Dallas Texas TV (@DallasTexasTV) January 8, 2024

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

  Officials cordoned off a two-block area around the hotel, while Tarrant County Judge Tim O’Hare directed staff at downtown county buildings to close early for the day – with the exception of jails and law enforcement.

  EXPLOSION in Fort Worth Texas at Sandman Hotel
  At least 11 people are injured – local Fox news reportpic.twitter.com/BDyYzRj469

  — Brendan (@BrendanMcInnis) January 8, 2024

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

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 18:40

• The AARP Just Told Its 38 Million Members To Get An 8th (Yes, Eighth!!) Shot Of mRNA
  The AARP Just Told Its 38 Million Members To Get An 8th (Yes, Eighth!!) Shot Of mRNA

  Authored by Alex Berenson via ‘Unreported Truths’ substack,

  AARP? Or AARPfizer?

  The lobbying group for older Americans just told its nearly 38 million members to “hustle” for another Covid jab, even if they have already had five boosters.

  See for yourself. The following question-and-answer column ran in the organization’s December “AARP Bulletin”:

  

  AARP is open to anyone 50 or older.

  The column does not specify a narrower or higher age range for its recommendation.

  Thus it implies that even a 50-year-old who has not already had six “Covid boosters” needs to “catch up” with another immediately.

  Keep in mind that someone who has had “five Covid boosters” has actually received seven mRNA jabs – the initial two-shot primary vaccination regimen, followed by five boosters.

  Thus AARP is suggesting its members should be taking their eighth jab of mRNA in the last three years.

  

  Yet scientists have essentially no safety data beyond a third shot, much less a fourth or more, and thus no way of knowing if the risks of repeated mRNA dosing rise with each shot.

  AARP’s unbelievably bad advice doesn’t end there.

  The column then goes on to tell members that “the most recent shot, which was released in September 2023, isn’t actually a booster. It’s a new vaccine that targets the latest variants.”

  A what-now? A new vaccine?

  Wow.

  Guess it must have gone through the randomized trials that are required in the United States for any new drug or vaccine.

  No?

  Let’s just call it a new vaccine anyway, since our elderly readers have gotten kinda suspicious of the failure of the Covid shots they’ve already taken.

  But the article ends on a happy note: Researchers are even working on a combined COVID-flu vaccine, so a few years from now, a single shot from your doctor or pharmacy may be all you need to protect yourself fully…

  

  If the side effects from the 23 mRNA jabs you’ve taken by then don’t kill you first!

  (No, you shouldn’t. REALLY.)

  *  *  *

  Subscribe to ‘Unreported Truths’ substack here

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 18:35

• Let The (Political) Games Begin
  Let The (Political) Games Begin

  Authored by James Howard Kunstler via Kunstler.com,

  “To an authoritarian ruling elite insane narratives serve as both loyalty test and humiliation ritual.”

  – Kit Knightly

  The ordeal of the holidays, and the void of action that attends it, is over. Now, history resumes its awesome out-spooling. Will it be tyranny, collapse, war, civil war, renewal? Probably some wicked combo of all that.

  The players are taking the field again. The great engine of the game comes back to life with a cough and a rumble.

  Did you notice that “Joe Biden” ceremonially kicked off his “reelection campaign” with that speech at Valley Forge, blaring the “insurrection” klaxon? Is it not astounding that half the people in our country have no idea that the joke is on them? “Joe Biden” is marking time in the oval office until the moment he must use his unique legal prerogative to pardon himself and all the members of his family for their roles in the influence-peddling racket he fronted as veep. . . and then he’ll gallantly step aside.

  The optimum play would be to hold off on that until just before the Democratic Party’s convention, where a claque of super-delegates can pick somebody else in a back room filled with estrogen vapors.

  

  It kind of depends on whether a faction of corruption-resistant Republicans will ante up for that impeachment inquiry we keep hearing about. Despite the obvious bullshit on CNN about “no evidence,” there is actually a garbage barge of evidence steaming up the Potomac to prove that “Joe Biden” sold out his country. It simply needs to be laid out with brutal decorum in the proper setting.

  The catch is that a House committee can report out a bill of impeachment – as we’ve seen before – but a trial in a Democrat-majority Senate would probably fail to bring a conviction. The additional catch is that even so, the whole country will have watched the sordid spectacle and seen enough proof of malfeasance to foul the waters for the Party of Chaos in the November election, no matter who heads the ticket.

  It must also be obvious that the party is running out of lawfare tricks for shackling Mr. Trump. Jack Smith’s J-6 case is a dog’s breakfast of erroneous supposition, misprision, and persecutorial misconduct, soon to be wrecked by the Supreme Court; the Mar-a-Lago raid case is a patent fraud; the Fulton County, GA, RICO case is a Fani Willis masturbation fantasy, and the two New York raps under DA Alvin Bragg and AG Letitia James will be laughed out of appeals courts. Anyway, Mr. Trump seems to thrive on the noxious vapors thrown off by these rancid actions. If all these genius moves fail, how else can they stop the Golden Golem of Greatness. . . and his promise of keen retribution for the serial hoaxes run on him and all the fiendish trips laid on the nation since 2016?

  They can try to kill him. Can you put it past our “intel community”? It is exactly that nucleus of the DC blob that has the most to fear from a second Trump term. Dozens of them will be charged with sedition and even treason, a hanging crime. And if they succeed in whacking Mr. Trump, that would only leave a huge opening for Bobby Kennedy, who has an even bigger axe to grind against the agency that rubbed-out his father and his uncle.

  We held a meet-up here this weekend in my little upstate New York town to make plans for the petition drive in April-May to get RFKJr on the New York ballot. I told the group that much as I would relish seeing Donald Trump mop up the floor with the people who perverted the rule of law and just about spatchcocked our country, I believe Bobby Kennedy would be a better choice to lead us through the dark defile of history that circumstance has jammed us in. He is just as determined to expunge the horrific blob corruption, but without Mr. Trump’s exasperating artifice and grandiosity. If anything, RFKJr appears unpretentiously authentic, respectful, resolute, and reverent about history’s tragic arc. You can imagine him persuading that deranged half of the country that the blob is not on their side, either.

  So far, this scenario has left out several of the other dispiriting plays that could get our country into even deeper trouble than mere domestic politics offer. The “Joe Biden” regime, its NeoCon fellow travelers, and its mysterious globalist taskmasters, appear avid to start a big war, most likely by going after Iran — only to suck in Russia, Turkey, and a host of miscellaneous Islamic maniacs against us, and not in a way that radiates a great outcome.

  The invasion of stateless mutts across the Mexican border looks like an accessory to that play, since it includes countless thousands of potential saboteurs who can wreak havoc in the homeland while our obsolete aircraft carrier groups get blown up in the Mediterranean. Even registered Democrats might finally notice that the open border is a problem.

  And, black swans aside — because they are aside and unknowable by definition — there’s the excellent prospect of a financial fiasco in the works that would wipe the smiles off the smug faces of all the remaining elite Wokesters, blob handmaidens, and news media myrmidons who depend on Wall Street to pay their mortgages. The national debt is zooming at a trillion dollars every month or so now. You know that can’t go on, don’t you? If all else fails in this era of mass formation mind-fuckery, the disappearance of a whole lot of money might finally get people’s attention.

  *  *  *

  Support his blog by visiting Jim’s Patreon Page or Substack

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 18:20

• Israel Begins To Scale Back Gaza War, But Still Expects Fighting To Continue All Year
  Israel Begins To Scale Back Gaza War, But Still Expects Fighting To Continue All Year

  Israel is again welcoming US Secretary of State Antony Blinken for an official visit, but this time with a key announcement indicating its forces have “shifted” to a new, scaled-back phase of the war, in line with the Biden administration’s wishes. Blinken is in the region with a message to ‘limit’ the spread of war.

  “The war shifted a stage,” IDF spokemsan Admiral Hagari told The New York Times, describing a planned reduction in both ground troops and airstrikes. “But the transition will be with no ceremony,” he said. “It’s not about dramatic announcements.”

  

  Gaza’s Health Ministry has lately said the death toll after months of the Israeli military’s operation in response to Oct.7 has surpassed 23,000 – mostly civilian deaths. International outrage, particularly among Global South countries, has been steady. The White House has for weeks behind the scenes pressed Israeli officials to scale-back the mass killing, and to launch a more targeted campaign.

  A big part of the pressure comes from the genocide case brought against Israel by South Africa at the International Court of Justice in The Hague. To review of hearings which are set to be held Jan.11 and 12:

  • South Africa alleges Israel’s actions in Gaza “are genocidal in character because they are intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part” of the Palestinian population in the enclave.
  • Israel immediately rejected the case as “baseless,” but — unlike in previous cases at international tribunals — it decided to appear in front of the court because it’s a signatory to the Genocide Convention. Israel will be represented at the ICJ by the British barrister Malcolm Shaw.

  Hagari said that operations in the northern half of the Strip have already begun to ebb, and that troop and reserve force reductions from the battlefield would continue. He also vowed the allowance of more humanitarian aid to enter Gaza from Egypt.

  But amid the mass Palestinian suffering, he emphasized, “We were the ones who were butchered,” on Oct.7 – in reference to the about 1,200 people, mostly civilians, slaughtered by Hamas.

  Meanwhile, controversy has abounded after more videos from the battlefield have been leaked, such as the following:

  Israel’s military releases footage of its soldiers detaining men from Gaza after stripping them off and forcing them to insult Hamas. pic.twitter.com/zLwHKznftm

  — Quds News Network (@QudsNen) January 8, 2024

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

  Israeli media describes: 

  Channel 12 airs a video ostensibly leaked by an IDF source showing a group of Palestinians stripped and bound after being detained by the Israeli military in northern Gaza.

  One of the detainees is heard telling the troops, “For 17 years, we’ve lived under tyranny,” ostensibly referring to Hamas.

  “When you arrived, we remained in our homes because we live in peace and love peace. If we were guilty of something, we would have left our homes and fled, but we live in our homes in peace,” he says.

  And on the other side, Palestinian Islamic Jihad has released a new hostage ‘proof of life’ video, which Israeli officials say is part of their ongoing psychological warfare efforts…

  🔴Palestinian Islamic Jihad releases proof of life video of Israeli hostage, Elad Katzir, as part of its psychological warfare pic.twitter.com/ye4M2h1NmV

  — i24NEWS English (@i24NEWS_EN) January 8, 2024

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

  On Sunday, the head of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) said he foresees a fight in Gaza that will continue through the entire year.

  “The year 2024 will be challenging. We will be at war in Gaza,” IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi said. “I don’t know if it will be all year long. We will be fighting in Gaza all year, that’s for sure, and this will also hold the other arenas, certainly in [the West Bank], to a certain state of alertness,” he added.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 18:00

• What Is Happening To College Sports?
  What Is Happening To College Sports?

  Authored by William Anderson via The Mises Institute,

  On Monday night, January 8, the University of Michigan and the University of Washington football teams will vie for the collegiate national championship.

  While championships always bring excitement to fans and participants alike, this year’s game brings attention to major changes that have occurred in the National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I in the past few years involving both monetary payments and mobility for athletes.

  

  While there is excitement for the game, we are seeing undercurrents that some claim will “destroy college football” as we have known it. The major changes involve athletes being able to gain product endorsements or make money off their likeness (Name, Image, and Likeness, or NIL) as well as being able to transfer one time via the NCAA Transfer Portal with no restrictions and no waiting for a year. Lou Holtz, a Hall-of-Fame college football coach, voiced his own concerns:

  The NIL and the transfer portal are both terrible for college athletics…I think that you go to school to get an education and to have that school be part of your diploma. … Why do we have athletics as part of college? Because you learn more lessons on a football field than you ever learn in a college classroom. You learn perseverance, you learn teamwork, you learn to wait your turn, you learn improvement. When you transfer, all you do is change the address of your problems. The problem’s with you.

  Before going further, I will explain how previous rules affected collegiate athletes, having been a scholarship D-I athlete a half-century ago (track, University of Tennessee). For the most part, the rules that governed us have remained in place with some small changes here and there.

  When I signed my athletic scholarship papers in 1971, I also signed the National Letter of Intent which bound me to the UT track program as long as I was enrolled there, much like the old Reserve Clause bound major league baseball players to their teams “in perpetuity” until they either were traded or released by their teams. If I had wanted to transfer to another program elsewhere, my coach would have to release me from my letter of intent before I could leave. Furthermore, if I went elsewhere, I’d not be able to compete in collegiate track until I had waited a year. (If I wanted to go to another program in the Southeastern Conference, I would have to sit out two years.)

  While athletes did transfer even under those rules, it imposed high costs on those that left their university for another team and the terms made transferring unappealing. There was the loss of a scholarship as well as the problem of having to sit out of intercollegiate competition for a year, which for a competitive athlete is an eternity.

  There were other major controls as well, which mirrored the kinds of restrictions that one might see in a regulated industry, and especially in the kind regulation that effectively turned industries into cartels. Until about the early 1980s, for example, the NCAA permitted only one collegiate football game to be broadcast each week, quite the contrast to today in which numerous games can be seen on television. Certainly, a true championship game like what college football fans can see Monday night would not have been remotely possible in an earlier era.

  But, as Holtz and others have claimed, are the transfer portal (which essentially makes collegiate athletes one-time free agents) and the ability of athletes to now make money via endorsements or through social media threats to college sport? They certainly have not diminished interest in college football, which enjoys more television viewership today than it did a decade ago despite the fact that overall live TV viewership is down.

  Certainly, the presence of both NIL and the Transfer Portal have changed the responsibilities of the coach, at least when it comes to retaining scholarship athletes. It is not just malcontents that might want to switch programs; there are times when another program may be a better fit for an athlete’s skill set.

  Take Michael Penix, Jr., the quarterback of the University of Washington’s football team, for example. Penix played three seasons for Indiana University, much of it in futility for a lower-tier program. At Washington, he is the leader of a team playing for a national championship. The Transfer Portal made this transition possible.

  If one sees the Transfer Portal as an open market for labor, it is easier to see how it would benefit both athletes and coaches. Michael Penix is not the only success story of the Portal. For every J.T. Daniels, the quarterback who used the Portal three times trying to find a good fit, there is a Hendon Hooker, who transferred to Tennessee after languishing at Virginia Tech and was named the Southeastern Conference’s Offensive Player of the Year in 2022.

  While it is true that the Portal takes away some leverage that coaches might have over their athletes, it also helps level the recruiting playing field. Historically, teams have had to depend solely on their recruiting classes. Unlike professional sports in which championship teams get the last picks in the draft, championship collegiate teams generally get the best recruits year after year, the University of Alabama and the University of Georgia, two perennial powers, rake in top recruiting classes.

  Lane Kiffin, football coach at the University of Mississippi, knows he cannot recruit at the level that Alabama’s Nick Saban and Georgia’s Kirby Smart, but he has brought in the top-rated transfer class that likely will make Ole Miss a contended in 2024. Far from “destroying” college football, the Portal is making it more competitive and more balanced.

  In women’s sports, LSU won last year’s NCAA basketball tournament thanks in large part to transfer Angel Reese (from the University of Maryland). Since then, Reese has been able to parlay her fame into NIL deals and even appeared in the famous Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition.

  The NIL world might be more controversial, given the huge differences in money paid to athletes. Tennessee’s freshman quarterback Nico Iamaleava is rumored to be tied to an $8 million NIL deal while most athletes at Tennessee probably will receive little to nothing. The University of Iowa’s Caitlin Clark, considered the best collegiate basketball player this year, has close to a million dollars in endorsement, but most players are not going to be anywhere close to that category.

  Not surprisingly, the main objections to NIL are that they

  • Will “create an uneven playing field” that will benefit some programs more than others.

  • Some athletes will place a higher priority on their NIL deals than their academic studies and loyalty to their teams.

  • It will “blur the line” between amateur and professional sports.

  These are many of the issues brought up when I was wearing my college team’s jersey and most likely these issues were at the fore when Knute Rockne stalked the sidelines at the University of Notre Dame a century ago. But as we have seen in recent years, college sports have not undermined the mission of American higher education. Instead, the leftist capture of US colleges and universities driven by identity politics has inflicted infinitely more damage than all of the college sports scandals combined.

  Instead, we should see the opening of the Transfer Portal and the establishment of NIL as the redirection of resources and factors of production that in the long run will make college sports more interesting and more enjoyable. Contra Lou Holtz and others, the trappings of a free market will not “ruin” college sports.

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 17:40

• United Finds "Loose Bolts" On 737 Max Doors After Emergency Inspection
  United Finds “Loose Bolts” On 737 Max Doors After Emergency Inspection

  Update (1722ET):

  Sources tell the aviation blog The Air Current that “loose bolts and other parts on 737 Max 9 plug doors” have been found after inspections following the Alaska Airlines mid-air mishap when a door ripped off the plane over Portland on Friday. 

  BREAKING: United has found loose bolts and other parts on 737 Max 9 plug doors as it inspects its fleet of Boeing jets following the rapid depressurization aboard an Alaska jet, according to three people familiar with the findings. https://t.co/pcPx9I8Z0l (via @theaircurrent)

  — Jon Ostrower (@jonostrower) January 8, 2024

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

  “The discrepant bolts and other parts on the plug doors have been found on at least five aircraft,” the source said. 

  Following @jonostrower‘s scoop on United finding 737-9s with loose door plug screws, a source sent this image of one of the door plug’s lower hinge bracket with a note that 2 screws are not screwed all the way in. https://t.co/sz1d997PdL pic.twitter.com/d6hgHAEb2u

  — Edward Russell (@ByERussell) January 8, 2024

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

  The Air Current noted, “The findings aboard the five United aircraft will likely significantly widen the fall-out from the grounding, intensifying the focus on Boeing and Spirit AeroSystems. The pair together is responsible for the assembly, installation and quality checks of the aircraft structure.”

  

  A United spokesperson confirmed the findings:

  “Since we began preliminary inspections on Saturday, we have found instances that appear to relate to installation issues in the door plug – for example, bolts that needed additional tightening.

  “These findings will be remedied by our Tech Ops team to safely return the aircraft to service.”

  There are 215 737 Max 9s in service across 11 major airlines.

  

  “Not sure that can be attributable to just one line. Might have to ground all Boeing aircraft delivered in a given window of time?” one X user said. 

  *    *    * 

  National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) chair Jennifer Homendy said cockpit recording data on the Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 9 jet, which lost a fuselage panel that triggered a sudden decompression event near Portland on Friday, won’t be retrieved because the data was erased. 

  On Sunday, Homendy told reporters that after Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 made an emergency landing at Portland International Airport – the ground crew did not pull the circuit breaker on the cockpit voice recorder, or black box, to preserve the audio, which only holds two hours or data, as required by federal law. 

  “There was a lot going on, on the flight deck and on the plane. It’s a very chaotic event. The circuit breaker for the CVR (cockpit voice recorder) was not pulled. The maintenance team went out to get it, but it was right at about the two-hour mark,” Homendy said.

  She continued: “The cockpit voice recorder was completely overwritten. There was nothing on the cockpit voice recorder.” 

  Reuters noted US cockpit recorders only need to log two hours of data versus 25 hours in Europe for aircraft made after 2021. 

  The NTSB head said the audio could have shed more light on the moments leading up to the aircraft’s door ripping off the fuselage at 16,000 feet. 

  Boeing & Spirit AeroSystems Shares Plunge After Max 737-9 Max Door Blowout Incident https://t.co/8DD60MxY2I

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 8, 2024

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

  Homendy called on the “FAA to change the rulemaking” on cockpit recorders, extending the recording time from 2 to 25 hours for all aircraft.

  “If that communication is not recorded, that is unfortunately a loss for us and a loss for the FAA and a loss for safety because that information is key not just for our investigation but for improving aviation safety,” she said.

  During the decompression event, a new-generation Apple iPhone was sucked out of the plane and landed near a road in Portland. An X user named “Seanathan Bates” discovered the device, which did not appear to be damaged. 

  Found an iPhone on the side of the road… Still in airplane mode with half a battery and open to a baggage claim for #AlaskaAirlines ASA1282 Survived a 16,000 foot drop perfectly in tact!

  When I called it in, Zoe at @NTSB said it was the SECOND phone to be found. No door yet😅 pic.twitter.com/CObMikpuFd

  — Seanathan Bates (@SeanSafyre) January 7, 2024

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

  In a separate report, Bloomberg Intelligence’s George Ferguson and Melissa Balzano believe the in-flight mishap “probably stems from a manufacturing oversight, a sign of deficiency at Spirit AeroSystems, Boeing’s key supplier.” 

  Diagram of a Boeing 737-9 mid-cabin door plug and components (Source: Boeing) pic.twitter.com/7qPF5MGAOX

  — NTSB Newsroom (@NTSB_Newsroom) January 8, 2024

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

  Don’t forget the Max program is a flying disaster. 

  As a reminder, the 737 Max was “designed by clowns who in turn are supervised by monkeys”.https://t.co/Z5rt2LoI3e

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 6, 2024

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

  The FAA has previously rejected the NTSB’s call to upgrade aircraft with new cockpit voice recorders. That should be reversed since Max jets “designed by clowns who in turn are supervised by monkeys’ continue to fly around. 

  Tyler Durden
  Mon, 01/08/2024 – 17:22

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• The Great Taking Exposes The Financial End Game
  The Great Taking Exposes The Financial End Game

  Authored by Bert Olivier via The Brownstone Institute,

  One of the very best exposés of the covert, very well-hidden, bellicose attempts to rob all of humanity – barring the miniscule number of psychotic individuals comprising the inimical opposition – of their material possessions and their ‘immaterial’ freedom, was published fairly recently. It is accurately titled The Great Taking (2023), and was written by David Webb, one of the most courageous and finance-savvy authors I have ever come across.

  

  He introduces the book on p. 1 in uncompromising terms: 

  What is this book about? It is about the taking of collateral, all of it, the end game of this globally synchronous debt accumulation super cycle. This is being executed by long-planned, intelligent design, the audacity and scope of which is difficult for the mind to encompass. Included are all financial assets, all money on deposit at banks, all stocks and bonds, and hence, all underlying property of all public corporations, including all inventories, plant and equipment, land, mineral deposits, inventions and intellectual property. Privately owned personal and real property financed with any amount of debt will be similarly taken, as will the assets of privately owned businesses, which have been financed with debt. If even partially successful, this will be the greatest conquest and subjugation in world history. 

  We are now living within a hybrid war conducted almost entirely by deception, and thus designed to achieve war aims with little energy input. It is a war of conquest directed not against other nation states but against all of humanity.

  In the Prologue of the book Webb paints a richly textured, autobiographical picture of his provenance as finance guru, obviously with exceptional intelligence and, it turned out, courage. His knowledge of finance and economics has been the result of long years of work in the field, but he recalls the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, before the start of his professional career, when he was a child, and what he calls (witnessing) the subsequent “industrial collapse” of the US in Cleveland, where the family lived, culminating in “the complete destruction of everything we had known” (p. vii). Before he gets into the details of his life, he commences the Prologue with an indirect intimation of his reasons for writing the book (p. vi): 

  Presently, as we well know, families are divided. People are experiencing a kind of isolation, perhaps not physically, but in spirit and mind. This has been made to happen through the dark magic of false news and narrative. This alone has been a great crime against humanity. The tactical purposes are many: to confuse and divide; to cause disengagement; to demoralize; to instill fears and to introduce false focal points for these fears; to manipulate the historical narrative; to create a false sense of the present reality; and ultimately, to cause people to acquiesce to what has been planned.

  It is impossible to overstate the urgency of Webb’s message – everyone who reads this article should download the book (free) at the link provided above, or at least view the documentary based on it at CHD.TV, Rumble and (I don’t know for how long) YouTube. It makes for compulsive reading – a kind of non-fictional, real-world detective story, where you, the reader, are both the victim of the crime and the one looking over the detective’s shoulder at the evidence that he is digging up.

  And is there persuasive evidence! In the ‘court of human justice’ – which should be established, if it does not exist – the primary documentary evidence adduced by Webb would be sufficient to incarcerate all of these culprits, if not condemn them to capital punishment (recalling that, etymologically, ‘capital,’ or ‘of the head’ in Latin, relates to one’s head, which was usually implicated in hanging and decapitation; it also echoes in ‘wearing a cap’). That Webb knows only too well how he has exposed himself (and his family) with this book – and earlier, in addresses where he shared his findings with audiences in Sweden and the US – is clear where he writes, against the backdrop of the two occasions where he presented his insights, together with evidence (p. xxx):

  Less than a month after speaking at that conference in the U.S., a man contacted me who asked to meet in Stockholm. He had been the Chairman of a U.S. political party, and had a long career related to the defense establishment. He stayed at a hotel within a short walking distance from my apartment. We had lunch. He suggested a pint of ale. He asked me to explain the subject of which I had spoken at the conference. I went through the evidence and implications. The odd thing is that he then asked no questions about the subject. Instead, he fixed me in the eye and said, ‘Does your family know you are doing this?’ He said nothing more; that was the end of the meeting. I paid the bill and left. Perhaps it had been a ‘courtesy call.’

  We all have to die sometime, and being assassinated must be among the most honorable ways to do it. One must have been doing something right! Made a difference! No classier way to die, really. I always wanted to be like John Lennon!

  One could easily be fooled by Webb’s debonair shrugging-off of what could indeed have been a thinly veiled death threat from his dinner guest, but the fact remains that anyone who has the courage to oppose the psychopaths trying to hijack the world runs a tremendous risk, the more high-profile such opposition becomes. This is shown in the recent death ‘by suicide’ (yeah, right!) of Janet Ossebaard, who made the series, The Fall of the Cabal, and was involved in the unmasking of a network of pedophiles. The chances that she committed suicide, as reported, are pretty slim, I would say; she was evidently a thorn in the side of the murderous cabal.

  Returning to Webb’s book, he tellingly recounts how, after 9/11, when he saw all the signs of a deteriorating US economy everywhere, concomitantly there were undeniable indications that the Bush administration was spreading disinformation on this, covering it up by disseminating spurious reports of American economic strength. 

  In reality, however, the opposite was the case, symptomatic of which was the rapid shutting down of American manufacturing capacity and outsourcing it to China (which was obviously in on the deal). Nothing less than the (planned) loss of the American industrial base was occurring, while, accompanying this, Alan Greenspan was lauding the putative “productivity miracle” resulting from technology investment and development. It was a masterly performance of pulling the wool over Americans’ eyes. 

  Simultaneously, the impression of prosperity was further solidified by projecting the illusion that there was no risk in borrowing money; the ability to repay loans was ostensibly guaranteed. Webb’s persistent, perspicacious sleuthing has uncovered the trail which reveals the steps taken years ago to prepare for the global economic collapse we are facing now. This included the 2008 financial collapse, of which he writes wryly (p. xxviii): 

  In the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis it eventually became known that tens of trillions in losses in derivative positions were housed in the biggest banks, which were then bailed out with newly created money. The prime brokers would have failed, but to prevent that they were made banks and also received direct injections of created money from the Fed. No one was prosecuted. On the contrary, the perpetrators were rewarded with enormous bonuses. It was almost as if it had all gone according to plan.

  If I understand Webb correctly, this is the strategy that has been repeated several times, at least since the second half of the 19th century, resulting in the rich getting (much) richer and the poor getting (much) poorer. In brief, focusing on “Velocity of Money” (VOM) – “Velocity multiplied by Money Supply = GDP. Lower Velocity results in lower GDP” (p. 3) – Webb shows that, given the cyclical collapse of economies and empires in the 20th century, following the Great War, and the demonstrable benefit, despite all this hardship, of certain banking interests regarding control (and creation) of money, as well as of key institutions, the contemporary ‘heirs’ of all this control knew that a similar collapse would recur. They have been preparing for it. And they are determined to remain in control. Hence the supposed ‘Great Reset.’ 

  During the Dot-com bubble and bust period Webb studied the relationship between financial markets and the Federal Reserve bank, and realised that the latter was deliberately influencing the former by manipulating the money supply – that is, routinely printing more money than, correlatively, GDP growth. If money supply growth is more than GDP growth, a financial bubble develops, divorced from any real economic growth. By the end of 1999 the money supply had increased by more than 40% of GDP annually, signaling that VOM was imploding. 

  Does this sound familiar? Since the start of the plandemic trillions of US dollars have been printed, accelerating the widening of the gap between money supply and real economic productivity, and thus hastening the financial collapse. This is what the cabal wants. After all, as Webb tersely remarks (p. 4), “Crises do not occur by accident; they are induced intentionally and used to consolidate power and to put in place measures, which will be used later.” Rather apocalyptically, he continues (pp 5-6):

  VOM has now contracted to a lower level than at any point during the Great Depression and world wars. Once the ability to produce growth by printing money has been exhausted, creating more money will not help. It is pushing on a string. The phenomenon is irreversible. And so, perhaps the announcement of the ‘Great Reset’ has been motivated not by ‘Global Warming’ or by profound insights into a ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution,’ but rather by certain knowledge of the collapse of this fundamental monetary phenomenon, the implications of which extend far beyond economics.

  Just how far becomes increasingly clear as one reads through this densely documented book – not a book with many pages, but a ‘big’ book as far as the importance of its theme (and its substantiation) is concerned. Given the number of reports and other sources which Webb cites, it is impossible to do justice here to all their details and their pertinence for Webb’s argument, that the so-called elites have spent years to prepare for a ‘super-cycle’ collapse that will necessitate the transition to a New World Order, with them still in control. I can therefore only lift out the salient parts of his argument. The first is neatly captured where he writes (p. 7):

  There are now no property rights to securities held in book-entry form in any jurisdiction, globally. In the grand scheme to confiscate all collateral, dematerialization of securities was the essential first step. The planning and efforts began over half a century ago.

  Not only was the CIA intimately involved in this “dematerialization” – which essentially meant moving from paper-based stock certificate archiving, to a computer-based system – but the CIA project leader was moved to a senior position in the banking sector without any banking experience. Webb raises the possibility, interrogatively, that the ensuing “paperwork crisis” was “manufactured” to justify the dematerialisation process, which paved the way for the present electronic archiving system worldwide.

  Small wonder the epigraph for this chapter is a quote from Sun Tzu (which is just as applicable to today): “All warfare is based on deception.” This also covers the topic of the next chapter: “Security Entitlement,” of which Webb writes (p. 9): “The greatest subjugation in world history will have been made possible by the invention of a construct; a subterfuge; a lie: the ‘Security Entitlement.’”

  And indeed, having informed one that, since their inception more than 400 years ago, these “tradable financial instruments” were recognised, by law, as personal property, he hits the reader with the news that this is not the case any longer. In practice, Webb explains, this implies that even if, wishing to avoid the complications of a car dealership possibly going bust after purchasing a car on an installment plan, one has bought it for cash, this will no longer work. Security entitlements have been changed legally to permit creditors of the bankrupt car dealership to seize your car as an asset that still belongs to the dealership. 

  Webb sums this legal coup up as follows (p. 10): “Essentially all securities ‘owned’ by the public in custodial accounts, pension plans and investment funds are now encumbered as collateral underpinning the derivatives complex…” The “protected class” have legally stolen all our assets from us even before the anticipated (and engineered) global financial implosion occurs (if it does). Moreover, through additional legislation, this has been ‘harmonised’ to ensure that “secured creditors” be guaranteed that their assets be protected through “cross-border mobility of legal control of such collateral” (p. 16). Furthermore, ‘safe harbour’ provisions were made timeously to protect the ruling class (p. 32): 

  In 2005, less than two years before the onset of the Global Financial Crisis, ‘safe harbor’ provisions in the U.S. Bankruptcy code were significantly changed. ‘Safe harbor’ sounds like a good thing, but again, this was about making it absolutely certain that secured creditors can take client assets, and that this cannot be challenged subsequently. This was about ‘safe harbor’ for secured creditors against demands of customers to their own assets.

  It gets worse. It turns out that, if something called Central Clearing Parties – tasked with providing “clearing and settlement for trades” in a variety of financial transactions – is insufficiently capitalised to prepare for the eventuality of failing, and such a failure occurs, “it is the secured creditors who will take the assets of the entitlement holders. This is where it is going. It is designed to happen suddenly, and on a vast scale.” Webb goes on to disabuse readers of the belief that the so-called “Bank Holiday” ended the Great Depression (Chapter VIII), and of believing Ben Bernanke’s promise, in 2002, that the Federal Reserve “won’t do it again” (i.e. make its mistakes regarding what led to the Great Depression). Instead, he cautions (p. 46):

  Is the Fed indeed ‘very sorry?’ Can one believe the promise that ‘we won’t do it again?’ They have studied the lessons of the past in detail; however, their purpose has been to prepare a new and improved global version for the spectacular end of this debt expansion super-cycle. That’s what this book is about.

  Webb’s elaboration on The Great Deflation (Chapter IX) is a salutary reminder that this kind of thing has happened before, in the 1930s, albeit not on the scale that is being planned this time. In the Conclusion (p. 64) he drives his point home by confronting readers with the stark reality of what is happening; I feel like quoting the whole of this powerful chapter, but obviously that is redundant, because the book can (and should) be downloaded free via the link provided near the beginning of this article – please read it; it is imperative to read all the detail that cannot be supplied here. Here is a smattering of citations from it:

  As a human being, should this not concern you? What part of the organized slaughter of vast numbers of innocent people can you find acceptable? Do you believe that you are special in some way, that you were being protected, or that you will be protected now?

  There has been abundant evidence of great evil at work in the world, throughout time and in our present time. Do you really wish to be ignorant of its existence and operation? (p.64.)

  To not know is bad. To not want to know is worse. 

   Willful ignorance of the existence and operation of evil is a luxury even the wealthy can no longer afford. 

  We are in the grip of the greatest evil humanity has ever faced (or refused to acknowledge, as the case may be). Hybrid war is unlimited. It has no bounds. It is global, and it is inside your head. It is never-ending. (p. 65.)

  We have witnessed designs and real attempts to exert physical control over every person’s body, globally, and this is continuing…Why is this happening? 

   I will make a startling assertion. This is not because the power to control is increasing. It is because this power is indeed collapsing. The ‘control system’ has entered collapse. 

   Their power has been based on deception. Their two great powers of deception, money and media, have been extremely energy-efficient means of control. But these powers are now in rampant collapse. This is why they have moved urgently to institute physical control measures. However, physical control is difficult, dangerous and energy-intensive. And so, they are risking all. They are risking being seen. Is this not a sign of desperation? (pp. 67-68.)

  Never before has a system benefitted so few at the great expense of so many. Is this not inherently unstable and unsustainable? Physical control, as opposed to rule by deception, requires enormous energy. Can this be sustained while destroying all economies, and abusing all people, globally? They do not know how to ‘build back better.’ Look at their footprint around the world—the destruction, the economic devastation. (p. 68.)

  Let me close with John F. Kennedy’s own words: 

  Our problems are man-made;

  therefore, they can be solved by man. (p. 70.)

  In turn, I shall conclude with the last paragraph of Webb’s Prologue; let us take this to heart, spread the link to his book far and wide, and, to quote Naomi Wolf’s recent book’s title, ‘face the beast’ bravely and resolutely:

  It is my hope that in making this unpleasantness explicit, and doing so at this time when developments are becoming more apparent, that awareness might spread, and that the worst might be averted. Perhaps this Great Taking might not be allowed to happen if we each hold up our end—even the investment bankers—and say forcefully: we will not allow this. It is a construct. It is not real.

  Amen.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 23:20

• The Argentine Peso Was NOT The Most-Devalued Currency Of 2023
  The Argentine Peso Was NOT The Most-Devalued Currency Of 2023

  According to Bloomberg’s financial monitor, the currencies of Lebanon and Argentina experienced significant devaluations against the dollar last year.

  The Lebanese pound recorded the highest loss of value against the U.S. currency, depreciating by 89.89 percent.

  Following close behind is the Argentine peso, which lost nearly 78 percent of its value.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Argentina holds the record for the highest number of years with negative GDP growth in the last half-century – a total of 21 years between 1971 and 2022, according to the World Bank.

  Furthermore, Argentina ranked as the fourth country with the highest inflation rate in the world last year, according to the latest data from the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 22:45

• Behind The West’s Collective Failure To Prepare For The Trouble We Now Face
  Behind The West’s Collective Failure To Prepare For The Trouble We Now Face

  Authored by Michael Bonner via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  In 1992, both writer and scholar Francis Fukuyama and Disney’s film “Aladdin” promised us “a whole new world.” Thirty-two years later, the world seems much worse than anyone expected, and 2024 may prove to be a major turning point.

  

  “Aladdin” wasn’t very specific about what new world would be like, but Fukuyama, author of “The End of History and the Last Man,” was.

  History was an evolutionary process with a goal, he wrote. That goal was liberal democracy, and we had reached it in the late 20th century. The whole world would put aside ideology, and be drawn into the promises of free trade, prosperity, and ever-expanding freedoms. Liberal democracy would not change into anything else, because all other forms of political order or ideology were so bad in comparison. The new world would not be one in which nothing new happened. It would be boring, though, because politics would be more about managing economies than competing visions of the Good Life, or mediating tribal and ideological conflicts. Nevertheless, the only challenge to liberal democracy would come from within: not everyone would want to be equal to everyone else, and some would struggle not within the liberal system but against it. Or so the argument went.

  Fukuyama’s vision was easily misinterpreted. Post-Cold War exuberance was seemingly impossible to resist. We had won, and the only serious challenge or potential alternative to Western power and culture was gone. Figuratively speaking, it was easy to sit back, relax, and enjoy the unfolding of an evolutionary process that was not only good but inevitable. This explains the West’s collective failure to predict and to prepare for the trouble we now face. We stopped taking external threats seriously, we systematically disarmed ourselves, cut military budgets, and gave up on our culture. History was over, after all.

  This was foolish. There clearly are, and always have been, malign actors in the world who do not wish us well, and who do not want liberal democracy at home. They resent it abroad too. Strongmen and autocrats of adversarial regimes have little in common except the desire to see the West humiliated or at least taken down a few pegs. But they are now working together to try to achieve exactly that. They detected weakness and acted as soon as the West was most vulnerable and distracted.

  So far, we have seen constant election interference, warfare in Ukraine, and more recently war in Gaza (initiated by Hamas and Iran’s prompting). Will these problems grow and spread? Will China seize the opportunity to invade Taiwan soon?

  Any of those possibilities may test Western, and especially American, resolve to the breaking point. Our enemies know this. They also know that the main question will not be whether Western militaries are up to the challenge—though that is definitely a question worth pondering. What we need to ask ourselves above all is whether or not the West, and especially America, has enough self-confidence to stand up for its own interests. There will be no point in continuing to defend a Western-made international system if no one believes in it and no one wants to preserve our values.

  If the West, with America at its head, is too divided or preoccupied with internal matters to police the world system that it created, and to punish those who seek to undermine it, then authoritarians and strongmen will keep pushing, taunting, and attacking us until we give up and withdraw.

  I raise these matters now, because the world in 2024 looks set to be much more dangerous and violent than it has been in a long time. The trouble is not just abroad, but also at home in the form of violent protest and hyper-polarization. Looming in the distance, drawing closer by the day, is the spectre of the U.S. presidential election in November. Whatever the outcome, it seems likely that the losing side won’t recognize the legitimacy of the winner as in 2016 and 2020. But let’s hope this isn’t how things turn out.

  In the meantime, let’s hope and pray that we can reconnect ourselves with the values that made the West great, and recover the nerve required to defend ourselves and the world that we built.

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 22:10

• The AARP Just Told Its 38 Million Members To Get An 8th (Yes, Eighth!!) Shot Of mRNA
  The AARP Just Told Its 38 Million Members To Get An 8th (Yes, Eighth!!) Shot Of mRNA

  Authored by Alex Berenson via ‘Unreported Truths’ substack,

  AARP? Or AARPfizer?

  The lobbying group for older Americans just told its nearly 38 million members to “hustle” for another Covid jab, even if they have already had five boosters.

  See for yourself. The following question-and-answer column ran in the organization’s December “AARP Bulletin”:

  

  AARP is open to anyone 50 or older.

  The column does not specify a narrower or higher age range for its recommendation.

  Thus it implies that even a 50-year-old who has not already had six “Covid boosters” needs to “catch up” with another immediately.

  Keep in mind that someone who has had “five Covid boosters” has actually received seven mRNA jabs – the initial two-shot primary vaccination regimen, followed by five boosters.

  Thus AARP is suggesting its members should be taking their eighth jab of mRNA in the last three years.

  

  Yet scientists have essentially no safety data beyond a third shot, much less a fourth or more, and thus no way of knowing if the risks of repeated mRNA dosing rise with each shot.

  AARP’s unbelievably bad advice doesn’t end there.

  The column then goes on to tell members that “the most recent shot, which was released in September 2023, isn’t actually a booster. It’s a new vaccine that targets the latest variants.”

  A what-now? A new vaccine?

  Wow.

  Guess it must have gone through the randomized trials that are required in the United States for any new drug or vaccine.

  No?

  Let’s just call it a new vaccine anyway, since our elderly readers have gotten kinda suspicious of the failure of the Covid shots they’ve already taken.

  But the article ends on a happy note: Researchers are even working on a combined COVID-flu vaccine, so a few years from now, a single shot from your doctor or pharmacy may be all you need to protect yourself fully…

  

  If the side effects from the 23 mRNA jabs you’ve taken by then don’t kill you first!

  (No, you shouldn’t. REALLY.)

  *  *  *

  Subscribe to ‘Unreported Truths’ substack here

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 21:35

• Which US Cities Have The Most Million-Dollar 'Mansions'
  Which US Cities Have The Most Million-Dollar ‘Mansions’

  Nearly one-in-ten U.S. homes are now worth at least $1 million.

  Analysis from Redfin has found that 8.2% of homes in America were million-dollar homes as of June 2023, nearing the June 2022 peak of 8.6%.

  In the graphic above, Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu uses Redfin and MLS data to highlight the top 15 U.S. cities by their percentage of million-dollar homes, based on June 2023 home values in metropolitan statistical areas (MSA).

  

  Top 15 U.S. Metros by Share of Million-Dollar Residences

  California has seen an exodus of residents over the last few years due to many factors, but the state still has the highest share of million-dollar homes in the country by far.

  Cities in California claimed the top six spots by share of million-dollar homes in June 2023. Here are the top 15, along with the change since June 2022 in percentage points (p.p.).

  

  First is San Francisco, where 81% of homes were worth at least $1 million. This is actually lower than the year previous, which saw 84.2% of homes cost more than one million dollars.

  Neighboring San Jose, home of Silicon Valley, was second place with million-dollar homes accounting for 80% of residences. The entire San Francisco Bay Area is the most expensive real estate market in America, with Oakland also having 49% of homes costing $1 million or more.

  Southern California also featured prominently, with Anaheim (55%) actually outranking San Diego (40%) and Los Angeles (38%). The first non-California metro to make the rankings was Hawaii’s Honolulu at 38%.

  Other regions to feature at the top of the rankings were the Western U.S. (Seattle and Salt Lake City) and the Northeast (New York City, Bridgeport, and Boston). Miami was the sole entry from the South, with far lower shares of million-dollar homes in major metros like Dallas-Fort Worth, Atlanta, and Phoenix.

  Share of Million-Dollar Homes Doubled Since 2019

  One reason for the increase in housing prices is intense competition for those trying to enter the housing market.

  Many existing homeowners are opting to stay put in their current residences to retain their relatively low mortgage rates, with the U.S. 30-year fixed-rate mortgage reaching its highest level since 2002.

  Subsequently, the high cost of financing has also caused development to slow down. But high demand from new potential homeowners has propelled prices to new heights. According to Redfin, the share of homes worth seven figures has doubled since before the pandemic.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 20:25

• 'High On Likes': Driving Under The Influence Of Social Media At The Crossroad Of Freedom & Serfdom
  ‘High On Likes’: Driving Under The Influence Of Social Media At The Crossroad Of Freedom & Serfdom

  Authored by Thaddeus McCotter via American Greatness,

  As the New Year commences, I peeked into the rearview mirror and rediscovered an article that appeared in Lisa DePasquale’s diurnal newsletter, Bright. Published on January 3, 2023, by StudyFinds [one word], the headline was a terse red flag for the future of our free republic: “The Social Disaster: Children Who Frequently Check Social Media Face Significant Brain Changes.”

  Based upon a then recent study from the University of North Carolina, the gist of the article is in equal parts instructive and alarming:

  ‘The findings suggest that children who grow up checking social media more often are becoming hypersensitive to feedback from their peers,’ says Eva Telzer, a professor in UNC-Chapel Hill’s psychology and neuroscience department and a corresponding author, in a statement.

  ‘Social media platforms provide adolescents with unprecedented opportunities for social interactions during a critical developmental period when the brain is especially sensitive to social feedback,’ the study concludes. This longitudinal cohort study suggests that social media behaviors in early adolescence may be associated with changes in adolescents’ neural development, specifically neural sensitivity to potential social feedback.

  It is not difficult to understand Big Tech’s venal motives for catering to customers’ psychology to increase their use of social media: the corporations’ already humongous profits.

  

  But the societal dimension of hardwiring youth to become hypersensitive to “social feedback”—i.e., “peer pressure”—within their network will have an immense and deleterious impact upon a free society.

  Certainly, it is not lost upon the administrative state, who is hellbent upon controlling (often in conjunction with legacy/regime media) both the means and messages of citizens’ interactions on social media, be it censorship, pushing bogus, statist narratives, etc.

  Per the paper published in JAMA Pediatrics, “students who look at social media at least 15 times daily were the most sensitive to social feedback.”

  While these students are the most at risk, their peers are not far behind them:

  “Previous research shows that 78 percent of 13- to 17-year-olds report checking their devices at least hourly each day and 35 percent look at the top five networks ‘almost constantly.’”

  Understandably, the researchers assert that “further research examining long-term prospective associations between social media use, adolescent neural development, and psychological adjustment is needed to understand the effects of a ubiquitous influence on development for today’s adolescents.”

  Let’s give them an admittedly non-expert head start on this research by gazing back even further in our rearview mirror to March 20, 2018, where StudyFinds previously published another alarming article, “It’s Not Your Smartphone You’re Addicted to, It’s the Social Interaction.”

  It’s author, Ben Renner, succinctly lays out the findings by the researchers at McGill University:

  “[people’s] urge to socialize is actually an ingrained human need resulting from eons of evolution. For those who argue spending too much time on a smartphone makes a person anti-social, the authors say overuse is actually the product of being hyper-social.”

  McGill psychiatry professor Samuel Veissière admitted, “There is a lot of panic surrounding this topic. We’re trying to offer some good news and show that it is our desire for human interaction that is addictive – and there are fairly simple solutions to deal with this.”

  What, one may ask, is “this?”

  “Many of the most addictive smartphone apps such as Facebook or Snapchat tap into this constant search for meaning and the ingrained desire to see others and be seen by them… Veissière insists the need for social interaction is a positive instinct, but in the age of constant connectivity to the internet and the variety of social platforms it provides, that instinct can be kicked into ‘overdrive,’ leading to unhealthy addictions.”

  Okay, but what are the proposed “simple solutions?”

  “Veissière and his team recommend turning off push notifications on your phone if possible and purposefully setting aside time to check your phone to help battle these addictive impulses.”

  Yet, for a hypersocial citizenry addicted to social media and “high on likes,” these simple solutions are the hardest, as anyone experienced in treating substance abuse addictions can attest.

  And it is almost impossible when the institutions subverted by the elitist Left are colluding to use social media “approval” to compel the citizenry into compliance with the state’s directives.

  Adjusting the rearview mirror to 2020, the COVID pandemic provided the paradigm by which we can view the damaging effects of the administrative state’s coordinating with Big Tech, Big Pharma, the legacy/regime media, academia, and their shock troops of left-wing trolls (paid and otherwise) to enforce its arbitrary and capricious effects upon the populace.

  “Wear the mask” and “get the vaccination” meant you are a good citizen; if not, you are a homicidal cretin “killing people” and worthy of any punishment society wishes to inflict upon you.

  So, too, 2020 also showed how the administrative state and Big Tech could collude on election interference by denying and censoring stories about the Hunter Biden laptop.

  Anyone trying to bring the truth to light was censored and “deplatformed” from their social network and its feedback—a cyberspace shunning.

  Now, in 2024, through the deliberate, debilitating din of the Communications Revolution, we can glean the insidious aim of the administrative state, Big Tech, and a host of leftist institutions and minions: the erosion of individual liberty and the perverse inversion of subordinating sovereign citizens into subjects of the government. Doesn’t history instruct how, in attempted revolutions/coups, the cabal urgently prioritizes capturing and controlling society’s means of communication? Using social media to cajole, coerce, and inure citizens into conforming within the “collective” and its “hyper-socialism,” the Left’s first punishment for exercising non-state-sanctioned, independent thought and dissent is and will continue to be the ostracization from one’s social interactions. Other punishments, such as job loss, harassment lawsuits, etc., will follow. Frankly, what is being “cancelled” but being locked in a virtual gulag?

  Thus, while the solutions may be simple, such as dismantling the administrative state, reforming their colluding leftist infested institutions, and offering hope to those addicted to “likes,” etc. – they will be decidedly difficult. But the future of our free republic requires an intervention. Inaction is not an option, especially given the speed AI is metastasizing within an already social media addled populace.

  For those whose decisions are driven in whole or in part by social media, they may well refuse to admit the problem as they wheel and whistle past the graveyard of individuality and liberty. For those of us not driving under the influence of social media, as we peer out the windshield to the crossroad of freedom and serfdom ahead, one has the sensation of time slowing down as a collision unfolds.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 19:50

• New Hampshire House Passes Bill Banning Genital Transgender Surgery On Children
  New Hampshire House Passes Bill Banning Genital Transgender Surgery On Children

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

  

  The New Hampshire House of Representatives has passed a bill that prohibits some transgender surgeries on minors, though the measure falls short of the initial intent of the measure that sought to ban all so-called “gender reassignment” procedures for children.

  Twelve Democrats joined nearly all Republicans to pass House Bill 619 by a vote of 199-175 on Jan. 5, in a move that came amid a series of other transgender-related bills that the House voted on earlier in the day.

  The bill that passed was a watered-down version of the original proposal, which, if passed as introduced, would have banned giving puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to children and would have prohibited the surgical removal of breasts in girls who identify as boys.

  The current version of the bill prohibits the carrying out of “genital gender reassignment surgery” on anyone under 18 while also banning health care workers from referring minors for such producers to out-of-state facilities.

  Genital gender reassignment surgeries are defined in the bill as surgical procedures to alter the genitalia of children who have no sex development disorders or whose genitals are not “malignant,” meaning cancerous or otherwise dangerous to their physical health.

  Banned procedures include removal of the penis and testicles or surgically creating a penis from other parts of the body, with the exception of reconstructive surgery to restore normal form and function to tissue affected by physical pathologies like malformation or trauma.

  Male circumcision is also exempt from the ban.

  The bill now heads to the GOP-controlled Senate and, if it passes there, then to the desk of New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, a Republican.

  Reactions and Other Bills

  Proponents of the bill argued that children should be protected from irreversible gender reassignment surgeries—especially since there’s not much data about their impact and claimed benefits—while opponents said it goes against parental rights and medical freedom.

  Rep. Erica Layon, a Republican and co-sponsor of the bill, said that genital reassignment surgeries should be prohibited—at least until more data is available.

  “We need to wait,” she said, according to the New Hampshire Bulletin, a local news outlet.

  The text of the bill states: “Adolescent genital gender reassignment surgery generally lacks both adequate information for informed consent and involves a high risk of coercion for parental consent when parents believe that they are faced with a choice between their child committing suicide or consenting to their child’s genital gender reassignment surgeries.”

  Rep. Jonah Wheeler, a Democrat who voted with most Republicans in favor of the measure, explained his reasoning in a speech ahead of the vote.

  “This is a question of whether or not you believe children should be able to get an irreversible surgery,” Mr. Wheeler said, per the New Hampshire Bulletin.

  “Despite being a liberal who believes in human rights, I do not think that children should be able to get irreversible surgery. So I’ll take all the heat that comes from this,” he added.

  Rep. Dan Hynes, a Republican who switched to an Independent, said the bill “goes against parental rights and goes against medical freedom.”

  Passage of the genital gender reassignment surgery bill came alongside House votes on other transgender-related measures.

  Earlier on Jan. 4, the House voted in favor of House Bill 396, which would allow the state and public schools to differentiate based on sex in “places of intimate privacy” such as bathrooms, as well as in prisons and sports competitions.

  Also, the House voted against House Bill 264, which would have allowed people to get a new birth certificate reflecting the gender they identify with without having to get a court order.

  Medically Necessary?

  A number of mental health and pediatric organizations in the United States and abroad advocate for so-called gender-affirming care, saying that medically transitioning children and adults will alleviate suicidal tendencies.

  Professionals often dismiss objections to transitioning children by telling parents that a transgender son or daughter is better than a dead child.

  About a half-dozen U.S. federal courts have blocked bans on so-called gender-affirming care for children, which proponents argue is “medically necessary” to lower the likelihood that people suffering from gender dysphoria will commit suicide.

  Opponents have pushed back on the claim that transgender procedures reduce suicidality, with a research review in March that purports to be the first ever to evaluate mental health outcomes solely from the standpoint of likelihood of suicide, finding that the results are inconclusive.

  That’s in part because most of the underlying research failed to control for the time elapsed after transgender procedures, with the researchers suggesting that people who get such procedures may be subject to an initial “honeymoon period” that evaporates over time as they revert to similar levels of suicidal ideation as before.

  “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.

  Meanwhile, a recent Finnish study found that mental health issues for people who medically transition continue despite “treatment.”

  The need for psychiatric care was greater both before and after medical transitioning compared to a control group, the data showed.

  The results of the peer-reviewed study also showed that more individuals are seeking help for gender dysphoria and that it is happening at ever younger ages, with a marked increase in female patients.

  Darlene McCormick Sanchez contributed to this report. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 18:40

• ZeroHedge January 6th Debate Highlights With Glenn Greenwald, Alex Jones & More
  ZeroHedge January 6th Debate Highlights With Glenn Greenwald, Alex Jones & More

  Saturday night marked the second ZeroHedge debate, which pitted Glenn Greenwald, Alex Jones and Darren Beattie against the Krassenstein brothers and Destiny – with Ian Crossland from Timcast moderating. The topic: Was January 6th a manufactured crisis?

  

  For those who lasted all three hours of this incredible debate, our hat goes off to you.

  Meanwhile, here are a few highlights in case you missed it:

  To kick off the festivities, everyone was asked the fundamental question over whether the Capitol riots of 2021 constituted an insurrection. Stephen Bonnell (a political commentator by the name of “Destiny”) succinctly made the affirmative case, while journalist Glenn Greenwald deemed it “laughable.”:

  The darkest day in American history?

  InfoWars founder Alex Jones asked panelists whether the Jan 6 riots surpassed Pearl Harbor and 9/11 in severity. Ed Krassenstein replied that “it depends” but ultimately concluded it wasn’t while Destiny answered by calling Jan 6 a “uniquely horrible event”:

  Trump’s Culpability

  On the question of whether Trump bears responsibility for the “insurrection”, Brian Krassenstein cited the high number of convicted rioters who claimed to have acted in service of the former President. Revolver News founder Darren Beattie alluded to the infamous murderer Charles Manson — who was motivated by imagined secret messages contained in The Beatles’ song Helter Skelter. “Trump is essentially Helter Skelter?” Beattie asked:

  Was the 2020 election “stolen”?

  It’s a question that lies at the heart of this debate. The answer to determines whether Trump and his supporters’ grievances and actions taken as a result were legitimate.

  Destiny — asserting the negative — raised the issue of Trump’s close advisers telling him there was insufficient evidence of widespread voter fraud, while Greenwald offered a nuanced perspective: perhaps the election was not “stolen” but “rigged” by entrenched forces within the U.S. intelligence apparatus:

  Ray Epps

  Beattie — whose outlet Revolver.news reported extensively on the mysterious Epps — answers a series of pointed questions scrutinizing his reporting from Destiny and the Krassensteins:

  Watch the full debate here and help our debate series by subscribing to ZeroHedge Premium, as well as our Rumble and YouTube channels:

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 18:15

• Speaker Johnson Announces $1.66 Trillion Bipartisan Package To Avert Shutdown
  Speaker Johnson Announces $1.66 Trillion Bipartisan Package To Avert Shutdown

  House Speaker Mike Johnson told colleagues on Sunday that Congressional negotiators have reached a topline spending figure to avert a federal government shutdown on Jan. 19 for some government agencies, and Feb. 2 for others.

  

  According to a Sunday “Dear Colleague” letter, the topline deal – which mostly adheres to a deal reached between the White House and former speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), limits discretionary spending to $1.66 trillion overall. It also secures $16 billion in additional spending cuts vs. the McCarthy deal, and is around $30 billion less than what Senate Democrats wanted.

  “This represents the most favorable budget agreement Republicans have achieved in over a decade,” wrote Johnson, adding “As has been widely reported, a list of extra-statutory adjustments was agreed upon by negotiators last summer. The agreement today achieves key modifications to the June framework that will secure more than $16 billion in additional spending cuts to offset the discretionary spending levels.”

  Breaking it down, the deal sets aside $886.3 billion for defense spending, $772.7 billion in domestic discretionary spending, and rescinds $6.1 billion in coronavirus emergency spending authority. The deal also accelerates $20 billion in cuts from the $80 billion IRS funding allocated under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.

  “The bipartisan funding framework congressional leaders have reached moves us one step closer to preventing a needless government shutdown and protecting important national priorities,” President Biden’s staff said in a statement assigned to the 81-year-old. “It reflects the funding levels that I negotiated with both parties and signed into law last spring. It rejects deep cuts to programs hard-working families count on, and provides a path to passing full-year funding bills that deliver for the American people and are free of any extreme policies.”

  House Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries issued a statement in support of the new agreement.

  

  “It will also allow us to keep the investments for hardworking American families secured by the legislative achievements of President Biden and Congressional Democrats,” the pair said. “Finally, we have made clear to Speaker Mike Johnson that Democrats will not support including poison pill policy changes in any of the twelve appropriations bills put before the Congress.”

  Let’s see if this sticks…

  Johnson and the Democrats’ biggest challenge will be House conservatives, who have opposed earlier debt ceiling agreements over a lack of spending offsets.

  That said, this agreement is separate from funding for Israel and Ukraine – a growing sticking point among some Republicans.

  As Mike Shedlock from MishTalk.com noted on Saturday, many problems remain.

  

  What’s the Real Deadline?

  January 19 is less than two weeks away. The real deadline is allegedly February 3.

  Since Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is not incessantly yapping over this, I suspect the real deadline is further away.

  Republicans can always punt with another “temporary” and “clean” continuing resolution. And that would not surprise me in the least. It would buy everyone time to avoid budget cuts that would kick in on April 30.

  But eventually, it will come down to my long-stated beliefs, expressed below.

  Expect More of This for More of That

  The Republican hard-line House Freedom Caucus won’t accomplish anything because there is not enough of them and they are not even united on what they want.

  Some want funding for Israel but that is conveniently lumped with funding for Ukraine which they generally don’t want.

  H.R.2 is a nonstarter. As a result, there will be some Republican holdouts who will not vote for whatever Speaker Mike Johnson concocts with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.

  If any bill passes in the House, it will be with Democrat support. The Freedom Caucus will howl.

  The only question is how big this final boondoggle is.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 18:05

• MSNBC Host Ridiculed For Crying Over January 6
  MSNBC Host Ridiculed For Crying Over January 6

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Modernity.news.

  An MSNBC host faced ridicule after he performatively cried over January 6 in a cringe stunt during his live show.

  

  Jonathan Capehart was talking with former D.C. police officer Michael Fanone about his new book when the incident occurred.

  “I’m going to try to get through this…erm…” stuttered Capehart as he appeared to wipe tears from his face.

  “Thank you for what you did three years ago today,” he continued as his voice quivered.

  MSNBC host cries over 3-year anniversary of “January 6”.

  This is going to keep me laughing all through the winter.pic.twitter.com/qR0UlQBzWZ

  — Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) January 6, 2024

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

  Fanone looked rather awkward as Capehart blubbered, but played up to the contrived theatrics.

  “We are still in the midst of the same fight that began on January 6, 2021 and we have a lot at stake in this country and I think that it deserves every American’s attention,” he said.

  Capehart’s ludicrous behavior was quickly skewered on X.

  Yet they laughed and celebrated over the “summer of love.”

  These people are such frauds. pic.twitter.com/EWswtyWHLb

  — Pro Swing Trading 📈😎🇺🇸 (@Pro__Trading) January 6, 2024

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

  “Whatever they are hysterical about is what they are lying about” Tucker Carlson

  — Gimme3Steps (@TheSouthGAJohn) January 6, 2024

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

  This is either acting, mental illness or both.

  What’s happening at the border right now is infinitely worse than J6.

  The media doesn’t even report on the border invasion let alone cry about it.

  Give me a break.

  — Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸 (@Bubblebathgirl) January 6, 2024

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

  Omg even the police officer was like wtf are you doing? 😅

  He was practicing all night for that moment lol

  — Carlos Rincon (@carlitosrincon_) January 6, 2024

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

  Omg even the police officer was like wtf are you doing? 😅

  He was practicing all night for that moment lol

  — Carlos Rincon (@carlitosrincon_) January 6, 2024

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

  This underlies neatly how the media-social-industrial complex sold J6 to the American public: by manipulating the faith Americans put in their institutions. They sold a nonsense study by constructing an argument on the basis of emotion, which enabled people to accept otherwise…

  — Christian Watson (@OfficialCWATSON) January 6, 2024

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

  Far too many soy lattes.

  — George Suchey (@suchey62) January 6, 2024

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

  Look how wild J6th was…oh wait..nevermind. pic.twitter.com/FuFuyoJhyi

  — The Comedian (@The__Comedian__) January 7, 2024

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

  Meanwhile, if it’s a competition based on hysterical weirdo behavior, Rep. Steve Cohen will give Capehart a run for his money.

  3 years ago today, I was there in the U.S. Capitol. We were minutes away from being violently attacked. I saw what happened, I felt what happened. And so did you.

  Donald Trump is a traitor to the United States of America. Don’t ever forget it. pic.twitter.com/NhBYq1GIM3

  — Steve Cohen (@RepCohen) January 6, 2024

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

  * * *

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 17:30

• BRICS Expands Footprint In The Global South
  BRICS Expands Footprint In The Global South

  Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Ethiopia and the United Arab Emirates formally joined the BRICS group of major emerging economies on January 1, 2024, expanding the bloc’s footprint in the Global South and growing its economic and political clout on the world stage, establishing a real counterweight to the Western-dominated G7.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  In August, the bloc had announced that it would be admitting six new members, including Argentina.

  However, as Statista’s Felix Richter reports, the South American nation declared a formal rejection of the offer on 29 December, 2023 with Argentina’s President Javier Milei stating in a letter published by several media outlets that the membership “was not considered appropriate at this time.”

  Speaking on the expansion of the BRICS, South African president Cyril Ramaphosa said at a press briefing:

  “We shared our vision of BRICS as a champion of the needs and concerns of the peoples of the Global South. These include the need for beneficial economic growth, sustainable development and reform of multilateral systems.”

  He also indicated that the addition of the six new members is just the beginning of the bloc’s expansion process.

  “As the five BRICS countries, we have reached agreement on the guiding principles, standards, criteria and procedures of the BRICS expansion process, which has been under discussion for quite a while,” he said.

  “We have consensus on the first phase of this expansion process, and further phases will follow.”

  Adding major fossil-fuel producers may give the bloc more scope to challenge the dollar’s dominance in oil and gas trading by switching to other currencies, a concept referred to dedollarization.

  However, expansion is “more about politics and less about economics,” according to analysts at Bloomberg Economics.

  Other groupings that are already promoting a move toward a more “multipolar” world – and away from the post-Cold War dominance of the US — include OPEC, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Southern Common Market (Mercosur), and the African Union.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 16:55

• Supreme Court Allows Idaho To Enforce Strict Abortion Ban, Will Hear Case
  Supreme Court Allows Idaho To Enforce Strict Abortion Ban, Will Hear Case

  Authored by Caden Pearson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The Supreme Court on Friday granted Idaho the authority to enforce its strict abortion ban while legal clashes play out over a federal law mandating emergency care.

  

  Responding to emergency requests from Idaho state officials, the nation’s highest court temporarily suspended a federal judge’s ruling that found parts of the ban conflicted with the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) of 1986.

  “The applications for stay … are granted,” the Supreme Court’s decision on Friday stated. “The preliminary injunction issued on August 24, 2022, by the United States District Court for the District of Idaho … is stayed.”

  The high court said it would hear oral arguments on the matter in April.

  Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador welcomed the decision, writing on X, formerly Twitter, “Idaho will continue to fight to protect life.”

  Federal Law Turns Hospitals ‘Into Abortion Clinics’

  EMTALA, the federal law at the center of the case, stipulates that emergency room care must be provided to anyone, irrespective of their ability to pay.

  The Biden administration cited this law in a 2022 federal guidance for health care providers regarding abortion. The guidance told hospitals they were obligated to provide “stabilizing” care under EMTALA to patients experiencing an emergency condition, extending this to include abortion.

  It applies to hospitals receiving federal funding through the Medicare program.

  On Monday, lawyers from Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), acting on behalf of the Idaho Attorney General’s Office, filed an emergency application for a stay pending appeal with the Supreme Court. Their motion asked for an immediate injunction against the 9th Circuit’s ruling, arguing that EMTALA preempts Idaho’s abortion ban, the Defense of Life Act.

  “Hospitals—especially emergency rooms—are centers for preserving life. The government has no business transforming them into abortion clinics,” said ADF Senior Counsel Erin Hawley in a statement.

  “Emergency room physicians can, and do, treat ectopic pregnancies and other life-threatening conditions. But elective abortion is not life-saving care—it ends the life of the unborn child—and the government has no authority to override Idaho’s law barring these procedures.

  “We urge the Supreme Court to halt the lower court’s injunction and allow Idaho emergency rooms to fulfill their primary function—saving lives,” she added.

  District Court’s Block of Ban

  Idaho’s abortion ban has been partially blocked from being enforced to the extent it conflicts with EMTALA since U.S. District Court Judge Lynn Winmill issued an injunction in July 2022 after the Biden administration sued.

  Judge Winmill, in making his ruling, noted that the state’s actions put doctors in an ethical bind.

  The dilemma, as described in the ruling, revolves around doctors grappling with the obligation to provide emergency care under EMTALA and the state’s blanket prohibition of abortions in Idaho.

  “The doctor believes her EMTALA obligations require her to offer that abortion right now. But she also knows that all abortions are banned in Idaho. She thus finds herself on the horns of a dilemma. Which law should she violate?” Judge Winmill wrote.

  Idaho challenged this ruling, arguing that the two laws were not conflicting and emphasizing that the federal law did not expressly mandate doctors to perform abortions in specific circumstances.

  The Biden administration, represented by Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, disagreed, asserting in court filings that the Idaho law “criminalizes care required by federal law.”

  The Epoch Times contacted Ms. Prelogar’s office for comment.

  Appeals Court’s Suspension of Block

  The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals briefly suspended Judge Winmill’s ruling in September but later allowed its reinstatement, prompting Idaho to appeal to the Supreme Court in November 2023.

  Idaho aimed to expedite resolution, seeking an injunction to limit the full enforcement of its abortion ban. An appeal is pending at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

  In light of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling for Texas earlier this week in a similar case involving EMTALA and stringent abortion restrictions, Idaho’s attorney general pushed the Supreme Court to act on their request, pointing to the 5th Circuit’s Jan. 2 opinion.

  In a win for Texas, the 5th Circuit unanimously declined “to expand the scope” of EMTALA to include enforcing abortions. The state’s attorney general, Ken Paxton, argued the Biden administration’s rule would force doctors to perform elective abortions against state law.

  “The question before the court is whether EMTALA, according to HHS’s Guidance, mandates physicians to provide abortions when that is the necessary stabilizing treatment for an emergency medical condition. It does not,” wrote 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Kurt Engelhardt in the opinion.

  “EMTALA does not mandate any specific type of medical treatment, let alone abortion,” the opinion added.

  ADF lawyers are also litigating the Texas case.

  Idaho’s abortion law was enacted in 2020 with a provision stating it would take effect if the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Following the Supreme Court’s decision in July 2022, which effectively overturned Roe, Idaho’s law came into force.

  The Defense of Life Act imposes criminal penalties, including up to five years in prison, for anyone performing an abortion, with health care professionals risking the loss of their licenses if found in violation. An exception is granted if the abortion is deemed necessary to protect the life of the pregnant woman.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 16:20

• Is Biden About To Put 10 Million Hispanics On The Path To American Citizenship?
  Is Biden About To Put 10 Million Hispanics On The Path To American Citizenship?

  Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

  If Biden gets the Republicans to go along with his Mexican counterpart’s proposal to grant work visas to those 10 million Hispanics who the latter claims have worked in the US for 10 years, then they’d be able to apply for a green card and eventually citizenship five years after that, which could lead to the imposition of one-party rule by 2032 if those new citizens in battleground states vote Democrat as expected.

  

  Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who’s known by his initials as AMLO, revealed during a press conference on Friday that “Mexico asked US authorities to grant visas to at least 10 million Hispanic migrants that have worked for more than 10 years in the country.”

  It also asked that the US pay regional states $20 billion in exchange for helping stem illegal immigration. AMLO added that the sanctions on Cuba and Venezuela should be lifted too since he partially blames them for this process.

  If Biden complies with the first of his three requests, then that would place 10 million Hispanics on the path to American citizenship since they could turn their work visa into a green card, after which they could apply for citizenship with full voting rights after five years. The Pew Research Center cited US Census Bureau data from 2020 to report last November that at least 1.6 million illegals live in Texas and 900,000 in Florida, which could have serious implications for forthcoming elections if they’re legalized.

  The UCLA Latino Policy and Politics Initiative “determined that Latino voters were decisive in sending President-elect Joe Biden to the White House”, with Latinos in 12 of the 13 states that they analyzed “support[ing] Biden over President Donald Trump by a margin of at least 2 to 1. And in nine of the 13 — including the battleground states of Wisconsin and Pennsylvania — the margin was at least 3 to 1. Only in Florida was Biden’s margin among Latino voters less than 2 to 1.”

  With this trend in mind and recalling that Trump won Texas by a little more than 600,00 votes and Florida by less than 400,000 according to the Federal Election Commission’s official results from the 2020 election, those two could permanently turn blue by 2032 if their illegals obtained citizenship. Battleground states like Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin could join them considering the thin margins within which Biden won them and their own large illegal populations.

  Referring back to the Pew Research Center’s official Census-informed report, it’s estimated that between 75k-175k live in Michigan and Wisconsin while 175k-400k live in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and Pennsylvania. Seeing as how Biden won those states by around 150,000, 20,000, 10,000, 10,000, 40,000, and 80,000 votes respectively, each of them with the possible exception of Michigan would easily turn Democrat if those illegals obtained citizenship and the UCLA’s identified trend holds as expected.

  It was predicted in mid-November 2020 that “Biden’s America Would Be A Dystopian Hellhole” because “Amnesty & Open Borders Will Revolutionize The Electoral Landscape” by placing the US on “The Path To One-Party Rule”, which could then lead to mass disarmament and more state-backed racist violence. The first step in this plan is to place all illegal immigrants on the path to US citizenship, which is precisely what AMLO just proposed amidst the US’ fierce debate over its de facto open southern border.

  The issue is so serious that the Republicans won’t approve more Ukraine aid unless Biden implements comprehensive border security reform to stem the tide after literally millions of illegals flooded into the country over the past three years of his presidency. Seeing as how so-called “moderate” Republicans have a tendency to sell out their principles after some time, and the vast majority of the party consider themselves to be “moderates” instead of MAGA, they might agree to amnesty as a “compromise”.

  Biden could promise to implement more robust border security and order the government to turn back all illegals caught crossing the frontier instead of retaining his “catch-and-release” policy that’s encouraged so many to invade the country in exchange for them going along with amnesty. He might even add a humanitarian and economic dimension to his argument by claiming that it’s “the right thing to do” and could lead to them paying more taxes, which could sway most “moderate” Republicans.

  If the Republicans agree to this “compromise”, then they’d be handing the country over to one-party Democrat rule by 2032, after which the dystopia that was warned about three years ago would become an irreversible reality. Their opponents’ liberal–globalist policies that would be imposed in the aftermath would also forever put an end to their own conservative-nationalist ones that they claim to support, thus completing the latest “American Revolution” that’s been ongoing since Obama’s time in office.  

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 15:10

• "Gobsmackingly Bananas": Weather Models Predict Polar Vortex Invasion Into US 
  “Gobsmackingly Bananas”: Weather Models Predict Polar Vortex Invasion Into US 

  While it’s still uncertain, weather models suggest that a polar vortex might plunge large swaths of the Lower 48 into dangerously cold temperatures sometime late next. 

  There has been a lot of speculation on social media platform X about the incoming polar vortex. 

  Updated info on the impending climate emergency due to the Arctic blast across the Pacific Northwest & then into the Central and Midwest USA in the coming 5-10 days.

  “Gobsmackingly bananas” temperatures 76°F below climate normal for mid-January are off-the-charts cold pic.twitter.com/JMNBm1bRLF

  — Ryan Maue (@RyanMaue) January 6, 2024

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

  It is now official what the Arctic has predicted: a massive cool down next week. #natgas https://t.co/b3iePWMSQy

  — Heinrich Leopold (@LeopoldHeinrich) January 7, 2024

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

  Weather watchers and meteorologists point out that an ongoing stratospheric warming event could displace the polar vortex from the Pole and pour cold air into the Lower 48. 

  The Arctic signals we will be seeing a historic cold winter. #natgas https://t.co/jb32p6qZAT pic.twitter.com/T53mgNPwLh

  — Heinrich Leopold (@LeopoldHeinrich) January 6, 2024

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

  Almost 60C of warming now at 10hpa 60N..
  The #spv stratospheric polar vortex weakened and displaced from the N Pole.. pic.twitter.com/cCT6ygWlZ8

  — Marco Petagna (@Petagna) January 5, 2024

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

  Big stratospheric warming underway over the North Pole 10hPa temps have soared from -80C to -15C and continues on up +65C in a matter of days. pic.twitter.com/waEtmrUfaW

  — London & Southeast 🔆 (@TheSnowDreamer) January 6, 2024

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

  It’s not just X users chatting away about a potential polar vortex. Bloomberg data shows headlines across corporate media with “Polar Vortex” have spiked in the last two weeks. We overlaid the headline data with natural gas futures, in which prices are rising, an indication traders could be pricing in a cold snap premium. 

  

  New weather outlooks from the National Weather Service’s Climate Prediction Center show a cold blast arriving late next week for Central and Eastern parts of the US. 

  

  Couple this with the higher precipitation probabilities—great news for snow lovers. 

  

  Longer-term outlooks show more cold is in store after the midpoint of the month. 

  

  Sigh. 

  Climate strike week 281. #FridaysForFuture #ClimateStrike pic.twitter.com/Ncz5LBAp4Z

  — Greta Thunberg (@GretaThunberg) January 5, 2024

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

  A new weather note from John Baranik, a meteorologist for DTN, provided more details about the incoming cold blast for the Lower 48:

  Those of us in the US and Canada have had short bursts of colder air, but nothing that would be labeled as arctic just yet.

  That will all change early next week, as an arm of the polar vortex is pinched off from the North Pole and settles into Western Canada by Jan. 9. Two upper-level ridges, one in Alaska, and another in the North Atlantic, will do the pinching. We have not had a dramatic ridge in either location to start the winter; this is a primary reason why we have yet to see a polar vortex event take place.

  But even with the polar vortex starting to develop in Western Canada, it will take another day or two for it to pull down the air from the North Pole, with those arctic-cold anomalies below normal starting to show up on Dec. 10 in northwest Canada.

  The cold will expand south and east from there into the U.S. during the following couple of days as the southern jet stream causes a few storm systems to move through the Pacific Northwest and Northern Plains Jan. 10-12. The extent and depth of the cold air are currently in question, as of Jan. 5.

  Model forecasts suggest that a ridge in the Southeast may be able to contain that cold air to the western half of the U.S. and Canada, at least the harshest of the cold. That would mean from the Canadian Prairies down to the Texas Panhandle up to Missouri and Minnesota will be the areas east of the Rockies to be put into the icebox for an extended period of time.

  Again, models are still working out how cold it might be, and some of that depends on the recent and forecast snow cover. A system that goes through the Plains and Midwest early in the week could lead to some very low temperature readings over the snowpack when the arctic air comes in.

  Meanwhile, the incoming cold snap reminds us of the multi-billion dollar weather disaster that paralyzed Texas’ power grid for over a week in February 2021. 

  Michael Cembalest, chairman of market and investment strategy for JPMorgan Asset & Wealth Management, recently published a note, reminding clients about power grid instabilities across the US:

  Due to retirement of dispatchable power generation (nuclear, coal, gas) and underinvestment in pipelines, gas storage and winterization, major US cities will face electricity outages and/ or natural gas outages (which are much worse). The North American Electricity Reliability Association just released its 2023 risk assessment. The region NERC highlights as having the greatest risk of power outages, even in normal peak conditions: Midwest MISO, which stretches from Minnesota down to Lo Louisiana. Outage risk in more extreme weather conditions is cited for New York, New England and the entire Western US. NERC cites peak loads rising at “ an alarming rate ” due to electrification, coinciding with increasingly intermittent new sources of generation ( wind and solar power ) and 80 – 110 GW of nuclear and fossil fuel generation retirements by 2033, which is ~7% of current installed capacity. Reserve margins indicate the buffer each region has to a spike in summer demand; the chart on the left summarizes NERC’s assessment of future reserve margins. Note as well how unplanned outages have been rising during cold weather storms.

  

  If you think power outages are bad, natural gas outages would be far worse. During winter storm Elliott in December 2022, cold weather resulted in the failure of gas production wellheads, pipelines, and distribution. Dry gas production in the lower 48 states fell by 16%, with Marcellus and Utica production falling by 23% – 54%. On December 25, interstate natural gas pipelines serving Con Edison experienced drops in pressure due to production losses and operational issues. Con Ed restored pressure from a backup LNG system until systemwide pressure was normalized, and ended up narrowly avoiding a gas system outage.

  During a gas outage, local gas distribution companies would need to go building-by-building and shut off gas valves to ensure that residual gas does not seep through units whose pilot lights are out. During the system restoration process, the main distribution system would be purged; then workers would have to insure at each point of service th at heating and cooking gas lines are safely purged and operational before restoring service and relighting pilot lights. Any homes or buildings with safety issues would need remediation before any gas restoration. Even losing service to 130,000 customers would be considered a major outage and could have taken five to seven weeks (!!) to restore. A large outage could also cause extensive property damage due to burst water pipes within homes and buildingssince water expands when it freezes.

  All eyes are on the incoming cold blast and possible grid strain issues due to high heating demand. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 14:35

• Paxlovid Does Not Reduce Risk Of Long COVID, Potentially Linked To Rebound Symptoms: Study
  Paxlovid Does Not Reduce Risk Of Long COVID, Potentially Linked To Rebound Symptoms: Study

  Authored by Amie Dahnke via The Epoch Times (Emphasis ours),

  

  Paxlovid, an antiviral medication prescribed to treat symptoms associated with COVID-19, does not reduce the risk of developing long COVID in vaccinated people recovering at home.

  The report comes from a new study published in the Journal of Medical Virology on Thursday. Conducted by a team of researchers from the University of California–San Francisco, the study also found that more people are experiencing rebounds of their COVID symptoms after taking Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir) than previously reported.

  Paxlovid is the first antiviral pill approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat mild and moderate COVID-19 in adults. It is typically prescribed to those at high risk of having the virus progress to a severe illness, including hospitalization or death. The medication has also been authorized for use in children 12 and older who are at risk of severe outcomes from COVID-19.

  According to manufacturer Pfizer, initial trials of Paxlovid showed it reduced hospitalizations and death in unvaccinated COVID patients by 86 percent to 89 percent. A real-world study conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) showed that adults who took Paxlovid within the first five days of a COVID-19 diagnosis had a 51 percent lower hospitalization rate within 30 days than those who did not take the medication. More recent studies have indicated lower efficacy rates, with patients having about 37 percent reduced hospitalization and death risk.

  However, no study has pointed to whether the drug helps protect people from getting long COVID, noted authors of the UC San Francisco study.

  Paxlovid Did Not Prevent Long COVID

  To determine if Paxlovid protects against long COVID, the research team examined over 4,600 vaccinated individuals from the UC San Fransisco COVID-19 Citizen Science study who experienced their first positive COVID-19 tests between March and August 2022. None of the patients was hospitalized. About 20 percent of patients took the three-pill course of Paxlovid, while about 80 percent did not.

  In December 2022, the patients answered a follow-up survey that included questions about long COVID, COVID rebound symptoms, and how long they continued to test positive.

  “We found a higher proportion with clinical rebound than previously reported, but did not identify an effect of posttreatment rebound on Long COVID symptoms,” researchers wrote.

  The team found little difference between the two groups. For example, roughly 16 percent of patients prescribed Paxlovid had long-COVID symptoms compared to about 14 percent who were not prescribed the medication. Long-COVID patients in each group experienced fatigue, shortness of breath, confusion, headache, and changes in sense of smell and taste.

  Paxlovid Rebound Symptoms Confirmed

  The UC San Francisco study reported that just over 1 in 5 individuals (21 percent) who reported getting better after taking Paxlovid experienced rebound symptoms, or a return of their COVID symptoms. Among those who experienced rebounds, 10.8 percent reported one or more long-COVID symptoms.

  Additionally, retesting positive was common among rebound patients; 25.7 percent of individuals who took Paxlovid and repeated antigen testing after testing negative ended up testing positive.

  In all, just over 26 percent of participants reported either rebound symptoms or test positivity, the study noted.

  Of the roughly 75 percent who didn’t experience rebound while on Paxlovid, 8.3 percent reported at least one long-COVID symptom.

  The study echoes a Nov. 13, 2023, study conducted by Harvard Medical School (HMS) researchers also indicating that 1 in 5 individuals who took Paxlovid experienced a rebound of symptoms.

  “We conducted this study to address lingering questions about Paxlovid and virologic rebound in COVID-19 treatment,” senior author Dr. Mark Siedner, associate professor of medicine at HMS and an infectious disease clinician and researcher at Massachusetts General Hospital, said in a HMS press release. “We found that the virologic rebound phenomenon was much more common than expected—in over 20 percent of people taking Paxlovid—and that individuals shed live virus when experiencing a rebound, which means they may be contagious after initial recovery.”

  Previous clinical trials suggested that between 1 percent and 2 percent of patients who took Paxlovid experienced rebound, according to the press release.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 14:00

• EU Adopts "Emergency Airworthiness Directive" After FAA Grounds Boeing 737-9 Max Jets Over Blowout
  EU Adopts “Emergency Airworthiness Directive” After FAA Grounds Boeing 737-9 Max Jets Over Blowout

  Shortly after the US Federal Aviation Administration issued an emergency order to ground 171 Boeing 737-9 (MAX) jets used by major airlines due to an incident where an emergency door separated from an Alaska Airlines Max jet over Portland on Friday evening, European aviation authorities have adopted the FAA’s directive.

  EASA wrote in a statement that “specific configuration” of the 737-9 MAX aircraft will be grounded for immediate inspection following “an event on an Alaska Airlines flight, where an exit panel detached from the aircraft inflight, leading to rapid decompression of the cabin.” 

  

  “EASA took the decision to adopt the FAA Emergency Airworthiness Directive (EAD) despite the fact that, to the Agency’s knowledge and also on the basis of statements from the FAA and Boeing,” the regulator said. 

  However, the EU regulator noted, “No airline in an EASA Member State currently operates an aircraft in the relevant configuration.” 

  Safety precautions in the EU for the troubled 737 MAX come as the FAA grounded 171 737-9 Max jets on Saturday after a mid-cabin exit door on an Alaska Airlines flight separated from the plane mid-flight over Portland.  

  BREAKING: Alaska Airlines plane makes emergency landing in Portland, Oregon after window blows out in mid-air.

  Several items, including phones, were sucked out of the plane when it suddenly depressurized. Everyone is safe. pic.twitter.com/BtOB1RU3tn

  — BNO News (@BNONews) January 6, 2024

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

  Here’s a list of the latest actions by airlines in the US and worldwide that operate these troubled jets (list courtesy of Bloomberg): 

  • Alaska Air Group Inc., the airline at the center of the turmoil, initially grounded all 65 of its 737-9 Max jets hours after the accident. It later allowed 18 of the planes to resume flying after receiving detailed maintenance inspections pre- dating the event. However, it subsequently pulled all jets from service again.
  • United Airlines Holding Inc., the biggest operator of the affected Max type, says all 79 of its jets are temporarily grounded. The next step is for the airline to determine with the FAA the inspection process and requirements to return the planes to service. It earlier said 33 of the jets had met necessary inspections before grounding all planes.
  • Panama’s Copa Airlines SA said it grounded 21 of its impacted jets. The carrier has a total of 29 in its fleet, but operates them in two different configurations. – Aeromexico has followed United and Alaska Air in pulling all 19 of its 737-9 Max jets from service for inspections.
  • Icelandair said its small fleet of 737-9 Max jets are not affected by FAA inspections. The carrier has been in contact with Boeing and the FAA.
  • Turkish Airlines said its country’s civil aviation authority asked it to examine its small fleet of five 737-9 Max planes. Until the technical review is complete, the carrier has withdrawn the jets from service.
  • FlyDubai said its three 737-9 Max jets are unaffected by the FAA directive, the company told Bloomberg News.

  

  One X user wrote:

  The Boeing 737 Max hull failure is bad This was a brand-new aircraft. ~150 revenue flights. Probably no more than 250 pressurization cycles on it total (if that) While failures of this sort are not unknown, they tend not to occur on a new airframe. Which suggests that a production issue is at fault…

  The Boeing 737 Max hull failure is bad

  This was a brand-new aircraft. ~150 revenue flights. Probably no more than 250 pressurization cycles on it total (if that)

  While failures of this sort are not unknown, they tend not to occur on a new airframe. Which suggests that a…

  — The Mind Scourge (@TheMindScourge) January 6, 2024

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

  Remember this… 

  As a reminder, the 737 Max was “designed by clowns who in turn are supervised by monkeys”.https://t.co/Z5rt2LoI3e

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 6, 2024

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

  We suspect Boeing shares might be red come Monday morning. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 13:25

• An Eclectic Mix Of Things To Mull Over
  An Eclectic Mix Of Things To Mull Over

  By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

  An Eclectic Mix of Things to Mull Over

  Let’s start with the one thing that has annoyed me more than anything else. I kept hearing over and over “what a good report” the jobs report was. That disturbs me, because with some digging, there were a number of issues that we highlighted in Strange Jobs Reports. I accept that my interpretation could be wrong, but some people who I trust (and have been consistently good) pointed out that it was probably worse than I wrote. Something that I found curious (but haven’t verified) is supposedly 11 of the last 12 reports have been revised down (seems odd).

  10 of the past 11 months have been revised lower https://t.co/fn139AC4il pic.twitter.com/tfrNWsdZXg

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 5, 2024

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

  There was a very good radio interview I listened to with someone from a temporary employment company who pointed out that for the second month in a row, there were losses in temp employment – usually a leading indicator. Oh, and the ISM was awful, but enough ranting! Or, more accurately, enough ranting on that subject, and let’s move on to other things that perturb me.

  First the “Normal” Stuff

  America the Divided, may well be how we fill in the blank for America the ______ (the 2024 Outlook piece). The election is heating up as we near the primaries and President Biden launched his first campaign commercial. The slogans might sound “unifying,” but from a distance, they seem more likely to be divisive (rather than unifying) at least at this stage.

  Paying lip service to Geopolitical Risk. I’m certainly aware of the risk that having such great access to and interaction with our Geopolitical Intelligence Group could be influencing me too much (for a hammer, every problem looks like a nail). But we are not the only ones talking about geopolitical risk. It has been mentioned in corporate report after corporate report (right up there with AI). Certainly, asset managers mention that geopolitical risk could pose the biggest risk to markets in 2024. Yet, for all the talk, I think that it is largely being ignored. Times Have Changed – Position Accordingly, details my thoughts on how geopolitical risk is impacting market signals and correlations. These changes in turn should impact your business decisions and portfolio management.

  General Robeson and Peter Tchir were on Bloomberg Radio discussing the Middle East, shipping, and oil (Bloomberg Podcast). Academy was also on Bloomberg TV with our macro take on markets, the economy, and geopolitical risks (Bloomberg TV first 2 segments).

  The Non-Strategic Petroleum Reserve

  From turning a blind eye to Iran’s sale of oil (well above any sanction limits) to the feeble attempts to exchange oil for free elections in Venezuela, to the disingenuously named Inflation Reduction Act, I cannot help but be concerned. The U.S. (as a nation) has painted itself into a corner and is not doing a good job of getting out of that predicament.

  

  We have tensions in the Middle East. We have competitors for Venezuela’s supply. The finds in Guyana may prove challenging for the U.S. (as opposed to other countries) to access.

  “We,” or at least the incumbent politicians, have demonstrated a real fear of inflation. Probably, at least in part, rightfully so, but that fear seems overdone – especially in an era where jobs and pay raises have been plentiful.

  There is no way that our adversaries (and even some “friends” like the Saudis) haven’t noticed this depletion and are taking advantage of it when and where they can. It is one reason why I like energy and energy stocks so much.

  COVID “Bumps”

  We argued, quite violently, it seems, that much of the goods inflation was transitory. That not only did you have supply chain issues, but you had consumer behavior radically altered, at least for a little while.

  • Government money was sloshing around. Job availability was incredibly high.
  • Mobility was high and many were exploring a “new way of life” that “work from home” brought, creating demand in its own right.
  • Finally, consumers aren’t stupid, and knew about supply chain issues, so they bought what was available, even if they didn’t need it at the time.

  Here is how I see the COVID bump playing out for goods (already discussed) and for services (up next).

  

  We have argued, less violently, but increasingly so, that the services industry experienced a similar bump, but with some key differences!

  • It started later for many. In some cases, states or countries precluded certain services from being offered. Even in areas where services were available, individuals had their own comfort level as to when they were comfortable using various services.
  • The travel industry was particularly hard hit by COVID, and it was difficult to return to normal after such a dramatic COVID pullback in demand. So, the “supply chain” issues in services like travel were hampered even after they started normalizing.
  • There was less money sloshing around by the time services got into full swing. Let’s admit it, 2023 should be labeled as the Summer of Vacation. It also happened to be the summer that America really discovered Europe and overseas travel.

  If I am correct about the difference, I think that we are in the early stages of declines in service usage. That will hit the economy hard.

  QQQ – Or When Passive Isn’t So Passive

  The top 7 companies (one stock has two share classes, so I counted both classes) totaled over 55% of the weighting in QQQ. Now, primarily due to a reweighting methodology, the top 7 companies are 38% of the index. Still a hefty chunk and an index skewed towards the titans, but that is a pretty significant drop. The methodology (I think more than market moves) also changed the top 7 companies in the index, with one dropping out and one entering.

  Let’s just say for a moment that you want to “bet on a reversal” of some of last year’s moves. Maybe you want to bet on small caps. For many, you could express it in futures (which has the same changes), or you could express it in ETFs (easier for many). If you thought, for example, that the Nasdaq 100 and the Russell 2000 would converge (I encouraged that trade until recently), it would seem to make some sense. Yet, all your charts going back to the changes in the Nasdaq in December will be heavily skewed by the top 10 stocks, which represented a far bigger portion of the index than it does now!

  Let’s say, and I think this is interesting, you owned the Magnificent “Pick a Number” stocks. Some number of the biggest tech companies. If you periodically hedged that position with Nasdaq 100, you had potentially a 55% overlap. It is far less than that today.

  Some of the biggest names in tech have struggled since late December (underperformed from early November to outright negative performance in some cases starting late December). Presumably, the rebalancing had an impact (QQQ alone is $225 billion as of Friday – not an insignificant number in a market that I view as being less liquid at any depth, than the frantic, algo driven, markets would make you believe).

  I cannot help but wonder what other shenanigans this reweighting is potentially having on portfolios?

  In any case, if the Magnificent “Pick a Number” falter, it won’t impact the Nasdaq 100 like it would have last year.

  Maybe it is nothing, but it seems strange enough to me to warrant consideration. Especially when you are talking about strategies and positioning that involved the behemoths in terms of market capitalization. If “hedges” are less effective, will we see more outright selling?

  Who Will Buy Treasuries Ever Again?

  If feels like it was just a few months ago when:

  • We watched every Treasury auction as a harbinger of doom (they haven’t stopped issuing, just no one pays much attention).
  • We talked about Chinese TIC data and the dwindling holdings (they are still reducing their holdings at a steady clip, but no one cares).
  • Every missile shot in the world seemed to cause immediate fears about the U.S. budget deficit (they are still being shot and the cost will add up, but that isn’t today’s problem).
  • As we issue debt at higher yields, our overall cost of debt increases, further increasing the risk of deficits and increasing the proportion of tax revenue spent on budget service. This is still happening, though new issue yields aren’t as bad as they were. However, most longer-dated debt is replacing debt with lower coupons – and about 65% of debt with high coupons is owned by the Fed at their limits. It takes years to increase (or decrease) the average coupon and it is still happening.
  • DC is dysfunctional and divisive but will keep spending money. No comment.

  Oh, it was just a few months ago! This is probably the biggest reason why I can’t get comfortable betting on a “flight to safety” trade. I just don’t think that we are done with these legitimate fears, and something will trigger them again (probably bad price action, since price action more often than not instills the narrative, rather than responds to the narrative).

  Bitcoin ETF’s

  I will be so happy when these are finally approved! I think that there are something like 14 applications for Bitcoin “spot” ETFs (that is the terminology when things like “cash” ETF or “physical” ETF don’t work because Bitcoin is neither cash nor physical).

  I’ve understood the amount of hype surrounding this from the existing holders of Bitcoin. It will apparently open up a whole new wave of buyers. There is so much excitement that many firms are “backing” a bitcoin ETF, which must indicate a Wall Street (or at least an ETF manager) love affair with Bitcoin. All that may be true, but I’m leaning towards this being a massive “sell the news” opportunity. Apparently, that is consensus (though I think that it is consensus in terms of voices, not money put to work, and money put to work is all that matters when looking for contrarian views).

  One thing that is very different about the chase for the Bitcoin ETF is the Greyscale Bitcoin Trust (ticker GBTC). This is not an ETF, but in my opinion, it is the main reason why everyone who can is trying to get a Bitcoin ETF.

  As of Friday, GBTC had a market value of $25 billion. The expense ratio, as published on Bloomberg, is 2%. That one security, therefore, generates about $500 million in fees! QQQ at $225 billion has fees listed as 0.2%. So before actual costs (which I presume are higher for GBTC), GBTC generates more income than QQQ! SPY, at $478 billion, has an expense ratio of 0.095%, so it also generates less than $500 million in fees. I suspect that GBTC alone is competitive with some much larger ETF suites, which is why so many are going after this obvious pie!

  I cannot think of an ETF launch (in recent memory) where you could just point to one asset and say, “if I can just get X% of that AUM, I’m doing extremely well!” That I think is a big motivator.

  GBTC is interesting in its own right, because it can trade at a premium or discount to NAV. There is a methodology to increase the shares outstanding, typically done when it is trading at a significant premium to NAV (likely indicating excess demand for GBTC). That was done and is how GBTC got so large.

  GBTC averaged around a 40% discount to NAV for much of the first 5 months of 2023. 40%! That discount to NAV has narrowed to 5.5% as of Friday – great for anyone who stuck with GBTC as not only did Bitcoin appreciate, but the gains from the discount to NAV closing were extremely good as well!

  But presumably, if an ETF that will trade close to NAV becomes available, investors would prefer that to something that can trade at meaningful discounts. In “normal” times, equity ETFs have almost no variation and credit products can deviate 1% or so depending on the availability of the create/redeem arb and the quality of the Net Asset Value calculation (not as straightforward for credit). I’m assuming that due to how Bitcoin trades, there will be some deviation even in the ETF NAV versus trading price, but it will be much more manageable (and not as one-sided) as the trust vehicle in place.

  The provider of GBTC is one of the applicants for an ETF (or at least that is my understanding). So, in my opinion, the first “battle” will be to divvy up the GBTC pie, with people trying to get money out of that. I wonder, at this point, how many of the GBTC holders own that versus being short Bitcoin, in anticipation of being able to get out at flat? If that is true, the pie might be smaller than everyone looking to ride the ETF wave realizes.

  I’ve heard that some ETF providers have lined up large crypto holders to swap their crypto into the ETF (once launched). That is interesting from an AUM standpoint but should do nothing for Bitcoin price (once the headlines of “billions enter Bitcoin ETF in first weeks of trading” have run their course). It just transfers the holding format, rather than creates real demand. If Bitcoin is so great, and you already figured out how to custody it yourself, why would you use an ETF? It seems almost bizarre – Bitcoin is great, the future of money, it trades 24/7, etc., but do I prefer to hold it in ETF form?

  I think that money will transfer from other ways of holding Bitcoin into ETFs, but that seems more of an admonishment of holding Bitcoin (the costs, the risks, the liquidity) than anything else.

  Will some new money come in? Sure, without a doubt marketing will ramp up and there are still some people who want Bitcoin but haven’t figured out how to buy Bitcoin. Though I suspect that number is far less than when the Bitcoin futures launched, and they do not seem (to me) to be a resounding success (if they were, we’d probably be hearing a lot less about “spot” bitcoin ETFs).

  The people most excited about the bitcoin ETF seem to be HODLers of Bitcoin (my gut is that they have ramped up their holdings in anticipation of ETFs unleashing a wave of demand) and the media (who want something else to talk about). I don’t have many conversations with people (with money) that indicate there is some massive pent-up demand for Bitcoin ETFs. Some, yes, massive, no. Maybe RIAs will all allocate 1% to it, but that remains to be seen.

  I view the Bitcoin ETF as much more about Wall Street seeing a pie that they can get their hands on (so why not) rather than heralding in some new wave of acceptance of crypto. And let’s be honest (and cynical), why else would I pay attention and write about it, if there wasn’t a chance that it might evolve back into something I have to incorporate into my daily work!

  Bottom Line

  Verbatim from Thursday.

  • I’m the most bullish I’ve been on energy and energy stocks in sometime (probably toss all commodities into that mix).
  • I’m the most bearish I’ve been on equities and am targeting 4,500 on the S&P 500 sooner rather than later.
  • Credit spreads will widen in sympathy with equities, though this is largely an equity valuation and “set-up” problem (the set-up being the conditioning to lower yields = higher stocks) so credit should outperform equities quite handily here.
  • On bonds, maybe, just maybe, we get some “flight to safety” trade, so I’m only mildly bearish on bonds right now, but will sell any rally in bonds as I think that the problems facing the bond market (from geopolitical risk) will outweigh the “traditional” safety bid.

  Lots to think about as we start 2024, and none of my “little tidbits” do anything to make me more comfortable with risk, just more reasons to remain cautious on everything.

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 12:50

• Saturday Night Drive-By: Citing Anonymous Sources, WSJ Smears Musk As Drug Abuser
  Saturday Night Drive-By: Citing Anonymous Sources, WSJ Smears Musk As Drug Abuser

  The Wall Street Journal fired some serious shots at Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk on Saturday night, dropping a lengthy hit piece accusing him of illegal drug use to an extent that has worried executives and board members while potentially jeopardizing Musk’s various federal government contracts.

  The article relies heavily on anonymous sources, described, for example,” as “people who have witnessed his drug use and others with knowledge of it.” Here are two of the more potent paragraphs:  

  The world’s wealthiest person has used LSD, cocaine, ecstasy and psychedelic mushrooms, often at private parties around the world, where attendees sign nondisclosure agreements or give up their phones to enter, according to people who have witnessed his drug use and others with knowledge of it.

  …

  In 2018… he took multiple tabs of acid at a party he hosted in Los Angeles. The next year he partied on magic mushrooms at an event in Mexico. In 2021, he took ketamine recreationally with his brother, Kimbal Musk, in Miami at a house party during Art Basel. He has taken illegal drugs with current SpaceX and former Tesla board member Steve Jurvetson.

  Many of the article’s accounts go back a few years or more, and there are no specific descriptions of where or when Musk supposedly used cocaine or ecstasy. As for ketamine, the 52-year-old has previously said he’s been prescribed the drug for depression, and last year tweeted that it was a better avenue than antidepressants that are “zombifying” patients. In 2018, he famously shared some cannabis on Joe Rogan’s show.

  Depression is overdiagnosed in the US, but for some people it really is a brain chemistry issue.

  But zombifying people with SSRIs for sure happens way too much. From what I’ve seen with friends, ketamine taken occasionally is a better option.

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 27, 2023

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

  Musk’s lawyer told the Journal that Musk is “regularly and randomly drug tested at SpaceX and has never failed a test,” and said there were “other false facts” in the quasi-exposé, but didn’t specify what they are. The lawyer didn’t respond to the Journal’s query about which drugs are screened for in the tests. 

  The Journal says former Tesla director Linda Johnson Rice was so fed up with Musk’s unpredictable behavior and worries about drug use that she opted out of pursuing re-election in 2019. Here again, it’s not Rice telling the Journal that, but “people familiar with the matter.”  

  Among the purportedly concerning anecdotes outlined in the story is a 2017 SpaceX all-hands meeting to discuss the firm’s Big Falcon Rocket (BFR) prototype. According to the Journal, Musk showed up an hour late, only to slur his words in a rambling speech in which he repeatedly called the product the “Big Fucking Rocket.” SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell was said to have intervened and taken charge of the session, with executives later quietly speculating that Musk was on drugs. An unidentified witness described his performance as “nonsensical,” “unhinged,” and “cringeworthy.” 

  In another speculation-centric element of the Journal story, Tesla board members were said to have worried that Musk was on drugs in 2018 when he took to Twitter and said he planned to take the firm private and had “funding secured.” That market-moving tweet put Musk in hot water with the SEC, which alleged he’d misled investors. Some of the worried board members considered pushing Musk to take a leave of absence, according to “people familiar with the discussions.”

  Last year, we reported on his ketamine use. This goes far beyond that, and puts billions of dollars in federal contracts at SpaceX at risk, as well as $1 trillion held by investors, and tens of thousands of jobs tied to Musk’s companies. https://t.co/NzsGbZMUqB

  — Kirsten Grind (@KirstenGrind) January 7, 2024

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

  The Journal’s Emily Glazer and Kirsten Grind seemed bent on putting Musk’s business in danger. They note that, in addition to potentially violating his own companies’ policies, drug use of the types alleged in the story could imperil Musk’s dealings with the federal government, including $14 billion in SpaceX business. Regardless of more permissive state laws, federal contracts require compliance with the Drug-Free Workplace Act.

  In addition to drug testing, the law requires that firms publish a statement “notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the person’s workplace.” Contractors must also inform employees that compliance with that statement is a condition of employment. Drug use can also lead to the cancellation of security clearances. 

  Musk hit back at WSJ: 

  “After that one puff with Rogan, I agreed, at NASA’s request, to do 3 years of random drug testing. Not even trace quantities were found of any drugs or alcohol. @WSJ is not fit to line a parrot cage for bird 💩 7.” 

  After that one puff with Rogan, I agreed, at NASA’s request, to do 3 years of random drug testing.

  Not even trace quantities were found of any drugs or alcohol. @WSJ is not fit to line a parrot cage for bird 💩

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 7, 2024

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

  Let’s not forget that Musk’s social media platform X is an attempt to fracture corporate media. So, of course, it’s only in the best interest of legacy media to churn out hit piece after hit piece on the billionaire. 

  However… 

  

  It’s worth highlighting that the 1988 law’s scope is focused on the “workplace.” With Musk a notorious, globe-trotting workaholic, defining his workplaces could be a challenging lawyerly endeavor. 

  Multiple federal agencies have already been weaponized against Musk, and now one of the establishment’s leading newspapers has piled on with its own shot. At year-end, we reported that Musk had regained the title of “world’s richest person,” suggesting it could render him “too big to cancel” — but they’re clearly not going to stop trying.  

  Wow so you’re telling me that not only did this guy sell more EVs than any other automaker on Earth in 2023, launch 80% of payload to orbit

  But he did it while on LSD, cocaine, ecstasy & ketamine? Just when you thought the guy couldn’t get more impressive

  what a dumb smear job pic.twitter.com/7RgV50ZXVN

  — Whole Mars Catalog (@WholeMarsBlog) January 7, 2024

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

  Legacy media’s smear campaign didn’t stop with Musk. 

  Last Thursday, Business Insider targeted hedge fund billionaire Bill Ackman’s wife, Neri Oxman. The report noted she plagiarized multiple paragraphs of her 2010 doctoral dissertation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. This comes directly after Ackman’s war on ‘woke’ Harvard University resulted in the ousting of Claudine Gay, former president of the school, over plagiarism.

  These smear campaigns are becoming very noticeable to the untrained eye – or the average American – suggesting a diminishing impact on discrediting individuals’ credibility and reputation by legacy media. Therefore, it seems likely that the era of canceling folks by corporate media and elites is in decline. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 12:15

• After Shooting Ashli Babbitt, Capitol Police Lt. Made False Radio Report: Lawsuit
  After Shooting Ashli Babbitt, Capitol Police Lt. Made False Radio Report: Lawsuit

  Authored by Joseph M. Hanneman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Within a minute after firing the fatal bullet that struck Ashli Babbitt on Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd broadcast a radio report claiming shots were being fired at him in the Speaker’s Lobby and he was “prepared to fire back,” a federal lawsuit alleges.

  

  The previously undisclosed radio dispatch is also contained on an audio recording obtained exclusively by The Epoch Times of the “OPS2” dispatch channel used by Capitol Police on Jan. 6.

  Information on the recording is contained in a federal lawsuit filed on Jan. 5 by Ms. Babbitt’s widower, Aaron Babbitt of San Diego. Mr. Babbitt, backed in his lawsuit by Judicial Watch, is seeking $30 million from the U. S. government for wrongful death.

  According to the lawsuit, Mr. Byrd fired his Glock 22 .40-caliber pistol, striking Ms. Babbitt in the left shoulder, then announced that he was being fired upon and was ready to return fire.

  “In fact, no shots were fired at Lt. Byrd or his fellow officers,” the lawsuit stated. “The only shot fired was the single shot Lt. Byrd fired at Ashli. He heard the loud noise of the gunshot. He saw her fall backward from the window frame.”

  

  The Epoch Times reached out to Capitol Police and Mr. Byrd’s attorney for comment on the lawsuit and its allegations. Mr. Byrd is now a captain with U.S. Capitol Police.

  A few minutes prior to the shooting, a police dispatcher mistakenly reported, “They’re taking shots into the House floor.”

  “Lt. Byrd erroneously believed and acted on a false radio call and/or false report of shots fired on the House floor occurring before he left the House floor and moved across the Speaker’s Lobby to the adjacent Retiring Room,” the suit said.

  “A reasonably prudent officer in Lt. Byrd’s position would have been aware that, in fact, the report was false and the sound heard on the House floor was glass breaking, not shots fired,” the lawsuit alleged.

  It is not clear why Mr. Byrd made the statement that he was taking fire and was prepared to fire back. His radio dispatch occurred up to a minute after he fired on Ms. Babbitt, the suit said.

  “The facts speak truth. Ashli was ambushed when she was shot by Lt. Byrd,” the lawsuit said. “Multiple witnesses at the scene yelled, ‘You just murdered her.’”

  “Lt. Byrd was never charged or otherwise punished or disciplined for Ashli’s homicide,” the suit stated.

  Video shot from the hallway outside the Speaker’s Lobby shows Mr. Byrd emerging in a shooting stance with both hands holding the Glock.

  In his only public statements about the shooting—made not to investigators but to an NBC television anchor—Mr. Byrd never mentioned his radio dispatch or his claim that shots were being fired at him and other officers. Nor did he use that as justification for firing his weapon and killing Ms. Babbitt.

  An unknown U.S. Capitol Police officer first reported shots fired in the U.S. House just before 2:43 p.m., followed later by Mr. Byrd’s shots-fired announcement, according to the audio recording obtained by The Epoch Times. Both reports turned out to be unfounded.

  Officer: “Shots fired, House floor. Shots fired, House floor. Immediate assistance.”

  Dispatch: “Shots fired, House floor. Shots fired, House floor.”

  2nd Dispatcher: “I need units to re…,” which was cut off mid-sentence. That message ceased on the OPS2 channel but was heard in full on the OPS1 channel:

  “I need units to respond to the chamber, the House chamber floor,” the dispatcher said. “Again, units need to respond to the House floor in reference to shots fired. They were shots fired at the House floor. Again, units to respond. They’re taking shots into the House floor. We need units to respond to that location. 1443 hours.”

  Lt. Byrd: “405-B. We got shots fired in the lobby. We got fot (sic), shots fired in the lobby of the House chamber. Shots are being fired at us, and we’re prepared to fire back at them. We have guns drawn. [Unintelligible] Don’t leave that end! Don’t leave that end!”

  J6ers in the Capitol stairwell. Down the hall a man casually walking. Ashli Babbitt with no weapon stands on the door with three SWAT officers right behind her and Lt. Michael Byrd shoots and kills her. Byrd was promoted to captain. Ashli Babbitt is dead. pic.twitter.com/10TrBZLwWX

  — Ken Miles (@kenmilesamerica) December 30, 2023

  Mr. Byrd’s dispatch was followed by 11 seconds of radio silence.

  The transcript of the OPS2 radio communications provided by the Department of Justice (DOJ) as evidence in Jan. 6 criminal cases does not include the words “we’re prepared to fire back at them.” The DOJ transcript instead says, “and it went, so we locked it down.”

  Dispatcher: “Simulcasting, shots fired on the House floor again.”

  Lt. Byrd: “We’ve got an injured person. I believe that person was shot. It was…” (cut off by another transmission).

  Unknown officer: “…Shot, one down, civilian. We need EMTs. We need… Come through on the west side of the building … to the House lobby.”

  Dispatch: “That’d be House…”

  Lt. Byrd: “405-B, did you copy?”

  Dispatch: “I copied. House lobby, west side. Individual…”

  Mr. Byrd retreated from the entrance to the seated area in the Speaker’s Lobby. Officer Mike Brown, a member of the USCP Containment and Emergency Response Team (CERT), said Mr. Byrd was “down and out and almost in tears.”

  The revelation of Mr. Byrd’s previously undisclosed radio statements raises fresh questions about the shooting of Ms. Babbitt, 35, and the investigation that cleared him of potential charges of excessive use of force.

  

  The DOJ report explaining why no charges were pursued did not mention Mr. Byrd’s radio dispatch.

  Mr. Byrd never made a statement to internal affairs officers who investigated the shooting on behalf of U.S. Capitol Police. When he met with DC Metro internal affairs the night of Jan. 6, 2021, he said he wanted to retain an attorney before saying anything.

  Mr. Byrd and his attorney did an informal walk-through of the shooting scene with a Capitol Police official in late January 2021 but he was never subjected to questioning.

  DOJ Report Contained Errors

  The DOJ report absolving Mr. Byrd from culpability included numerous errors and incorrect statements.

  The report says that after the glass in the doors leading to the Speaker’s Lobby was smashed out, rioters “were then able to reach through the broken glass and push the chairs off the top of the barricaded furniture.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Sun, 01/07/2024 – 11:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Obama's Weird New Movie And America's Extreme Vulnerability To Cyber-Attack
  Obama’s Weird New Movie And America’s Extreme Vulnerability To Cyber-Attack

  Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

  There has been a lot of buzz lately about a recently released film by Netflix titled ‘Leave The World Behind’ based on a novel by the same name.  The plot revolves around a catastrophic collapse in the US triggered by a cyber attack (and mass drone attack) that shuts down the internet and disrupts the global economy, leading to questions of who might have been behind the sabotage?

  The most interesting aspect of the film is not so much the story (which is lackluster at best), but the fact that Barack Obama was so deeply involved in the making of the film as executive producer and as adviser on the script. This has led many people to suggest the movie is actually predictive programming – Propaganda designed to acclimate the masses to the idea of an event that is planned to happen in the near future.

  Similar concerns were raised back in 2021 when the World Economic Forum oversaw a “war game” called Cyberpolygon, an event meant to simulate a massive cyber attack on the vulnerable functions of the world-wide web. The reason Cyberpolygon raised so many eyebrows was perfectly understandable; the WEF had also hosted another simulation at the end of 2019 called Event 201. The game, which included the CEOs of some of the most powerful health and media corporations in the world along with numerous government officials, “coincidentally” focused on the outbreak of a global coronavirus pandemic, and it was held only a couple of months before the real thing happened.

  In other words, it was as if the globalists at the WEF knew that covid was about to strike.

  While Hollywood interpretations of cyber attacks are usually exaggerated in terms of the true effects, there is a very real and considerable threat associated with such a disaster. So-called “experts” in the tech field often dismiss the wider dangers to the internet itself because they have been indoctrinated into believing that the design of the web has too many redundancies. In other words, they act as if it is invincible.

  This is not really the case. Though data loss can be prevented through cloud storage, the internet as a mechanism can still be shut down or taken down deliberately for long periods of time.

  In the past I have written about a very interesting event that was barely covered by the corporate media called the “Fastly Outage.”  In June of 2021 there was an internet outage that led to large swaths of the web going completely dark, including a number of mainstream news sites, Amazon, eBay, Twitch, Reddit. A host of government websites also went down. All this happened when content delivery network (CDN) company Fastly experienced a “bug.” Although Amazon had its website back online within 20 minutes, the brief outage cost the company over $5.5 million in sales.

  A content delivery network is a geographically distributed network of proxy servers and their data centers. They make up the what is known as the “backbone” of the internet.

  

  Fastly identified and fixed the problem within two hours and continues to claim the outage had nothing to do with a cyber attack. However, a huge vulnerability for the internet (a center of structural support Carl von Clausewitz would’ve called a “schwerpunkt”) was revealed to the public. A sizable portion of the web is dependent on only a handful of CDN companies, including Fastly.

  It is also through collusion with these companies that governments are able to implement an “internet kill switch” in the face of possible civil unrest. A cyber attack would simply remove the government as the arbiter (or act as a false flag scapegoat so the government can avoid blame).  But what would really happen if we lost the internet for a week, or a month or a year? In the US the result would be calamity because our economy has become far too dependent on digitization.

  Around 10% of US GDP is directly tied to online commerce. This doesn’t seem like much, but a loss of that GDP would send the US into immediate and steep recession. Around 17 million jobs in the US are generated by commercial internet enterprises, and around 38% of these workers are employed by small businesses. According to surveys 70% of American workers say they cannot do their jobs effectively without internet access.

  Keep in mind, if the trend of “work from home” during the covid lockdowns had stuck, an even bigger piece of the economy would be dependent on the health of the web.

  The five industries considered most vulnerable to cyber attack are public administration, healthcare and pharmaceuticals, finance and insurance, education and retail. That is to say, these are the industries that are attacked most often. Attacks on vital utilities are usually the favorite set pieces for disasters portrayed in fiction and film, but these are actually far less worrisome. The real danger is the potential for an attack on the internet as a system. All it would take is for a couple CDNs or more to be hit simultaneously to cause vast online blackouts.

  Most important of all are the ways in which international banking and finance utilize online networks to maintain the flow money. Without the web, trade velocity dies immediately and building it back from implosion could take years.

  But who would benefit from such an attack? Certainly, foreign powers might see the crippling of America’s digital infrastructure as a way to severely damage the country without having to fight directly and militarily. However, there are also a number of benefits to the globalists.

  For example, one of the biggest obstacles for the elites during their attempt to institute medical tyranny and the ‘Great Reset’ during covid was the proliferation of factual data that debunked the pandemic narrative. American conservatives represented a serious barrier to their success with tens of millions of gun owning patriots refusing to comply. The harder they pushed, the greater the chance of an armed insurgency.

  Even though the establishment had every single Big Tech conglomerate on their side when it came to mass censorship of contrary information, they still failed to stop the spread of the truth – Covid was nowhere near the threat they hyped it up to be and the public was quickly made aware of this by the alternative media. The elites did not have as much control over the web as they thought they did.

  In the event of a large scale cyberattack, the internet could be shut down completely, leaving only corporate media sources to filter information and control the narrative. The alternative media would be silenced and the public would be left in confusion, desperately searching for answers. Interestingly, this is a core theme of Obama’s ‘Leave The World Behind’ – The idea of a population utterly cut off from reliable information and scrambling to figure out who is attacking them.

  The internet has become an integral pillar of western economies to the point that a majority of people would not know how to live without it should it disappear. This is the disturbing reality we face in the midst of a growing series of geopolitical conflicts and more oppressive governments. It would seem it’s only a matter of time before there’s a major disruption.

  The solution is pretty straightforward – Localization of trade and production is the way to prevent full spectrum collapse, and alternative communication networks such as ham radio networks can prevent information silence. There is no reason why Americans should have to become subservient to the whims of globalism, the interdependent supply chain or digitization; they can and should create their own backup plan. Getting people to realize this and implement basic local measures is where we run into difficulties. Sadly, a lot of first-world citizens assume that the system will always be there for them when they need it, and they don’t actively seek out solutions until disaster is at their doorstep.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 23:20

• Dry January? These Are The Most Popular Cocktails For 2024
  Dry January? These Are The Most Popular Cocktails For 2024

  Dry January might be be required to recover from the excesses of the holidays, but a whole new year beckons with more successes, milestones, and achievements, perhaps requiring more or less libations, depending on the country one is from.

  But what are people craving from their alcohol mixes?

  Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu charts out the most popular cocktail drinks in 2024, according to the annual consumer survey from the Bacardi Cocktail Trends Report.

  

  Ranked: Most Popular Cocktails for 2024

  The ever-versatile, but long-enduring Gin & Tonic comes in at first place (28%) for the most popular cocktail drink chosen by Bacardi’s survey respondents.

  Allegedly, the Gin & Tonic traces back to 19th century India, when English soldiers began mixing their daily rations of quinine tonic with gin. Quinine was a common malaria drug up until the early 1900s.

  The modern G&T is coupled with a fistful of ice and makes for a refreshing summer beverage. Its popularity is unparalleled across the Commonwealth, but also finds patrons in Europe, the U.S., Japan, and the Netherlands.

  

  Note: The survey was designed as multiple choice, thus percentages do not sum to 100.

  Another classic summer favorite, the Mojito comes in a close second (27%) by those surveyed. The white rum based cocktail originated in Cuba, though there is much debate on who (or which group) invented it first. Variations include using tequila instead of rum, adding muddled fruit, and switching out lime for lemon juice.

  The Margarita and Bloody Mary tie for fourth place and the unpretentious but clearly popular Whiskey and Coke rounds out the top five.

  Another 19% also love Piña Coladas (and possibly also dancing in the rain), a delicious blended mix of white-rum, cream of coconut, and pineapple juice. This island favorite is the official drink of Puerto Rico, from where it originates.

  Ranked seven to 10, are two more rum-based drinks (the Daiquiri, and the Rum and Coke) and two lemonade mixes with gin and vodka respectively.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 22:45

• Global Security In 2024: 5 Contextual Trends, 10 Possibilities
  Global Security In 2024: 5 Contextual Trends, 10 Possibilities

  Authored by Gregory Copley via The Epoch Times,

  It is more than probable that 2024 will create a confluence of major strategic trends, which could increase the likelihood of formal, kinetic conflict and continued global economic decline…

  

  Each year of the past three decades has seemed like a pivotal year in the evolution of the post-Cold War global strategic architecture, and, indeed, that has been the case. But 2024 promises to provide a number of highly significant watersheds in the progress of that new global framework.

  We should review the major concerns in priority order, in terms of the known probable events and their consequences, bearing in mind that some “uncertain” factors will move into the “certain” column during the year. The interactions from events will, to an extent, develop in accordance with their coincidence with other events. Note that all pivotal events interact with each other; nothing is evolving in isolation.

  What is significant, though, is that there are globally pervasive socio-economic trends that provide an additional contextual layering or background.

  These are the result of the accretion of event trends underway for decades.

  These should be taken as part of the framework for 2024’s geopolitical pivot points. These include the following:

  1. By the early 21st century or even the late 20th century, the exhaustion of the urban-industrial republican reforms began around the late 17th century and created several hundred years of growth, wealth, and the modern form of democracy. The maturity and exhaustion of these societies are now starting to give way to increasingly autocratic governance and lowered national productivity.

  2. The pattern of global population decline, already well underway everywhere except India and Africa (and foreseeable there in the coming decades), is causing a major drop in wealth and population health, and requires the consideration of new economic models geared to declining market sizes and declining technological innovation levels.

  3. A peaking and subsequent decline in the appeal and efficiency of major urban agglomerations is impacting political power centralization.

  4. The overwhelming and deepening decline in prestige—and therefore coercive capability—of literally all major powers in the world has ushered in an era of distrust, a lowered efficacy of military alliances, and a willingness by governments to “go their own way,” increasing the prospect for “unintended consequences,” including unanticipated conflict.

  5. The continued decline, with no reverse at present foreseeable, in the pace of scientific and technological breakthroughs or disruptive events, and a decrease in the volume and efficacy of research and development funding and marketplace trust in “scientific saviors.”

  Against this background, one must consider more immediate consequences that could possibly come to fruition in 2024, such as the following (and their timeline and priority could change as incidents trigger responses):

  Communist China

  The deep, ongoing economic collapse of communist China is leading to strategic consequences at the domestic, regional, and global levels. This could include reactive, high-risk military action by China against other states, particularly Taiwan and Vietnam, in 2024, if Chinese leader Xi Jinping were to retain power. That could result in major escalation and broadening of such conflicts, resulting in the further reduction of the Chinese regime and the removal of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

  Taiwanese military personnel drive a CM-25 armored vehicle across the street during the Han Kuang military exercise, which simulates China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) invading the island in New Taipei City, Taiwan, on July 27, 2022. (Annabelle Chih/Getty Images)

  Alternately, Xi’s removal from power in 2024 could result in a stabilized but greatly chastened and impoverished mainland Chinese society in which the CCP could retain carefully balanced control. It is also possible that an unchecked military action initiated by Xi could then trigger his removal by the Party. The prospect, at the beginning of 2024, was that the growing rift between Xi and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), as well as the growing Party and public confrontation of Xi, may preempt action by Xi.

  US Presidential Election

  The U.S. presidential election of November 2024 will clearly impact U.S. domestic harmony and international actions, as well as the trend path of the power of the U.S. dollar globally. With the probability of a decline in prestige and power projection capability of both the United States and China, the question arises as to which power will attempt to fill the power vacuum during the transitional phase-out or reduction of the Pax Americana phase of the “rules-based world order.”

  Will the United States accelerate or slow the pace of economic vulnerability due to its debt service crisis? And what could trigger a global debt crisis?

  Balance of Power in Middle East, North Africa

  The overflow of the Ethiopian civil war, the Sudanese civil war, and Egypt’s socio-economic crisis into global politics impacting the Red Sea/Suez sea lane is intimately linked with the restructuring of the Middle Eastern and North African (particularly the Horn of Africa) balance of power. This will be accompanied by a stabilization in the Levant through a conclusive outcome to the Gaza war (albeit not with an end to sporadic conflict between Israel and its immediate neighbors).

  Meanwhile, a change of power in Ethiopia could substantially alter the Red Sea/Suez Canal trade route in positive terms. It could lead to a regional accord with Egypt to dramatically transform the region.

  Israel–Hamas War

  The consequences of the Israel–Hamas war as a wider phenomenon, particularly impacting the actions of Turkey and Iran, and subsequently their relationship with Russia, has the potential impact on the Russian-controlled International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC) and the rise of India as a stand-alone strategic pretender.

  The Iranian involvement in the Hamas conflict may have brought the Iranian clerical leadership under possibly terminal pressure despite the INSTC alliance, which had promised the clerics security under a Russian blanket.

  Russia–Ukraine War

  A negotiated end to the Ukraine–Russia war, possibly by spring 2024, but certainly by the end of 2024, may lead to the possible scaling back of U.S. dollar-based sanction weapons to recover ground lost to the BRICS-plus (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, plus new members) bloc and others that felt threatened by U.S. unilateralism in sovereignty intervention through the dollar. That may well depend on the outcome of the U.S. presidential election.

  Venezuela–Guyana Dispute

  The impact of the Venezuelan escalation of its conflict with Guyana has the potential to cause the United States to refocus on the Americas, coupled with a potential slowing of the anti-dollar trend among BRICS-plus bloc member states.

  A man walks by a mural campaigning for a referendum asking Venezuelans to consider annexing the Guyana-administered region of Essequibo in Caracas, Venezuela, on Nov. 28, 2023. (Federico Parra/AFP via Getty Images)

  The question is whether this is occurring too late for the United States to take advantage of the possible opportunity, largely because of the mass dollar debt owed by the U.S. government, and because of the U.S. political addiction to the weaponized use of sanctions depending on the use of dollars as a tool to punish adversaries, disregarding the long-term build-up of concerns among U.S. allies and trading partners that the weapon could be used against them.

  Africa

  There is a move toward comprehensive rejection of foreign great power dominance in Africa. That is occurring because of the decline in great power resources and budgets and, in particular, because of the declining prestige and influence of those external powers.

  At the same time, African frustration with imported geopolitical models, including artificial borders, is being matched by the growth, or return, of African philosophical and cultural approaches to governance. All of this, coupled with European and North American governance issues, will interact with the global population movement crisis.

  Green Energy

  There is a slowing down—because of declining prosperity—of trends to end fossil fuel dependence and artificially stimulate pseudo-green technologies while markets move back into a moderating position on energy sources.

  Key Western governmental initiatives to create an artificial market for green and pseudo-green energy technologies for political purposes are now, in 2024, facing increasing societal resistance due to the declining economies and increasing difficulty in sustaining wealth levels, despite governmental initiatives to control the market.

  Technological Developments

  The continued decline in the pace of scientific and technological advancement rates, already mentioned in the contextual trends as being in evidence since the early years of the 21st century, will still see key areas advance incrementally, but with fewer breakthrough technologies occurring, and at a higher cost per incident.

  This is likely to see societies—and armed forces—opting for a mix of practical, older technologies and practices despite governments often attempting to legislate the obsolescence of valid existing technologies.

  In the military sense, the attempts to evolve older weapons systems (such as the U.S. F-15 fighter, the B-52 bomber, the M1 Abrams tank family, 1960s-based hypersonic capabilities, and anti-satellite weapons) are symptomatic of the process.

  Societal Polarization

  The further polarization of many “modern” societies under modern forms of democracy is likely to be evident, particularly in the United States, Canada, Western Europe, Australia, and possibly India. Significantly, none of these societies has legal mechanisms available to overturn such societal polarization and the increasing paralysis and exhaustion of the state apparatus.

  This means that unprecedented catalysts—possibly outside their respective constitutions—must occur for each of these types of societies to change in order to cope with the necessity to create new models and shed old obligations, or else state paralysis and polarization are likely to continue.

  All of these trends are part of the natural cycle of societies. Still, we see them now in the light of modern communications technologies, and we are seeing them harmonizing on a global level. Initial responses have been to attempt to stem the pace of collapse rather than to look at strategies for the emerging era beyond the short-term uncertainties.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 22:10

• The Perfidious Unreality Of The "New Normal"
  The Perfidious Unreality Of The “New Normal”

  Authored by Kit Knightly via Off-Guardian.org,

  So, what’s with all the fake crying?

  Rachel Maddow pretended to cry about “kids in cages”. Matt Hancock pretended to cry about Covid vaccines. Sarah Sidner pretended to cry over covid. Anderson Cooper pretended to cry about Israel, so did John Kirby. Van Jones pretended to cry after Biden “won” the 2020 “election”. Adam Schiff and Adam Kinzinger both pretended to cry about January 6th.

  Don Lemon pretends to cry about pretty much everything.

  They all do it, and they’re all so bad at it.

  And speaking of pretending badly, remember those early photos of people in China lying in the street, straight as planks, supposedly killed by “Covid”?

  

  As if this scary new virus just snuffs you out mid-step to topple backwards flat on the ground in a perfect silent movie pratfall.

  And it’s not just “Covid”.

  During the run-up to the 2020 election “pretending badly” was happening everywhere.

  We were told, over and over again, “It’s going to look like Trump won, but then Biden will win at the last minute because of postal ballots”.

  And gosh darnit – they were right!

  Out of nowhere Joe Biden – ‘Creepy Uncle Joe’ – who in early 2020 was obviously the least popular democratic candidate, and even more obviously going senile – is transmogrified into the most popular presidential candidate

  of ALL TIME…

  …shattering the popular vote records by over 13 million votes.

  Such is the power of bad pretending , when you just don’t give a crap about plausibility or boring details of historical precedent.

  That was, of course, following Biden’s “miracle turnaround” in the primaries, where massive defeats in Iowa and New Hampshire left his campaign “teetering on the abyss”.

  On election night they presented us with badly pretend graphs like this:

  

  They reported that counting the first 99% of the vote took a few hours, and that counting the last 1% in a couple of swing states took two weeks.

  …and told us this was all totally normal and that anyone who said otherwise was an “election denier”.

  On January 6th 2021 they showed you an “insurrection” – a word that used to mean “an armed attempt to seize control of a government by force” but now means “some guy in a Buffalo hat putting his feet on Nancy Pelosi’s desk”.

  Then they told you to be afraid for the fate of a “democracy” which their previously blatant election-rigging had just demonstrated does not exist.

  Bad pretending at its most brazenly ballsy.

  Let’s be honest the airwaves have been saturated with this since at least 2020.

  Remember those lovable doctors and nurses shooting increasingly elaborate music videos during a supposedly deadly pandemic.

  Or doctors saying BLM protesters don’t have to stay home or social distance because “racism is a worse pandemic”.

  Blatantly bad pretending.

  The Israel-Hamas war has already produced similar scenes.

  I mean what is this Busby Berkeley 4K drone footage routine supposed to be telling us?

  Dozens of perfectly synchronized & choreographed women doing yoga poses over posters of supposed hostages as if it’s the most normal thing in the world, when it’s just NOT, is it?

  Who responds to a loved one being taken hostage by calling all their friends and arranging a synchronized yoga session?

  So, what are we looking at? How is this related to the real world?

  And don’t forget “terrorists” on motorized hang-gliders chuntering along at a leisurely pace into some of the most defended airspace on the planet.

  And of course Hamas – operating out of the world’s “largest open-air prison”, with only a couple of hours of electricity a day and limited food and fresh water – but somehow putting together professionally edited high definition music videos of them making improvised weapons.

  …and we’re not supposed to ask “how?” or “why?”

  After the alleged bombing of Al-Ahli Arab hospital, doctors held a press conference surrounded by dead bodies:

  

  So did they bring the bodies to the podium or the podium to the bodies?

  And WHY exactly in either case?

  Is it sensible? Is it respectful? Is it even sanitary?

  Stacking corpses, then running electrical and audio cables over them. In very hot weather, under bright television lights.

  Presumably the mourning families had to wait to collect their dead until after the press conference. Hopefully they didn’t mind.

  I mean you’d be ok with your deceased loved one being used as set-dressing for a presser wouldn’t you?

  All the while, Israel continued carpet bombing a relatively small and very densely populated urban area in the name of “saving hostages” that a) they had made seemingly no effort to recover and b) Could EASILY have been inside one or more of the buildings they are levelling.

  And NO – please – I am not claiming people are not dying. Don’t grab for that easy lazy assumption as a reason to switch off.

  People are dying. People are being murdered. And degraded. And their corpses used as set-dressing for globalist agenda-drives. That’s both the goal and the method.

  But that doesn’t change the fact the narrative rationalization for the killing & for so much else is literal madness.

  And they’re conditioning people not to say it, and eventually not to even see it.

  Look around you – see it while you still can.

  • They kill people while claiming to save lives.

  • They push vaccines while admitting they don’t work

  • They present the physically impossible as an ongoing reality

  • They completely invert the meaning of words and yet claim nothing has changed

  • They attack reason as irrationality and tell you insanity is sense

  • They paint farce as tragedy and real tragedy as “necessary evil”.

  • They laugh, and tell you they are crying.

  • They almost literally report 2+2=5 and call anyone who claims it’s 4 a “five denier”.

  Is this just the symptom of an establishment and media so far removed from normal human experience they no longer understand it well enough to fake it?

  Perhaps. But I think it could be something more.

  Just hear me out…

  I have argued before that a primary goal of the new normal agenda to disrupt each human individual’s relationship with the real world.

  In my piece on the UN’s “Global Digital Compact” I described it thus:

  the final aim of globalist policy [is] control of all aspects of life, achieved by inserting a digital filter between people and reality. Banking, communication, media consumption, shopping. Every interaction you have will be through a digital membrane which can both monitor your exchanges with the world and – if deemed necessary – deny you access to that world.

  By making every purchase remote, every interaction digital, they can effectively disrupt everybody’s ability to interact with reality.

  However, it could be there’s also a more subtle and potentially destructive policy at play – one that attacks people’s ability to understand or even perceive that reality.

  A war on, for want of a better word, realness : the physical laws that govern our world, the emotional responses of human to human, the very existence of rational thought.

  This is the perfidious unreality of the “new normal”: Nurturing and normalising a pervasive persistent state of non-real.

  Why? What is the benefit of cultivating unreality?

  Well, that’s a complicated question with a twisting trail of intertwining potential answers.

  I have written before about the psychopathic individual’s tendency to lie to no purpose, to lie even when the truth would serve their interests better. This is because psychopaths are control addicts, and the ultimate expression of control is to create a fake world and make people live in it.

  This applies to institutions as well as individuals. Perhaps more so. To an authoritarian ruling elite insane narratives serve as both loyalty test and humiliation ritual.

  If they give you something impossible to believe, and you don’t question it, you are demonstrating greater loyalty to the authority above you than to the reality around you.

  The more absurd the lie you believe – or claim to believe – the more loyal you are to the Party. The more you pretzel your own mind at the command of the establishment the lower you sink in obeisance, the more you humiliate yourself.

  The more you humiliate yourself, the more you are no longer your own person.

  Humiliation is the ultimate demonstration of control, and demonstrating control is important to a grasping power structure built on insecurity and forever teetering on the edge of collapse.

  This idea of social control via collective belief predates Covid by decades.

  Take “The magic bullet theory”, an explanation which is no explanation at all. Theoretical physics stretched to near-breaking point.

  It literally has the word “magic” in it.

  And people repeated it, maybe even believed it, rather than deal with the real world in which such an idea was clearly ridiculous.

  Trading in their sanity for the comfort of belonging.

  Telling outrageously nonsensical lies allows you to demonstrate your power over people. But it also allows you to cultivate that power. To prepare soil where useful lies can take root easily.

  Because it’s easiest to lie to people who have no idea what truth means. Because if I can convince you to abandon sense, my narratives are no longer bound by the crushing monotony of causality, linear time or the laws of physics.

  In a world of no reason or rule, everything I tell you becomes inherently believable. In a world where nothing is true, anything could be.

  I can tell you that me taking your money makes us both richer, and you’ll never realise I’m robbing you.

  I can tell you that bars and chains are an expression of freedom, and you’ll never realise you’re my slave.

  In short, they use crazy narratives to erode the idea of objective truth, because if you don’t even know such a thing exists you are a lot easier to control.

  

  This is the perfidious unreality of the “new normal”. It’s not just about deception or fakery or propaganda.

  It’s about breaking your spirit and your mind.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 21:35

• Hezbollah Strikes Israel Intel Base With 60+ Rockets As "Initial Response" To Hamas Leader Assassination
  Hezbollah Strikes Israel Intel Base With 60+ Rockets As “Initial Response” To Hamas Leader Assassination

  Hezbollah on Saturday initiated what it announced as “an initial response” to Israel’s assassination by drone of Hamas deputy chief Saleh al-Arouri, which happened in a south Beirut neighborhood last week.

  The Lebanese paramilitary group backed by Iran unleashed large salvos of missiles that bombarded military bases as well as communities in northern Israel (many of which have long been evacuated), triggering alert sirens among some 90 towns and settlements.

  The Hezbollah statement declared that the assault was “part of the initial response to the crime of assassinating the great leader Sheikh Saleh al-Arouri.”

  

  The Israel Defense Forces in a follow-up statement said some 40 rockets were fired from Lebanon at the Mount Meron area in particular, which contains a crucial IDF base which reportedly has overseen Israeli operations against Syria.

  Hezbollah indicated it launched 62 “various types of missiles” against the Meron air control base as part of Saturday’s retaliatory attacks, however, Israel said there were no casualties in the aftermath.

  Lebanon’s Hezbollah-linked Almayadeen news service has said that the targeting of Meron Base is a first of the conflict, and is of huge significance: 

  Located just 8 kilometers from Lebanon’s southern border, “Meron” Base overlooks the Lebanese towns of Rmeish, Yaroun, and Maroun al-Ras in the central sector. It occupies the summit of Mount Jarmaq in northern occupied Palestine, making it the highest peak within the occupied territories.

  Sitting at an altitude of approximately 1200 meters above sea level, the base sprawls across an area of up to 150,000 square meters, with a substantial portion of the surrounding areas believed to be under its control for military and intelligence purposes.

  According to the Resistance statement released today, “Meron” primarily serves as an aerial surveillance center.

  It is the sole facility responsible for managing and controlling air operations toward Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, and Cyprus, as well as the northern part of the eastern Mediterranean Sea basin. Moreover, this base acts as a central hub for electronic warfare interference in the mentioned directions, staffed by a significant number of elite Israeli officers and soldiers.

  Hezbollah has already since Oct.7 been targeting and degrading Israel’s vast military communications infrastructure along the Lebanese border, often publishing videos of these attacks.

  ⚡️BREAKING

  Hezbollah strikes Israel’s most important military site

  With 62 missiles, Hezbollah pounded the Mount Meron base, which coordinates Israel’s air operations and bombing raids on Syria and Lebanon.

  This strike was the initial response to the assassination of Saleh… pic.twitter.com/kKfEB3s2UK

  — Iran Observer (@IranObserver0) January 6, 2024

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

  It is as yet unknown the degree of damage that Meron base may have suffered, and Israel is likely to keep this under wraps even if the damage is extensive.

  Saturday’s escalation was met with swift reaction from the European Union, which urged restraint:

  EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said on Saturday that it was “imperative” to avoid a regional escalation in the Middle East.

  “It is absolutely necessary to avoid Lebanon being dragged into a regional conflict,” he said, also warning Israel that “nobody will win from a regional conflict”.

  “We are seeing a worrying intensification of exchange of fire across the Blue Line,” he added, referring to the current demarcation line between the two countries, a frontier mapped by the United Nations that marks the line to which Israeli forces withdrew when they left south Lebanon in 2000.

  Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah had vowed to retaliate for the killing of Hamas political deputy head Saleh Arouri in a Friday speech, while also saying he won’t negotiate ceasefire with Israel until it ceases attacking Gaza.

  IDF published clips of its airstrikes on southern Lebanon Saturday:

  חוליית מחבלים, עמדת שיגור, מבנים צבאיים ותשתיות טרור; צה”ל השלים שורת תקיפות בשטח לבנון>> pic.twitter.com/MH0HY5JRR6

  — צבא ההגנה לישראל (@idfonline) January 6, 2024

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

  Later in the day Saturday, the IDF said it launched multiple airstrikes on Hezbollah positions in southern Lebanon in response, and released footage showing attacks on buildings and rural sites said to include a “terrorist squad, launch site, military buildings and terrorist infrastructure.”

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 21:00

• White House Wasn't Aware For Days That Defense Secretary Austin Was Hospitalized
  White House Wasn’t Aware For Days That Defense Secretary Austin Was Hospitalized

  Earlier throughout the day there were significant rumors that Pentagon chief Lloyd Austin has been in the hospital for days, and no one knew it… surprisingly even at the White House, apparently—and at a moment the US is embroiled in running conflicts and proxy wars from Ukraine to the Middle East.

  This is a worrisome development which has huge implications for the Biden administration and White House competency and issues of transparency. Not only has Austin’s hospitalization now been confirmed, but CNN is reporting late Saturday that President Biden was in the dark almost the whole time: 

  President Joe Biden was not aware for days that Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin was hospitalized, a source familiar with the matter told CNN.

  National security adviser Jake Sullivan ultimately informed Biden late Thursday afternoon, soon after Sullivan himself learned that Austin had been hospitalized, that source said. Austin was admitted to the hospital on New Year’s Day due to complications from an elective surgery.

  The Pentagon announced the hospitalization Friday. Austin issued his first statement Saturday, five days after being admitted to the hospital, saying he could have done a “better job” of notifying the public.

  

  All of this was ultimately confirmed by a statement from the hospitalized Secretary of Defense himself, who said in the early evening Saturday, “I recognize I could have done a better job ensuring the public was appropriately informed. I commit to doing better.”

  Austin continued regarding this growing scandal over transparency: “But this is important to say: this was my medical procedure, and I take full responsibility for my decisions about disclosure,” the statement continued.

  The Defense Secretary was at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center and now says he’s “on the mend”. 

  He was hospitalized and thus out of commission… as the head of the Pentagon… for nearly four days.

  NEWS

  CNN has now confirmed that President Biden was not aware that Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin was hospitalized and in intensive care for nearly four days.

  Biden only found out when National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan informed him Thursday afternoon shortly after… pic.twitter.com/S1lJPFYsR0

  — Yashar Ali 🐘 (@yashar) January 7, 2024

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

  CNN underscores, “Senior administration officials said they were shocked to learn of Austin’s hospitalization and the delay in informing the White House.”

  The initial procedure which led to complications has been deemed minor, but the situation worsened into a serious medical event based on the undisclosed complication.

  This scandal may have Constitutional implications, given the White House-appointed civilian head of the military was persona non grata and the Commander-in-Chief didn’t so much as know about it…

  An entire industry of reporters investigating Chris Rufo’s college degree but none of them can figure out why the Secretary of Defense was missing in action for four days while the Biden Administration covered it up.

  — Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) January 7, 2024

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 20:25

• "The Death Toll Of A Global War": Bret Weinstein And Tucker Discuss COVID Vaccine, WHO's Authoritarian Plans For Humanity
  “The Death Toll Of A Global War”: Bret Weinstein And Tucker Discuss COVID Vaccine, WHO’s Authoritarian Plans For Humanity

  Tucker Carlson sat down with evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein (brother of Eric Weinstein), where the two dissected the intricate web of narratives surrounding COVID-19, the pharmaceutical industry, and global shifts in governance and public health policy.

  

  According to Weinstein, opposition to the ‘official’ COVID narratives is like taking on Goliath – with competent and courageous experts in various fields being aggressively censored during the pandemic. This led to the formation of a “Dream Team” of dissenters.

  “I call the force that we’re up against Goliath. Goliath made a terrible mistake and made it most egregiously during COVID, which is it took all of the competent people, all of the courageous people, and it shoved them out of the institutions where they were hanging on. And it created in so doing, the Dream Team. It created every player you could possibly want on your team to fight some historic battle against a terrible evil,” he said, suggesting that the Dream Team is uniquely qualified to fight against those who botched the pandemic response with deadly consequences.

  Weinstein also discussed the demonization of alternative treatments such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, and suggested that there have been 17 million deaths from the COVID-19 vaccine.

  “So I’m not a math genius, but one in eight hundred shots times billions is a lot of people…..17 million deaths from the COVID vaccine?” asked Tucker. “Just for perspective. I mean, that’s like the death toll of a global war.”

  To which Weinstein replied: “Yes, absolutely. This is a great tragedy of history. So that proportion. And amazingly there is no way in which it’s over. I mean, we are still apparently recommending these things for healthy children.”

  🚨 “17 million deaths from the COVID vax?”

  Bret Weinstein tells Tucker Carlson: “I saw a credible estimate of something like 17 million deaths globally.” pic.twitter.com/US4Ejypb1f

  — Tucker Carlson Network (@TCNetwork) January 6, 2024

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

  Weinstein and Carlson also discussed what they perceive as a global power shift orchestrated through public health policies. They discussed the World Health Organization’s (WHO) proposed pandemic preparedness plan, expressing concerns over potential overreach and infringement on national sovereignty. Weinstein warned of a “turnkey totalitarian planet,” with the WHO positioned to dictate unprecedented controls over nations and their citizens.

  Bret Weinstein Exposes the World Health Organization’s Neo Dark Age Agenda – He is 100% correct on all of it…the best and brightest who were all doing their own things in life in all different areas and levels….found a common cause in trying to preserve Western Democratic… pic.twitter.com/wvAtDrI9bv

  — DavidCWillisUSA (@DavidCWillisUSA) January 6, 2024

  Watch the entire segment on the WHO below…

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

  And subscribers to Tuckercarlson.com can watch the entire one hour interview here.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 19:50

• American Soldiers Are Being Put In Danger For Israel
  American Soldiers Are Being Put In Danger For Israel

  Authored by Brad Pearce via The Libertarian Institute,

  Since the October 7 attacks restarted conflict between Israel and Hamas, U.S. troops have been under fire all over the Middle East. Thus far, most attacks have been deflected with minimal damage, but it is only a matter of time before one gets through and causes a serious loss of life.

  Twenty-two years after the beginning of the Global War on Terror, the government rarely bothers to say what we are doing in the Middle East. There is an implication that by “fighting terrorism” we protect Israel, which is somehow crucial to our national security. In reality, our alliance with Israel harms U.S. national security, as demonstrated by the fact that we have been attacked alongside Israel.

  The War Party has gone from the spurious line of reasoning, “We have to fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them here,” to not really fighting them “over there” but just leaving our troops as sort of reverse hostages to draw fire so that we have a pretense to get drawn into any regional conflict. The continuing U.S. presence across the Middle East is nothing but a depraved exercise in putting American personnel in harm’s way for its own sake.

  

  Though it’s hard to imagine now, until around fifty years ago the United States policy class was skeptical of Israel, and the Middle East was considered a strategic backwater. Perhaps in the 1970s the need for oil and the internal logic of the Cold War justified constructing a policy of trying to split the difference between making Israel a satrap while also maintaining a sphere of influence among the Arab states.

  However, that questionable strategy notwithstanding, the Cold War has been over for decades and the United States is now a net exporter of oil. All that justifies our presence with the American public is the detritus from years of propaganda which has left an unexamined belief that supporting Israel as “the only democracy in the Middle East” serves some sort of moral or strategic purpose.

  One way or another, U.S. troops continue to be spread throughout the Middle East and Israel continues to receive enormous amounts of foreign aid. Though the United States has multiple clients throughout the region, it is Israel with whom there is a “special relationship.” The perception among the Arab public is that there isn’t distance between the policies of the United States and Israel, despite the fact that Israel is nearly impossible to control and many observers see it as a case of “the tail wagging the dog.”

  In pursuit of some rarely defined objective we have troops at over 30 locations in the broader region, according to a map from the American Security Project (and that is only the public or well-documented bases). Us peasants are left guessing where else our rulers are placing our countrymen, but a study by Axios Research found that there were approximately 45,400 known U.S. troops in the Middle East as of October 31, which includes new troops deployed to the region due to the current conflict.

  At this time, the United States is not said to be engaged in any major conflicts in the Middle East. The troops seem to just be on standby to give hostile militant groups convenient targets and serve as tinder for a regional conflagration. And convenient targets they are. A December 11 article from the Associated Press says there have been “at least” 92 attacks on U.S. troops in Syria and Iraq alone since October 7. In response, the United States has launched airstrikes across the region, but they are obviously unable to eliminate the myriad of militant groups who are attacking.

  The Iraqi government has protested the retaliatory airstrikes as a violation of their sovereignty, but of course they remain an occupied country twenty years after the American invasion and don’t have the ability to kick out the United States. In fact, it is Iraq itself that is the most threatened by attacks it has no control over, as the occupying foreign power could turn on them at any time. Alternately, the United States has nothing resembling authorization to be in Syria. Having failed to set up a puppet government in that country, they don’t even have anyone to complain to about coming under attack.

  

  Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) recently forced a vote in the U.S. Senate to withdraw from our undeclared war in Syria, which failed 84-13, meaning 84 Senators want our troops to remain targets. Senator Paul said at the time, “It seems to me, though our 900 troops have no viable mission in Syria, that they’re sitting ducks. They’re a tripwire to a larger war, and without a clear-cut mission, I don’t think they can adequately defend themselves, yet they remain in Syria.”

  It isn’t just Syria, it is the entire Middle East policy. Our political class is leaving American soldiers in the region as sacrificial lambs so there is a pretense to get involved and protect Israel should any major conflict break out. Meanwhile, few serious arguments are made that supporting Israel is good for national security—in fact, Joe Biden went with just saying he is a Zionist, which is to say he supports Israel for ideological reasons completely divorced from American interests. I suppose for the political class admitting that is better than acknowledging the more important truth: supporting Israel harms our national security and US troops in the region serve no purpose but to be easy targets.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 19:15

• St. Louis Mask Mandate Rescinded Less Than 24 Hours After Woke Health Officials Get Trigger Happy
  St. Louis Mask Mandate Rescinded Less Than 24 Hours After Woke Health Officials Get Trigger Happy

  The city of St. Louis reversed course less than 24 hours after reimplementing mask mandates, announcing Friday afternoon that it would no longer require city employees to mask up while working following pushback from hospitals, health experts, and the governor.

  

  “The City of St. Louis has updated its communications with employees surrounding masking,” said a representative from Mayor Tishaura Jones’ office.

  “The City of St. Louis Department of Health strongly recommends masking indoors for all City of St. Louis employees, effective immediately.”

  This came one day after city health director Matifadza Hlatshwayo Davis said that COVID-19, RSV and flu cases in the city justified masking up again.

  On Friday, however, the department updated its original statistics with ‘less alarming’ data regarding RSV trends, according to KSDK.

  “BJC is not seeing a strain on hospital capacity,” BJC Health Care officials told the outlet, adding “We are experiencing a seasonal increase in respiratory illness, which is typical for this time of year.”

  Mercy Hospital described it as a “typical winter.” St. Louis County said they haven’t seen any out-of-the-ordinary strains on the health system.

  “Luckily our influenza has not spiked yet and it is going up, but it’s not nearly what it was last year,” according to Dr. Jim Hinrichs, the interim co-director of the St. Louis County Department of Public Health. “It’s moderate. It’s not alarming.”

  Gov. Mike Parson’s office confirmed to 5 On Your Side it had a conversation with Jones’ office on Friday related to the city’s mask policy shift. -KSDK

  The health department had originally claimed that COVID-19 hospitalizations were up 38% over December, as 278 people were hospitalized with (but not necessarily because of) COVID-19 during the week of Dec. 23. Flu cases rose an alleged 455%.

  Perhaps, as Ian Miller noted on X, the reversal was because of the sudden realisation that masks never made a difference in St.Louis anyway…

  

  …”science”.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 18:05

• "This Is Not A Time For Us To Have A Mentally-Challenged President"
  “This Is Not A Time For Us To Have A Mentally-Challenged President”

  Authored by Mike McDaniel via AmericanThinker.com,

  Joe Biden At Valley Forge: Triumph Of The Shill II

  Well, he did it again. 

  Speaking near Valley Forge, PA, President Joe Biden delivered a follow up to his red-tinged “Triumph of the Shill” speech. The New York Post explains: 

  President Biden kicked off his bid for re-election Friday by deriding former President Donald Trump as a “loser”and calling his bid for a political comeback something out of a “bad fairy tale” Friday — prompting his predecessor to fire back that the 80-year-old is a “true threat to democracy.”

  As one would expect on the anniversary of Democrats/socialists/communists’ (D/s/cs) high holy day, we learned, yet again, how very, very close we came to losing America:

  Valley Forge “tells the story of the pain and the suffering and the true patriotism it took to make America,” Biden, 81, began his first proper 2024 campaign speech.

  “Today, we gather in a new year, some 246 years later, just one day before January 6 — a date forever seared in our memory because it was on that day that we nearly lost America, lost it all.”

  

  Image: Erie Railroad Train Wreck. Wikimedia Commons.org. Public Domain.

  I’m sure China, Iran and our other enemies are paying close attention. They don’t need massive militaries with nuclear weapons to conquer America, only a minor riot by unarmed citizens, provoked by the FBI, that lasts an hour or so.

  Trump’s assault on democracy isn’t just part of his past, it’s what he’s promising for the future. He’s being straightforward. He’s not hiding the ball,” Biden said.

  “His first rally for the 2024 campaign opened with a choir of January 6 insurrectionists singing from prison on a cellphone while images of the January 6 riot playing on the big screen behind him at his rally. Can you believe that? This was like something out of a fairy tale — a bad fairy tale.”

  What were those horrid insurrectionists singing? The Star-Spangled Banner, our national anthem. The horror.

  “Let’s be clear about the 2020 election: Trump exhausted every legal avenue available to him to overturn the outcome — every one. But the legal path just took Trump back to the truth that I’d won the election and he was a loser,” Biden said to hoots and applause.

  Gropin’, sniffin’ Joe forgot to mention not a single court actually heard evidence, which makes for rather a dead end “legal avenue.”

  

  He also forgot to mention Trump quietly, and on time, left office as the Constitution requires. What a pathetic dictator.

  “Well, knowing how his mind works, he had one act left, one desperate act available to him: the violence of January the 6th,” Biden said, “and since that day, more than 1,200 people have been charged for their assault on the Capitol, nearly 900 of them have been convicted or pled guilty.”

  To more cheers, he added, “Collectively to date, they have been sentenced to more than 840 years in prison.”

  Rational Americans might think Biden’s glee in destroying the lives of more than 1000 Americans for what amounts to misdemeanor trespassing–normally a ticketable offense–doesn’t really live up to his endless rhetoric about uniting America.

  “He calls those who oppose him ‘vermin.’ He talks about the blood of Americans being poisoned, echoing the same exact language used in Nazi Germany.  He proudly posted on social media the words that best describe his 2024 campaign, ‘revenge,’ ‘power,’ ‘dictatorship.’  There’s no confusion about who Trump is and what he intends to do,” Biden said.

  “You can’t be pro-insurrectionist and pro-American,” the president added at one point — insisting that unlike Trump “our campaign is about preserving and strengthening our American democracy.”

  “The protection and preservation of American democracy will remain as it has been the central cause of my presidency,” Biden went on before turning his wrath on Trump’s allies in Congress.

  The Bee is the latest victim of plagiarism by a president. pic.twitter.com/sMI5wrJNvI

  — Not the Bee (@Not_the_Bee) January 6, 2024

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

  There it is again: “our American democracy,” by which Biden means a tyranny of the majority. 

  The words “constitutional, representative republic,” which is what America is, never escape his lips.

  Biden just finished a very angry speech in which he previewed the center of his re-election campaign.

  Number of times he mentioned…

  Economy: 0️⃣
  Inflation: 0️⃣
  Border security: 0️⃣
  Debt/spending: 0️⃣
  Foreign affairs: 0️⃣
  National security: 0️⃣
  Crime: 0️⃣
  Fentanyl crisis: 0️⃣

  — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) January 5, 2024

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

  Donald Trump replied:

  “This is not a time for us to have a mentally challenged president,” the former president said, adding that “the only insurrection is the insurrection that is taking place at our border where he is allowing millions of people from parts unknown to invade our country at a level far worse than even a military invasion.”

  “Biden’s record is an unbroken streak of weakness, incompetence, corruption and failure, other than that he’s doing quite well, isn’t he? That’s a hell of a hell of a list, right? That’s why Crooked Joe is staging his pathetic, fear-mongering campaign event in Pennsylvania today. Did you see him? He was stuttering through the whole thing, he’s going, ‘He’s a threat to Democracy,’” Trump said. 

  Serious ‘Where The F*** Am I?’ vibes here. pic.twitter.com/X6EVhwLFXT

  — m o d e r n i t y (@ModernityNews) January 6, 2024

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

  Biden’s remarks are a preview of his second basement campaign, and a continuing act of desperation.

  

  The 2024 campaign will be one for the record books, if America survives to write them.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 17:30

• US Warship Downs Houthi Drone Over Red Sea "In Self-Defense"
  US Warship Downs Houthi Drone Over Red Sea “In Self-Defense”

  US Central Command (CENTCOM) has announced yet another intercept of a launch out of Yemen which had targeted commercial vessels in the Red Sea. 

  CENTCOM described that the Saturday incident saw the USS Laboon guided-missile destroyer down a drone over the Red Sea, after it came near near several commercial ships in international waters.

  

  There were no casualties or damage to ships from the “unmanned aerial vehicle launched from Iranian-backed Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen,” according to the US statement.

  Further, the military statement suggests that US warships may have been targeted by the drone, given it says the USS Laboon shot the inbound drone down “in self-defense”.

  The Biden administration has previously been accused of downplaying that there’s actually been attempted Houthi attacks directly on American warships and naval assets. This would of course be an act of war, and the White House is said to be belatedly drawing up plans to hit back at Houthi launch positions, in an offensive manner (and not just defensive intercepts).

  This hasn’t happened yet, as the US is apparently pursuing a policy of restraint, not wanting a bigger regional war to break out with Iran, which has long backed the Houthis.

  But the contradiction is that Washington has done nothing to impose any kind of limits or conditions on Gaza’s air campaign, which has resulted in unprecedented Palestinian civilian deaths.

  Meanwhile the Pentagon has issued a lot of ‘final warnings’ as Red Sea attacks have persisted weekly & now daily…

  The United States gave the Houthis a “final warning” in the Red Sea, and they responded with a sea drone to attack more ships. https://t.co/E0R25hT0qw

  — FORTUNE (@FortuneMagazine) January 6, 2024

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

  The Houthis say their ‘war on Red Sea shipping’ and on Israel itself will continue so long as Israel drops bombs on Gaza civilians. Meanwhile things have only escalated across the region, including Iran-backed militant attacks on US bases in Iraq and Syria. 

  These attacks across Iraq-Syria have led to an escalation in the Pentagon response, which most recently saw a very high-ranking and influential Iraqi militia leader killed. This has enraged the Iraqi government in Baghdad, given the commander, identified as Mushtaq Taleb al-Saidi, had been integrated with national forces, and was considered a key ally.

  Below is a policy note exploring the implications of the growing tit-for-tat in the region, via Peter Tchir’s Academy Securities.

  * * *

  What has Happened:

  • Yesterday [Jan.11], a U.S. drone strike in Baghdad killed Mushtaq Taleb al-Saidi, who was deputy head of operations for the Popular Mobilization Force (PMF), a network of Iran-backed militia groups.
  • Since the war between Israel and Hamas began on October 7^th, there have been over 100 attacks on U.S. and allied forces in Iraq and Syria by Iran-backed militia forces.
  • Iraq’s prime minister, who had the backing of Iran-aligned factions and militias when elected, called the attack “unjustified” and a “dangerous escalation and a violation of Iraq’s sovereignty.”
  • On Tuesday, as reported in our previous SITREP, a suspected Israeli drone attack killed Saleh al-Arouri (Hamas deputy leader) in Beirut.
  • In addition, an Israeli strike on Wednesday night killed a Hezbollah commander in southern Lebanon and Israel has warned of more significant military action if a diplomatic deal is not reached to pull Hezbollah forces away from the Lebanese border.
  • Finally, the U.S., the UK, and other key allies issued “a final warning” to the Houthi rebels this week to cease its attacks on international shipping in the Red Sea or face consequences.

  Why it Matters:

  “First, it’s important to understand that deterrence is the product of three factors: capability, will, and the adversary’s perception of those capabilities and that will. If the first two factors are missing—or inordinately low—or the adversary doesn’t believe that the U.S. has the will to use their capabilities, then deterrence fails. This is the current situation. The proof is in the actions that commercial shipping companies have taken in halting their transit of the Red Sea. We have warships in the region—capability—but if we’re not going to use them to ensure free movement through the Red Sea—will—and the adversary believes that we won’t use them—perception—then we won’t be successful in deterring further aggression on the part of the Houthis and Iran. A strong response to the initial Iranian-backed Houthi attacks could have prevented this situation (i.e., strikes against the Houthi command & control apparatus, launch, storage, and maintenance sites). The solution is that we should stop just shooting down arrows and kill the archers. But the Biden administration has been hesitant to address the source of these attacks over concerns of escalation. Which raises a second point—escalation has already occurred—it was initiated by the Iranians, Houthis, Hamas, Hezbollah, and other Iranian proxy groups.” – General David Deptula

  “General Deptula lays it out nicely. Only comment I’d add is that the U.S. must produce a full array of attack options (both arrows and archers) that will punish Iranian proxies where they currently enjoy sanctuary. That is not an expansion of the current state of affairs; it is appropriate and would meet every legal prescription of proportionality. Not surprisingly, Iran is overreaching. The Iranian leadership, specifically the IRGC leadership, must know with certainty that their only sanctuary is within the borders of Iran.” – General Spider Marks

  “General Deptula’s deterrence formula is how a great power imposes its will on a lesser power through military means. The current U.S. approach is not working, considering the continued attacks on U.S. forces in the region and the disruption of commerce through the Red Sea. The U.S. is failing to deter Iran and its proxy forces, and its deterrence strategy must be reset. The U.S. foreign policy is allowing bad actors to challenge the international order. The U.S. needs to escalate its response in compliance with international law to de-escalate the situation. How quickly and with how much force must be calibrated per General Marks’ salient points of proportionality and self-defense.” – General Robert Walsh

  “While there is always the risk of a miscalculation that leads to escalation, I think that these recent events, while linked to multiple ongoing conflicts (many that predate 7 October), are not necessarily indicative of irreversible momentum toward broader escalation. Each participant (Israel, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Houthis, or the U.S.) can adjust the rheostat as desired. These events could continue to play out as transactional, but limited in scope and scale, and are not indicative that a broader conflict is imminent or inevitable. I would not look at these as fully coordinated events, but rather as transactional. I’m not surprised to see ISIS claim the attacks in Iran which do not follow suit with how Mossad would traditionally strike in Iran proper. While it may seem counterintuitive given the strikes in Gaza, the Israeli government has been relatively surgical in their actions with respect to Iran to minimize casualties/collateral damage.

  A possibly unanticipated outcome is that we may see a policy shift in Iraq. A deliberate strike in Baghdad has drawn the ire of the current regime (not that they haven’t complained during previous strikes) and may be enough for Iraq to consider a reduction (if not an elimination) of the U.S. military presence in Iraq. Lately, there is more being written in the news and opinion pieces about the risk to U.S. forces in Syria and Iraq and questioning the mission. Another factor is whether the U.S. is willing to begin to strike Houthi infrastructure should maritime attacks continue. All that said, I would assess with moderate confidence that none of the nation states are looking to expand the conflict into a direct war and will continue to measure their responses. Where the U.S. is struggling is how to establish deterrence.” – General Robert Ashley

  “The U.S. desires to de-escalate, not escalate, but the challenge is that the same military response can be used to achieve both results. There are plenty of historical examples of U.S. administrations aggressively addressing such threats, resulting in Iran (and others) choosing to back down due to the sudden and high costs that they have incurred. Aggressive action (sinking ships, shooting down aircraft, and killing forces attacking civilian targets) may be our best chance to de-escalate Iran’s actions. It is doubtful that Iran will back down without a serious punch in the nose.” – General Mastin Robeson

  “The bottom line is that escalation will occur by proxies if we don’t change our response and reset our deterrence level. We don’t have the initiative and many allies are not joining our efforts to deter Houthi strikes against shipping. They also see that our policy and posture are not working. The strike in Baghdad is a response that may have unintended consequences. It is possible that the Iraqis can expel or reduce U.S. forces in Iraq which could have a major impact on counterterrorism operations ongoing in Iraq and Syria. If we want an effective deterrent at this point, we will need to increase our response to attacks at a 1-1 level.” – General Frank Kearney

  Please see (link) and attached PDF for full report.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 16:55

• An Explainer Of Jan. 6 And Its Aftermath
  An Explainer Of Jan. 6 And Its Aftermath

  

  Authored by Joseph Hanneman via The Epoch Times,

  It was a day of infamy.

  Worse than Pearl Harbor, 9/11, or even the Civil War, Americans were told.

  A bloody insurrection by a wild, ruthless, armed mob of election deniers.

  A coup d’etat.

  A revolution.

  That first Wednesday in January 2021, however, was none of the above.

  

  Yet Jan. 6 will forever be a prominent part of American history—in ways that few people fully realize.

  It was most certainly a fork in the road.

  Defining and understanding that historic day requires solid information, full context, and a willingness to look beyond the narratives that began before Jan. 6 was even a few hours old.

  Jan. 6 is part of a much larger political and societal movement designed to usher in a “new America,” according to Victor Davis Hanson, an American classicist, military historian, and political commentator at the Hoover Institution.

  “What’s happened in America is not public opinion but institutional control is driving the United States in a direction that was never intended to go, to the degree that they are saying to America, ‘We are morally superior to the old America. This is a new America,’” Mr. Hanson said in an “American Thought Leaders” interview.

  “And that gives us the right to use any means necessary to achieve a morally superior end. You are deplorable, you’re irredeemable, you’re a clinger, you’re a semi-fascist, you’re crazy, you’re ultra-MAGA, and you don’t have the right to object to the means that we’re using.”

  To mark the third anniversary, The Epoch Times offers this guide to Jan. 6 to help the uninitiated and well-versed alike better understand this complex topic.

  

  In an Oct. 28, 2023, interview with Jan Jekielek of ‘American Thought Leaders,” historian Victor Davis Hanson said America is being pulled to places it was never meant to go. (Epoch TV)

  What Was Jan. 6?

  It was a day of rallies and protests held on the National Mall, the Ellipse, and the U.S. Capitol grounds in Washington. The driving force was a widely held belief that the 2020 presidential election was marred by suspicious activity, a lack of security, and alleged widespread fraud with mail-in ballots and electronic voting.

  Massive crowds came to Washington to hear President Donald Trump speak and to put pressure on a joint session of Congress to take seriously the elector challenges expected to be filed by representatives of at least six states under Title 3 U.S. Code § 15.

  Why Does Jan. 6 Matter?

  Jan. 6 and its aftermath has had a broad impact on American society.. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI launched an unprecedented use of federal power that—while currently wielded against people right of center—could easily be unleashed against any group.

  The Jan. 6 investigations and prosecutions have raised serious concerns about due process, pretrial detention, jail conditions, equal protection under the law, and—perhaps most significantly—First Amendment guarantees.

  How Big Were the Crowds?

  Estimates are all over the map, from 400,000 to upwards of 3 million at the Ellipse. At the peak of activity at and near the U.S. Capitol between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m., Republican U.S. House investigators estimate crowd size at 250,000. The largest crowds gathered on the west front of Capitol grounds.

  

  Thousands of supporters for President Donald Trump pack the Washington Mall for a rally in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021. (Joseph Prezioso/AFP via Getty Images)

  When Did the Trouble Start?

  At 12:53 p.m., more than 20 minutes before President Trump finished speaking at the Ellipse, a fast-growing crowd kicked over metal barricades guarding the Peace Circle and advanced to the northwest sidewalk of the U.S. Capitol.

  Seconds before 12:55 p.m., protesters picked up the bicycle-rack barriers and shoved them into five U.S. Capitol Police officers. Officer Carolyn Edwards was knocked off her feet and her head struck the concrete steps, causing a concussion.

  With that barricade down, the crowd moved quickly to defeat two more police barricades and soon swarmed the west plaza underneath the inauguration stage. By 1 p.m., thousands of protesters began pressing against a hastily assembled line of Capitol Police officers.

  When Did Violence and Rioting Erupt?

  The crowd on the west plaza was amped up and agitated. The conversations along the police line included protesters telling police why they were so angry and questioning why officers would oppose their efforts to get election answers. A few minor skirmishes broke out.

  A protester on the north end of the police line screamed into a megaphone: “You can’t kill us all! We are here to stay! We’re not going anywhere! We want in! We want in!”

  “I’m a combat veteran,” one protester told a police officer.

  “If it’s an unconstitutional order, it is our duty as Americans to disobey those orders. I know you guys have it in your hearts. Do the right thing. Do the right thing. That’s all I’m asking.”

  The true flashpoint came just before 1:06 p.m. when U.S. Capitol Police Deputy Chief Eric Waldow ordered “less than lethal” force be used on the crowd.

  

  Bystanders try to stop the profuse bleeding from the face of Joshua Black, who was shot in the face by Capitol Police on Jan. 6, 2021. (Special to The Epoch Times)

  “I got a crowd fighting with officers, pushing, throwing projectiles,” he broadcast on USCP radio.

  “I have given warnings about chemical munitions. I need the less-than-lethal team positioned above me to identify the agitators and start deploying. Launch, launch, launch!”

  Video shot by a protester with a camera on an elevated stick—obtained by The Epoch Times—doesn’t show fighting or projectiles being thrown in the area where Deputy Chief Waldow stood at 1:06 p.m. and where force was about to be deployed.

  Just before 1:07 p.m., a Capitol Police grenadier shot protester Joshua M. Black, 47, in the left cheek with a projectile. Mr. Black immediately began bleeding profusely. A large blood stain on the concrete remained visible all afternoon.

  Word spread quickly through the crowd that a protester had been shot.

  As bystanders pressed Mr. Black’s wound to stop the bleeding, other protesters began screaming at police.

  The mood and tenor of the crowd changed at that moment.

  When Was the Capitol Breached?

  A yet-to-be-identified man known only by the hashtag #RedOnRedGlasses sailed a long 2-by-4 plank through a window near the Senate Wing Door at about 2:12 p.m.

  Proud Boys defendant Dominic Pezzola used a riot shield to smash the same window.

  In short order, dozens of people were streaming into the Crypt level of the Capitol.

  Were There Deaths and Injuries on Jan. 6?

  Four Trump supporters died at the Capitol on Jan. 6: Benjamin Philips, 50, Kevin Greeson, 55, Ashli Babbitt, 35, and Rosanne Boyland, 34.

  Ms. Babbitt was shot and killed by Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd just outside of the House Speaker’s Lobby at 2:44 p.m. Mr. Byrd was subsequently cleared by USCP and the U.S. Department of Justice, but the shooting remains highly controversial. A civil suit against the federal government was lodged on Jan. 5.

  

  Ronald McAbee (in the red cap at center) leans over a prone Rosanne Boyland. Another protester does CPR on the lifeless woman on Jan. 6, 2021. (Special to The Epoch Times)

  Ms. Boyland collapsed at the mouth of the Lower West Terrace tunnel at about 4:22 p.m. and was crushed in a stampede. Police at the tunnel entrance ignored pleas to render medical aid. Metropolitan Police Department Officer Lila Morris inexplicably picked up a wooden walking stick and beat Ms. Boyland in the head and ribs. Ms. Morris faced no discipline for her actions.

  Once Ms. Boyland was pulled inside the Capitol, advanced lifesaving care was started by MPD, U.S. Park Police, and Capitol Police. Efforts continued on two levels of the Capitol. Ms. Boyland was pronounced dead at a hospital at 6:09 p.m.

  Mr. Philips was determined to have suffered a fatal stroke. Security video obtained by The Epoch Times showed Mr. Philips was not struck by police munitions as widely believed. Mr. Greeson suffered a heart attack, although at least one witness claims he was struck in the head by a police projectile before collapsing.

  Some 140 police officers from Capitol Police and MPD suffered injuries on Jan. 6. Some of the injuries were career-ending. An unknown number of protesters were injured, including Dominic Vargo, who was shoved off a stairway ledge by a Capitol Police motorcycle officer just after 2 p.m., and Mark Griffin, whose leg was broken when an MPD officer fired a 40mm crowd control munition at him from point-blank range.

  How Did the FBI and DOJ Respond?

  The decision was quickly made to launch the largest criminal investigation in U.S. history to pursue protesters and rioters. The ramp-up effort was described by top prosecutor Michael Sherwin as a “shock and awe” campaign, borrowing a slogan from the U.S. invasion of Iraq in the Persian Gulf War.

  

  FBI manhunt information is displayed on the side of a bus stop in downtown Washington D.C. on Jan. 13, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)

  The FBI set up a web page with photos of criminal suspects, and eager online sleuths excelled at identifying people and turning them in to the FBI. The DOJ established a “rapid-indictment” unit to level charges against a long list of suspects.

  Protesters found themselves being turned in to the FBI by neighbors, former classmates, and—in some cases—by ex-spouses and children. Arrests have continued unabated for three years, with the total now approaching 1,250.

  How Has the FBI Handled the Arrests of Suspects?

  The FBI’s practice of using SWAT teams to apprehend and arrest Jan. 6 suspects in dozens of cases has brought condemnation from civil rights attorneys and current and former FBI special agents.

  In one case chronicled recently in The Epoch Times, the Westbury family of Lindstrom, Minnesota, faced two SWAT raids, the first involving only misdemeanor charges. The second raid involved up to 60 agents and the use of drones to fly over the property—even into the backyard chicken coop.

  

  Dozens of heavily armed FBI agents conduct a predawn raid on the home of Robert and Rosemarie Westbury in Lindstrom, Minn., on Oct. 4, 2021. (Courtesy of the Westbury Family)

  “For a nonviolent misdemeanor—a nonviolent, non-felony misdemeanor—they came out with 20 to 25 FBI agents fully vested up, AR-15s all pointed right at me like I’m a domestic terrorist,” Jonah Westbury told The Epoch Times.

  Former FBI special agent Stephen Friend said his decision to protest these tactics led to him being suspended without pay and eventually forced him to resign from his “dream job.” He testified before Congress in May 2023 along with special agent Garret O’Boyle and analyst Marcus Allen.

  Are Defendants Mistreated in Jail?

  Defendants have reported many cases of abuse by jail guards and terrible living conditions at the District of Columbia jail, referred to derisively by inmates as the “DC Gulag.” Defense attorney Joseph McBride wrote and submitted an 11-page report to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Amnesty International. He said he never received a response.

  “January Sixers are regularly being held in solitary confinement for 22 or 23 hours a day in DC-GITMO. Dubbed the Patriot Unit, this previously defunct part of DC-GITMO, was reopened specifically to house January Sixers,” Mr. McBride wrote.

  “To put it mildly, the facility is disgusting. Black mold, brown drinking water, and poor ventilation are but a few of the problems with the facility itself.”

  The U.S. Marshals Service conducted a surprise inspection of the DC facility on Nov. 2, 2021, that led to the removal of some 400 inmates, but the Jan. 6 defendants were not moved. Two days later, four members of Congress demanded access to the jail after being turned away repeatedly by the deputy warden.

  

  U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), with colleagues Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) and Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) (left), speaks at a press conference addressing the treatment of the Jan. 6 detainees at the D.C. jail in Washington on Dec. 7, 2021. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

  Interviews with pretrial detainees on Nov. 4, 2021, led Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) to publish a 28-page report, “Unusually Cruel,” detailing conditions at the facility. Jan. 6 defendants reported being forced to sleep with the lights on and having to carry their mattresses around the jail in the dead of night.

  Others reported physical abuse, including one detainee who said guards dropped him head-first onto the concrete floor.

  Why Wasn’t the National Guard at the Capitol?

  According to former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, his pre-Jan. 6 request for the National Guard was squelched because “Pelosi will never go for it,” referring to former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

  Mr. Sund’s comments were spoken at a hearing of the Committee on House Administration’s Subcommittee on Oversight on Sept. 19, 2023. The contention about Ms. Pelosi came from former Senate Sergeant at Arms Michael Stenger, Mr. Sund testified.

  According to former senior Trump aide Kash Patel, President Trump authorized up to 20,000 National Guard troops for use in D.C. and elsewhere on Jan. 6, 2021, but the use of those troops was later rejected by D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser and the U.S. Capitol Police. Mr. Patel said former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) misled the public by saying Trump never ordered troops to the Capitol.

  

  Members of the National Guard patrol the area outside of the U.S. Capitol during the impeachment trial of former president Donald Trump at the Capitol in Washington on Feb. 10, 2021. (Jose Luis Magana/AP Photo)

  “She knows the truth—45 [Trump] authorized the National Guard days before Jan. 6, and Pelosi and Bowser rejected it,” Mr. Patel told The Epoch Times in 2022.

  “Cheney knows it’s unconstitutional for any president to ever order the military to deploy domestically. He may only authorize their use; then there must be a request.”

  Mr. Sund detailed his frustrated efforts on Jan. 6 to get authorization to ask for National Guard backup, then having to fight resistance from the Department of Defense. He said the New Jersey State Police arrived at the Capitol to assist faster than the National Guard, which was staged minutes away from the Capitol.

  By the time the National Guard put boots on Capitol grounds on Jan. 6, police had restored order and pushed most of the protesters out.

  What Legal Issues Have Arisen From Jan. 6 Prosecutions?

  In December, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to the DOJ’s use of a white-collar-crime statute to prosecute more than 330 Jan. 6 defendants for “corruptly obstructing an official proceeding,” a felony punishable by up to 20 years in prison.

  Federal prosecutors claim that the delay of a joint session of Congress to hear elector objections and count Electoral College votes from the presidential election constitutes a crime under 18 U.S. Code Section 1512(c).

  Defense attorneys argue that the statute, enacted as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, was intended only to prosecute corporate fraud in publicly traded companies, not First Amendment political protests. The case of Joseph W. Fischer v. United States is the first Jan. 6 case to make it onto the Supreme Court calendar and could have a major impact on many cases if the high court strikes down the DOJ actions.

  Dozens of other cases from Jan. 6 are in various stages of appeal. These include claims that the DOJ withheld exculpatory evidence from defense teams, resulting in unfair bench and jury trials. Other cases cite the refusal by federal judges to grant zero change of venue requests as evidence that defendants are not facing juries of their peers.

  What Impact Has the Release of the Capitol Security Video Had?

  In 2022, then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) gave exclusive access to more than 40,000 hours of Capitol Police security video to Fox News, The Epoch Times, Just the News, and columnist Julie Kelly.

  The video provided to those media outlets led to some revelations, including an important look at the medical aid provided to Ms. Boyland as she awaited transport via a D.C. Fire and EMS Service ambulance.

  

  Paramedics stop the gurney carrying Rosanne Boyland near the House Wing Door at the U.S. Capitol and move her to the floor to continue CPR on Jan. 6, 2021. (U.S. Capitol Police/Screenshot via The Epoch Times)

  However, the House has not fulfilled about half of the video requests made by The Epoch Times, limiting the media’s ability to fully cover the events of Jan. 6.

  Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has decided to hire a contractor to blur the faces of identifiable persons on the video, setting off a fury of complaints on social media. That decision will prevent media and defendants from using facial recognition software to track suspicious actors and determine the numbers of undercover agents and informants in the crowds that day.

  What’s Next for Jan. 6 Investigations?

  It remains to be seen if GOP House members will successfully press for a new Jan. 6 committee to investigate the myriad issues ignored by the Democrat-controlled House Select Committee in 2022.

  Major unresolved questions include what role undercover police, federal agents, and informants played in the crowds on Jan. 6.

  Court documents filed by Jan. 6 defendant William Pope of Topeka, Kansas, exposed the presence of dozens of undercover Metropolitan Police Department Electronic Surveillance Unit officers on Jan. 6.

  

  Bobby Powell is interviewed in Terra Ceia, Fla., in November 2022 for “The Real Story of Jan. 6 Part 2: The Long Road Home,” a documentary from The Epoch Times. (Paulio Shakespeare/The Epoch Times)

  One of those officers appeared to participate as an agitator, helping protesters over police barricades and urging them to go up to, and into, the Capitol.

  Radio journalist Bobby Powell has spent three years trying to get investigators and journalists to look at a video he shot on the east patio of the Capitol, showing a man who looked like an undercover operative vandalizing a large sheet of glass in a Capitol window. Mr. Powell’s story is told in The Epoch Times’ new documentary: “The Real Story of Jan. 6: The Long Road Home.”

  There will likely also be fallout from alleged perjured testimony given at the first trial of Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes and four other defendants that ran from Sept. 27 through Nov. 29, 2022.

  Journalist Steve Baker from Blaze Media says his video investigation showed that an alleged confrontation between Oath Keepers and USCP Officer Harry Dunn never happened because the witness—USCP Special Agent David Lazarus—was nowhere near Mr. Dunn or the Oath Keepers at the time.

  The revelations cast serious doubt on testimony given by Mr. Lazarus and Mr. Dunn in the Oath Keepers trial. One Oath Keepers defense attorney, Brad Geyer, said the development should lead to Oath Keepers guilty verdicts being set aside.

  Perhaps the biggest remaining mystery is the identity of the person who planted pipe bombs at the D.C. headquarters of both the GOP and Democrat parties on Jan. 5, 2021.

  The FBI has increased its reward—it’s now at $500,000—for information leading to an arrest, but has reported little progress over the past three years.

  The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has refused to release its analysis of the bombs after The Epoch Times filed a Freedom of Information Act request in 2022.

  *  *  *

  The Epoch Times original documentary “The Real Story of January 6 Part 2: The Long Road Home” will be available to full subscribers starting Saturday, Jan. 6, at 8:30 p.m. ET on EpochTV.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 16:22

• JPMorgan: Housing Affordability Could Be Restored Within 3.5 Years, But There's A Catch…
  JPMorgan: Housing Affordability Could Be Restored Within 3.5 Years, But There’s A Catch…

  Authored by Sam Bourgi via CreditNews.com,

  There may be light at the end of the tunnel for Americans struggling to afford a home, but it will take at least three and a half years to get there, according to Joe Seydl, JPMorgan’s senior markets economist.

  

  Why three and a half years?

  According to Seydl, that’s when Americans’ paychecks will catch up to soaring housing costs.

  That translates to an annual income growth of 7%.

  “If you are looking to buy a house in the United States, don’t wait for, or expect, a home price crash,” Seydl wrote in a research report.

  “We don’t foresee one coming (thankfully), nor do we think one is necessary to restore affordability at the national level. We think time and continued robust income growth can cure the problem on their own,” he explained.

  

  There’s just one caveat to Seydl’s analysis: While housing affordability could potentially be restored in 3.5 years nationally, it’ll take longer in major metro areas.

  If you are looking to snap up a house in Miami, Chicago, Houston, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, or New York, the wait may extend to five years.

  While Seydl’s analysis should provide a boost of confidence to Americans struggling to afford their first home, they shouldn’t celebrate just yet.

  Can wage growth be sustained?

  Seydl’s conclusion hinges on “incomes continuing to rise at a robust rate.” But can such growth be sustained?

  According to the Atlanta Fed, wages were growing at 5.2% from September to November—much higher than at any point over the last two decades but down from a peak of 6.7% in mid-2022.

  Meanwhile, inflation still remains well above the target and keeps eating into Americans’ paychecks. In fact, adjusted for inflation, Americans’ wages have shrunk by 5% since pre-Covid.

  Looking ahead to 2024, labor experts aren’t expecting a wage renaissance either, pointing to shrinking annual budgets for payrolls.

  “By all expectations, the mood for [wage growth in] 2024 is radically different than what it was going into 2023,” Aaron Terrazas, Glassdoor’s chief economist, told CNBC.

  According to a recent industry survey by Mercer, American companies are budgeting for a 3.9% increase in wages this year, down from 4.1% in 2023.

  The other factor driving housing affordability

  While higher wages would certainly improve housing affordability, fixing the chronically low supply of real estate may prove to be a much bigger challenge.

  According to the National Association of Realtors (NAR), America is grappling with a “severe housing shortage that’s years in the making.”

  There are so few listings that even one of history’s largest jumps in mortgage rates hasn’t shaken the housing market.

  In fact, as of November, median home prices stood at $409,000—16% higher than before Covid.

  According to NAR, this has affected average or ‘middle-income buyers’ the most.

  “Middle-income buyers face the largest shortage of homes among all income groups, making it even harder for them to build wealth through homeownership,” said Nadia Evangelou, senior economist and director of real estate research at the National Association of Realtors.

  “Even with the current level of listings, the housing affordability and shortage issues wouldn’t be so severe if there were enough homes for all price ranges,” she said.

  According to Redfin data, there were just 3.82 million existing homes for sale in 2023—a 7.3% decline from the previous year and the lowest since 2010.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 16:20

• "Have A Metamucil And Delete Your Account" – Harvard Prof Self-Immolates With Elitist Attack On Chris Rufo
  “Have A Metamucil And Delete Your Account” – Harvard Prof Self-Immolates With Elitist Attack On Chris Rufo

  It would be an understatement to say that academic elites are absolutely seething over the takedown of Harvard president Claudine Gay, whose rise to power was brought to you by the letters DEI, and of course capital P for Plagiarism.

  

  There were two major players involved in her downfall – billionaire investor Bill Ackman, and journalist Chris Rufo.

  Now, establishment tentacles like Business Insider, and the NY Times are going after Ackman’s wife for allegedly plagiarizing part of her dissertation (which, after reading their hit-piece, is maybe a 0.01 on the Gay scale).

  They’re also coming after Rufo, of course – and they aren’t sending their best.

  On Thursday, Harvard Professor of Government and African American Studies, Jennifer Hochschild, implied that Rufo had ‘stolen valor’ by claiming he was a Harvard alum, because he went through Harvard’s extension program as opposed to their graduate program.

  

  “On Rufo: what do integrity police say about his claim to have “master’s degree from Harvard,” which is actually from the open-enrollment Extension School?” Hochschild wrote on X. “Those students are great – I teach them- but they are not the same as what we normally think of as Harvard graduate students.”

  She was immediately smoked by Community Notes:

  

  And then, there’s the replies:

  “You’re a joke. Claudine Gay plagiarized the acknowledgements from one of your papers and now, out of some bizarre desire for revenge, you’re trashing your own university’s continuing education school,” said Rufo, adding “Have a Metamucil and delete your account.”

  You’re a joke. Claudine Gay plagiarized the acknowledgements from one of your papers and now, out of some bizarre desire for revenge, you’re trashing your own university’s continuing education school. Have a Metamucil and delete your account.

  — Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) January 5, 2024

  “If what the Harvard elite are saying about the extension program is true then I think you and every other graduate has a class action lawsuit on your hands,” one user suggested, adding “They sold you a bill of goods. billed your program as an extension of Harvard, charged you exorbitant fees, and then turned around and said it really wasn’t Harvard.”

  It is a masters degree. If you claim otherwise, then Harvard has engaged in false advertising and is subject to a lawsuit for fraud. Is it your claim that Harvard has engaged in fraudulently advertising?

  — Cernovich (@Cernovich) January 5, 2024

  Hochschild kept digging… posting “Rufo could have proudly and honorably said, “I pulled myself up by bootstraps;to prove it I have master’s degree from Harvard extension school, along with other smart and gutsy students.”Instead he used weasel words to try to attach himself to Ivy status and prestige.Insecurity??”

  Except, Rufo hasn’t attempted to conceal anything…

  Lmao, you just keep proving how far Harvard has fallen. Here is his post. Good for you trashing your students. pic.twitter.com/kshrYLOGYk

  — Nick Joseph (@NickJoseph44) January 6, 2024

  Every word makes sense when viewed through this lense. pic.twitter.com/Qxglih40QG

  — Dr. Ranch Wood (@UVIL1991) January 5, 2024

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

  So a rude, crude, “Harvard extension” guy who didn’t go to Harvard, brought down the Harvard president over the fierce objections of the Harvard board and the Harvard establishment. Well, what does that say about the Harvard establishment?

  — Dinesh D’Souza (@DineshDSouza) January 5, 2024

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

  This is a professor at Harvard. If she has a problem with the way Harvard hands out degrees through its extension school, she could have said so before. Or resigned. Instead, she just reveals herself as the Margaret Dumont of academia. https://t.co/lQAsY0asGZ

  — John Podhoretz (@jpodhoretz) January 6, 2024

  America is in serious need of an academic renaissance. 

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 15:45

• FAA Grounds Boeing 737 Max 9 Jets After Exit Door Incident
  FAA Grounds Boeing 737 Max 9 Jets After Exit Door Incident

  Update (1310ET):

  The Federal Aviation Administration announced a temporary grounding for Boeing 737 MAX 9 jets. These jets will need to be inspected before returning to service. This comes after a mid-cabin exit door flew off mid-flight of an Alaska Airlines MAX 9 on Friday evening.

  • FAA ORDERS TEMPORARY GROUNDING OF CERTAIN BOEING 737 MAX 9 JETS
  • FAA: PLANES MUST BE INSPECTED BEFORE THEY CAN RETURN TO FLIGHT
  • FAA REQUIRING INSPECTIONS OF CERTAIN BOEING 737 MAX 9 PLANES

  *    *    * 

  Update (1250ET):

  Sources tell CNBC that United Airlines plans to ground dozens of its Boeing 737 MAX 9 jets for inspections following an incident involving a mid-cabin exit door on an Alaska Airlines MAX 9 jet on Friday evening. This would mean both Alaska Airlines and United Airlines would have both grounded their MAX 9 jet fleets.

  Here’s what X users are saying about the Alaska Airlines incident:

  Another video. Confirms a rear plug door failed in flight. Super rare, brand new @Boeing 737 max 9 failure. Absolutely NOT something a passenger could do. This is a mechanical failure and not something maintenance would be at fault for. https://t.co/xUCpXIYml1

  — Shane Connor 🇺🇲 (@p3d_tesla) January 6, 2024

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

  A big deal: Max was involved in 2 catastrophic crashes in ‘18 & ‘19, causation, trim failure.

  Boeing originally denied fault & was accused of profit over safety.

  Wouldn’t set foot in one.

  Alaska Airlines grounds 737 Max 9 planes after window blow out https://t.co/GyjGQrvPFq

  — Tonksey 🇪🇺 #GTTO #ToryCorruption #Antifa #BLM (@JohnTonks) January 6, 2024

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

  If you wish to do anything right this year, you can permanently BAN every and all MAX 8,9 whatever other number aircraft from your company. The program is a catastrophic failure with proof and you’re daily putting tens of thousands of souls lives at risk. That MIGHT 1/2

  — Now Serving Whatever Number You’re Not 💁🏼‍♀️ (@RuthNicola85) January 6, 2024

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

  *    *    * 

  A brand new Boeing 737 MAX 9, operated by Alaska Airlines, was forced to make an emergency landing at Portland International Airport shortly after takeoff on Friday evening due to its mid-cabin exit door detaching from the aircraft mid-flight. This incident was recorded and shared on social media platform X. 

  

  The Max jet, registered as N704AL, was operating as AS1282 from PDX to Ontario International Airport with more than 170 passengers on board. Data from the aviation tracking website Flightradar24 shows the jet was about ten minutes into the flight, reaching 16,000 feet, with a ground speed of nearly 400 knots when the incident unfolded. 

  

  “During the flight, a sudden decompression occurred once the door detached, leading to an emergency landing. In video footage captured during the incident, the emergency exit can be seen torn off and oxygen masks deployed. There are no reports of serious injuries,” aviation blog Airways Magazine wrote in a note. 

  

  Passengers recorded the shocking moment when the mid-aft door ripped off. 

  BREAKING: Alaska Airlines plane makes emergency landing in Portland, Oregon after window blows out in mid-air.

  Several items, including phones, were sucked out of the plane when it suddenly depressurized. Everyone is safe. pic.twitter.com/BtOB1RU3tn

  — BNO News (@BNONews) January 6, 2024

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

  According to BBC News, Alaska Airlines said 65 of its 737 Max 9 aircraft were suspended after the incident for ‘inspections.’ 

  Boeing said it was briefed on the incident and was “working to gather more information.” 

  The door incident came weeks after Boeing reported 737 Max jets had yet another quality control issue: “A possible loose bolt in the rudder control system.” 

  Max jets have faced several major issues related to different parts and systems. The most notable defect was MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System), which led to two separate crashes, killing a combined 346 people.

  Several months ago, fuselage supplier Spirit was found to have improperly drilled holes in the aft pressure bulkhead. 

  We need to revisit internal communications from Boeing employees that pointed out Max jets were “designed by clowns who in turn are supervised by monkeys.” 

  The latest incident of a door detaching mid-flight certainly does not instill confidence in this troubled aircraft. 

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 15:10

• Is 2024 Bitcoin's Big Year?
  Is 2024 Bitcoin’s Big Year?

  Authored by Michael Washburn via The Epoch Times,

  U.S. regulators’ pending approval of the spot Bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF), which could come as soon as next week, and severe criticisms of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for missteps in the prosecution of a Utah-based firm, DEBT Box, and for a general pattern of regulatory overreach, have combined to give the cryptocurrency market unprecedented momentum in 2024, financial and legal expert analysts have told The Epoch Times.

  For Bitcoin, 2024 is off to a strong start. On Tuesday, Jan. 2, riding high on expectations of spot ETF approval, Bitcoin hit $45,000, before dipping modestly to $44,000 today.

  

  The severe risks that regulators associate with Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are real indeed (though most importantly, not unique to bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency), and criminals make wide use of Bitcoin scams to rip off unsophisticated investors, often older people who did not grow up with social media and online trading platforms. The latter problem is so acute that police in U.S. states routinely issue warnings about the dangers of investing in crypto online. Crypto is still a highly volatile asset, and the value of a digital portfolio can disappear virtually overnight.

  The conviction in November of former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried on all the felony charges he faced, after just a few hours of jury deliberations, has also not helped the sector’s image.

  Yet a confluence of factors is still likely to make 2024 the most decisive and transformative year thus far for the cryptocurrency, analysts say. Market players are fed up with SEC Chair Gary Gensler’s war on digital innovation and failure to adhere to legal protocols as he goes about trying to control an industry he has blasted as “rife with fraud, rife with hucksters,” the analysts say.

  The financial markets have taken note of Bitcoin’s performance in the first days of the new year. For much of 2022 and 2023, Bitcoin struggled to emerge from the “crypto winter” and the fallout from the collapse of FTX and other exchanges, and its price vacillated between $20,000 and $30,000.

  Weighing Spot Bitcoin ETFs

  Digital assets are increasingly in vogue at prominent financial institutions. Many of them, such as BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, have gone from a view of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies largely consistent with that of Mr. Gensler, to finding value in digital money and seeking to parlay that value into high returns for investors.

  BlackRock CEO Larry Fink is among those whose view of Bitcoin has undergone a radical shift.

  In October, a former BlackRock managing director said that his former boss, Mr. Fink, and U.S. financial regulators largely agreed on the inevitability of spot Bitcoin ETF adoption, and it was just a question of when.

  Despite the slight dip, much of the market still believes the long-awaited approval is finally at hand, and is bullish. John Deaton, a lawyer who has represented cryptocurrencies platforms in legal battles with the SEC, does not credit such rumors of a regulatory refusal, and sees many factors coming together to make 2024 a huge year.

  “I believe Bitcoin will do well between 2024 and 2025. When you combine the approval of a spot ETF, with the halving in April, along with an election year where you know the Fed will attempt to manipulate the economy, lower interest rates, and buy assets through quantitative easing, it’s a perfect storm for price appreciation,” Mr. Deaton told The Epoch Times.

  “Halving” refers to a process of slashing by 50 percent the payment for mining Bitcoin, to help keep it scarce and retain its value.

  

  As the week came to a close, CoinTelegraph reports that 19b-4 amendments were filed for spot BTC ETF applications from asset managers BlackRock, Valkyrie, Grayscale, Bitwise, Hashdex, ARK 21Shares, Invesco Galaxy, Fidelity, Franklin Templeton, VanEck and WisdomTree. 

  The filings are one of the last stages in the SEC approval process, but S-1 documents must be completed in order for U.S. exchanges to begin listing shares of investment securities with direct exposure to crypto.

  Some experts have speculated that final approval for the spot Bitcoin ETFs will drop before Jan. 10 – the deadline for an offering from ARK Invest and 21Shares. A potential approval could mean greater adoption of crypto in the U.S. and worldwide.

  There’s the first 19b-4 amendment filing! Here we go. https://t.co/dz01aborw7

  — James Seyffart (@JSeyff) January 5, 2024

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

  Meanwhile, in a post on X (formerly Twitter), Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas showed optimism that the SEC would approve a Bitcoin ETF by the start of next week:

  “Yeah it’s basically done. Latest I’m hearing (from multiple sources) that final S-1s are due 8am on Monday as SEC is trying to line everyone up for Jan 11th launch.”

  DEBT Box Fiasco

  The cryptocurrency industry has long had a tense, contentious relationship with SEC Chair Mr. Gensler, who has made no secret of his loathing of cryptocurrency and the firms that mine and trade crypto tokens.

  In an interview with Bloomberg Television last July, Mr. Gensler said, “A lot of investors should be aware it’s not only a highly speculative asset class, it’s also one that they currently should not assume that they’re getting the protections of the securities laws, even though the securities laws apply to many of those tokens.

  “The platforms often are commingling and trading against you and have market makers that are on the other side of your trades … Right now, this is a field rife with fraud, rife with hucksters. There are good faith actors as well, but there are far too many that aren’t,” Mr. Gensler continued.

  As part of his crusade to stamp out such fraud, Mr. Gensler has gone after crypto exchanges of many sizes and profiles, and SEC enforcement has taken a noticeably harsher tone.

  In August 2023, the SEC announced an enforcement action against Digital Licensing Inc., a Draper, Utah-based firm doing business under the name DEBT Box, and 18 of its executives and personnel. The SEC’s complaint charged the company with raising about $50 million, along with unknown amounts of Bitcoin and Ether, with fraudulent claims on social media that investors would make substantial profits investing in tokens generated through crypto mining. According to the complaint, the tokens pitched to investors were the results not of mining but simply of DEBT Box’s ordinary blockchain code.

  

  U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission chairman Gary Gensler testifies during a Senate Banking Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington on Sept. 12, 2023.(Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

  In its zeal to prosecute DEBT Box, the SEC went so far as to make emergency applications for a temporary restraining order and seizure of the firm’s assets, on the grounds that such steps were necessary to stop DEBT Box from transferring investors’ money to offshore accounts.

  But DEBT Box executives vigorously challenged the claims that the SEC put forth to justify seizing the company’s assets, and U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby agreed that the regulator had exceeded its mandate and made materially false claims.

  On Dec. 21, Gurbir Grewal, head of the SEC’s enforcement division, took the highly unusual step of apologizing for his agency’s conduct.

  “I fully appreciate the extraordinary responsibility entrusted to the SEC when enforcing federal securities laws. … I understand that the division fell short of these standards in this case, and I apologize for that shortfall,” Mr. Grewal said.

  The SEC’s PR Nightmare

  The SEC’s admission that it behaved in an arbitrary manner more befitting an authoritarian regime than a financial agency operating under Constitutional strictures affirms what many have long believed about the SEC and its orientation under Mr. Gensler.

  “The SEC only gave a half-hearted apology because they had no choice. The federal judge is considering issuing sanctions against the lawyers at the SEC. That is how bad their behavior and conduct in these crypto cases has become,” Mr. Deaton told The Epoch Times.

  In Mr. Deaton’s view, the severe blowback directed at the SEC’s overreach in this matter is not surprising given the regulators’ failed efforts to prosecute Ripple Labs on the grounds that its crypto token, XRP, was a security, and that Ripple had engaged in the unlicensed sale of a product that fell under the SEC’s purview.

  Though the SEC may not have made material misstatements of fact in seeking to prosecute Ripple, the SEC’s arguments in the case, which Judge Analise Torres found to be invalid in a 34-page ruling issued on July 13, 2023, were so deeply flawed that it was clear the regulator was operating without any grasp of legal nuance or the bounds of its mandate, Mr. Deaton believes.

  “The federal judge in the Ripple case stated that the lawyers at the SEC actually ‘lack faithful allegiance to the law’ and only care about advancing their own self-serving agenda,” Mr. Deaton said.

  Mr. Deaton then called the DEBT Box case an “egregious” instance of overreach where a government agency felt entitled to seize the assets of private citizens without a trial, and without an opportunity to face the accusers and present counter-arguments in court, or any of the other niceties of due process.

  “This was a temporary restraining order where the defendant was not present. It’s an ex parte hearing with the judge, and they intentionally misled the judge to believe that DEBT Box was closing bank accounts and moving money overseas, and if the judge didn’t freeze all the assets, innocent people would lose their funds,” Mr. Deaton said.

  “Based on that, the judge froze the accounts and DEBT Box employees’ payroll checks bounced, which meant people couldn’t pay their mortgages and other bills. What the SEC did was criminal and they should be punished,” he continued.

  

  U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission building in Washington on Nov. 13, 2023. (Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times)

  Chronic Failures

  This is not the first case in which the SEC’s conduct has come in for harsh criticism. Mr. Deaton mentioned the case of Stamford, Connecticut-based Grayscale Investments in this connection, noting that a U.S. appeals court found the SEC to have acted arbitrarily in its zeal to close the firm down.

  The extent of the agency’s wrongdoing in the DEBT Box and other matters does not redound to the SEC’s credit, and the opprobrium now directed at the regulator cuts across partisan lines, he observed.

  No one can claim that a Republican appointee hampered the SEC’s campaign against Ripple, and that the regulator might have fared better in a legal proceeding under the oversight of a Democrat. After all, Judge Torres is anything but a Trump supporter, said Mr. Deaton, who does not expect Mr. Gensler to retain his position as SEC bigwig indefinitely.

  “Judge Torres is a lifelong Democrat appointed by President Obama, and all she did was follow and apply the law. Gary Gensler is a bad faith regulator, and no other SEC chair has lost so much in the court system. Democrats are realizing that he is a political liability,” Mr. Deaton said.

  Broad Acceptance

  Adding further momentum to Bitcoin’s rise, regulators outside the United States increasingly view cryptocurrencies as a hedge against rampant inflation and a means for non-institutional investors—in other words, ordinary citizens—to find some prosperity in tumultuous times.

  Josip Putarek, a crypto analyst at the gaming platform dappGambl, agreed that Bitcoin’s strong start in 2024 is largely a function of U.S. regulators’ imminent spot Bitcoin ETF approval, and suggested that other digital currencies may ride the same wave.

  “All eyes are on Bitcoin right now, and if it performs well, the money inflow to the crypto market may shift to Ethereum and other altcoins,” Mr. Putarek told The Epoch Times.

  “Approval of a spot Bitcoin ETF will drastically change the game, as it will open up inflows to Bitcoin from institutions, thus creating constant buy pressure,” he said.

  Citing the example of gold-based exchange-traded funds, Mr. Putarek suggested the spot Bitcoin ETF’s performance may be comparable.

  “Looking at gold, that ETF has multiplied its market capitalization several times since its launch. In addition, gold, which was in the $400 band in 2004, showed a growth performance of 370% in six years,” he said.

  But an even more important driver may be the rapidity with which various governments are turning to digital currencies.

  Latin America and Hong Kong

  “El Salvador was the first country to officially recognize Bitcoin as a payment unit in 2021, and many other countries will follow in the future. It’s just a matter of time. In my opinion, Argentina and Hong Kong could be among the first countries to join El Salvador in the journey,” Mr. Putarek said.

  Mr. Putarek cited the chronic inflation crippling Argentina’s markets as a reason why its newly elected president, Javier Milei, has adopted forceful pro-crypto rhetoric and drawn comparison to El Salvador’s president, Nayib Bukele.

  As for Hong Kong, the jurisdiction combines a highly tech-savvy, pro-crypto bent with a determination to adhere to the inter-governmental Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) international standards aimed at curbing the fraud and scams still associated with crypto, Mr. Putarek said. Hong Kong has updated its Anti-Money Laundering (AML) Ordinance to be compliant with FATF Recommendation 15, requiring firms to follow strict AML and anti-terrorist-financing protocols and operate under a license from the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission. Hong Kong has been a member of the FATF, which targets money laundering and terrorist financing, since 1991.

  In agreement on the direction of Argentina under Mr. Milei is Silvina Moschini, an analyst and the CEO of Unicorns Inc.

  “President-elect Milei demonstrates a noteworthy commitment to financial advancement, particularly in his alignment with crypto foundational values, advocating for minimal state intervention and free markets. This creates a promising landscape for digital assets in Argentina, suggesting a favorable environment for the tokenization of assets and broader financial innovation in the country,” Ms. Moschini told The Epoch Times.

  The appeal of crypto as a hedge in the midst of Argentina’s economic chaos has not diminished, Ms. Moschini believes.

  “Amid the economic challenges in Argentina, characterized by peso devaluation and high inflation, crypto adoption has surged as a practical solution for individuals seeking alternatives to navigate these issues,” she said.

  Ms. Moschini added that she expects the trend to gather force in tandem with the peso’s devaluation.

  People walk past a bank branch decorated with images of old Argentine peso bills, in Buenos Aires, Argentina, on Sept. 26, 2018. Argentina’s year on year inflation hit a staggering 142 percent during election week. (Eitan Abramovich/AFP via Getty Images)

  A Complex Environment

  At the moment, the headwinds in the United States and other countries may be favorable to broader adoption of crypto. At the same time, many observers are sober about the persistence of fraud and scams, and the continuing disrepute that they impart to digital asset trading and investing.

  It is important not to read too deeply into El Salvador’s decision to recognize Bitcoin as legal tender. After all, El Salvador is a small country with a set of economic circumstances that hardly apply elsewhere. When compared with traditional, or fiat, currencies, digital money is still at a disadvantage.

  “Crypto lacks the straightforwardness and ease of use that regular currencies bring to the market. Merchants aren’t supporting crypto. Crypto can be volatile, and coupled with its scaling issues, merchants are left with no choice but to deny crypto as a form of payment,” Laura K. Inamedinova, a partner at Dubai-based Illuminati Capital, told The Epoch Times.

  “Recently, we’ve seen payment providers like Mastercard and Visa support different crypto projects like Coinbase, Taurus, Circle, and others, but that’s not as widespread as we might want,” she added.

  In Ms. Inamedinova’s view, raising public awareness about the risks as well as the potential of digital currencies is crucial.

  “There’s still a large stigma around crypto being a scam, which is why educating the public is so important,” she said.

  Here is one more reason why the financial markets are at such a critical juncture, with regulatory approval of the spot Bitcoin ETF expected as early as next week.

  “In a case like this, spot ETFs could work in boosting the credibility of the Web3 space, but that’s not all. Crypto as a financial instrument needs to be simplified for the public,” Ms. Inadmedinova continued.

  The challenges and dangers are real but she views the market with guarded optimism. The Bitcoin halving expected in April, the pending rollout of the spot ETF, and various private initiatives will drive a bull market in 2024 and beyond, she believes.

  The Epoch Times has reached out to the SEC for comment.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 15:10

• Ukraine Again Targets Crimea & Belgorod In Large-Scale Drone & Missile Attacks
  Ukraine Again Targets Crimea & Belgorod In Large-Scale Drone & Missile Attacks

  At a moment the front lines are at a standstill and Ukraine is suffering severe manpower and ammunition supply woes, its military continues high-risk attacks on Russian territory, including two days of missile and drone launches on Crimea. Russia in return has been unleashing even harsher retaliatory strikes in Ukrainian cities, as it warned it would do.

  The Russian military has said Saturday it deflected a fresh missile attack on Crimea, having shot down four inbound Ukrainian missiles overnight. The day prior, Russia downed 36 attack drones over the peninsula, a defense ministry statement also said.

  

  However, Kiev said some of its projectiles made it through the anti-air measures, with Mykola Oleshchuk, the commander of Ukraine’s air force, announcing on social media: “Saki airfield! All targets have been shot!” – in reference to the Russian airbase in western Crimea. Ukraine’s military also said it targeted a command post near Sevastopol.

  Air raid sirens have been sounding in various border regions of Russia stretching back to Thursday:

  Air alerts were heard over the Russian oblasts of Krasnodar and Belgorod, as well as temporarily occupied Crimea, on Jan. 4 as Russia’s aggressive war on Ukraine increasingly hits closer to home in Russia.

  Russia claimed nearly 50 drones were used in the separate attacks, with explosions heard in occupied Crimea and Belgorod, and reports of injuries in Belgorod.

  In the latest direct hit on a residential neighborhood in Belgorod city, two Russian civilians were injured by shelling. Belgorod Vyacheslav Gladkov said on Telegram, “According to preliminary data there are two injured: one man has shrapnel wounds to the forearm, and another has shrapnel wounds to the shin.”

  “Windows were shattered in several apartments and more than 30 vehicles were damaged because of a shell explosion near an apartment building,” according to regional media. “One house suffered roof damage and a car was damaged.”

  Russia has throughout nearly two years of war warned that countries externally supplying weapons to Ukrainian forces would be treated as direct participants in the conflict if their weapons are found to be used against Russia. The US in particular has been the biggest supplier of heavy weaponry, followed by NATO and EU countries.

  

  Moscow has all the while underscored the proxy war nature of the conflict and showdown with NATO, but so far a WW3-style escalation has been narrowly avoided, but this worst case scenario certainly looms large. This especially as President Putin has lately charged that Ukraine is using Western advanced weapons systems to directly target Russian cities and territory.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 14:35

• Trump Drops New Campaign Video Vowing More Transparency On JFK Assassination
  Trump Drops New Campaign Video Vowing More Transparency On JFK Assassination

  Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Modernity.news,

  Donald Trump dropped a new campaign video featuring Bill Clinton meeting with Jeffrey Epstein, while the ad also promised more transparency on uncovering the full story behind the JFK assassination.

  

  The video opens with Ronald Reagan’s ‘thousand years of darkness’ speech where he called on Americans to tell their elected officials that national policy should be based on a shared sense of morality and is soundtracked by Aerosmith’s Dream On.

  It also features Trump’s promise to obtain transparency surrounding the assassination of JFK, featuring footage of Kennedy being shot before highlighting the lyrics, “you got to lose to know how to win.”

  The ad then shows footage of when Trump was ‘arrested’ along with a passage from Sun Tzu’s The Art of War which reads, “If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles.”

  Trump just dropped a video featuring Jeffrey Epstein, Clintons’, Obamas, Klaus Schwab, and Bill Gates. 👀 pic.twitter.com/yZrvncYnPx

  — Patrick Webb (@RealPatrickWebb) January 5, 2024

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

  The chorus then drops showing Trump with his supporters before clips showing Bill Clinton meeting with Jeffrey Epstein.

  The lyrics “dream on” are then illustrated with images of Trump’s Republican rivals Nikki Haley, Ron DeSantis, Chris Christie and Mike Pence before showing footage from Trump’s 2016 victory.

  World Economic Forum founder Klaus Schwab, Barack Obama, Bill Gates, George Soros, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton are also told to “dream on”.

  The song’s ‘scream’ part is then illustrated with the infamous meme of the obese Democrat screaming in anger at response to Trump winning.

  The ad finishes with Trump declaring:

  “As long as the American people hold in their arms deep and devoted love of country then there is nothing this nation cannot achieve – the best is yet to come.”

  Compare Trump’s ad to Biden’s latest effort, which demonizes Trump supporters as extremists.

  *  *  *

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

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 14:00

• These Were The Top News Stories Of 2023 Based On Google Search Trends
  These Were The Top News Stories Of 2023 Based On Google Search Trends

  In an age of rapid-fire social media updates, memes, and never-ending cat videos, what’s the world still collectively paying attention to?

  Visual Capitalist’s Marcus Lu and Pallavi Rao visualize the the top 10 news stories of 2023 according to Google Search trends.

  

  Hope Amidst Disasters

  In February, southern Turkey and parts of Syria suffered a deadly earthquake which killed more than 50,000 people and left more than a million without a home. Adverse weather conditions and poor infrastructure hampered rescue efforts, worsening the effects of the disaster.

  While rebuilding has since begun, the scale of the project is vast: more than 300,000 buildings collapsed or were damaged beyond repair. Steadily rising inflation in the country, along with a depreciating Turkish lira, has ballooned reconstruction costs.

  

  Meanwhile, an ongoing war in Sudan is being fought between opposing factions within Sudan’s military government. Millions of people are facing food insecurity, and there are widespread reports of war crimes.

  On a more positive note, Google users also looked up Chandrayaan-3, India’s third lunar-exploration mission. In August 2023, India became fourth country to successfully land on the moon.

  Hurricane Season and Violent Events

  Another year gone by, another global temperature record broken. Rising temperatures in the Atlantic Ocean, along with the effect of El Niño, led to plenty of tropical storms in the region, of which the World Meteorological Organization named 20.

  Of them, Hurricane Idalia caused widespread damage in Florida, and Hurricane Lee resulted in prolonged power outages in Maine, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick.

  On the Pacific side, Hurricane Hilary brought torrential rain and flooding to parts of Mexico and the southwestern U.S.

  

  Finally, the Israel-Hamas war has led to more than 15,000 deaths in Palestine and 1,500 fatalities in Israel.

  On December 22nd, the UN Security Council passed a resolution “calling for humanitarian pauses” in the fighting and increased aid to Gaza. An earlier resolution (which called for an immediate ceasefire) failed after being vetoed by the United States.

  Meanwhile, a proposed peace plan by Egypt (which helped architect an earlier six-day temporary ceasefire) has not been well received, though neither the Netanyahu government, nor Hamas has outright rejected it.

  Tyler Durden
  Sat, 01/06/2024 – 13:25

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Sachs: US Foreign Policy Is A Scam Built On Corruption
  Sachs: US Foreign Policy Is A Scam Built On Corruption

  Authored by Jeffrey Sachs via CommonDreams.org,

  On the surface, US foreign policy seems to be utterly irrational. The US gets into one disastrous war after another — Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Ukraine, and Gaza. In recent days, the US stands globally isolated in its support of Israel’s genocidal actions against the Palestinians, voting against a UN General Assembly resolution for a Gaza ceasefire backed by 153 countries with 89% of the world population, and opposed by just the US and 9 small countries with less than 1% of the world population.

  In the past 20 years, every major US foreign policy objective has failed. The Taliban returned to power after 20 years of US occupation of Afghanistan. Post-Saddam Iraq became dependent on Iran. Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad stayed in power despite a CIA effort to overthrow him. Libya fell into a protracted civil war after a US-led NATO mission overthrew Muammar Gaddafi. Ukraine was bludgeoned on the battlefield by Russia in 2023 after the US secretly scuttled a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine in 2022.

  To understand the foreign-policy scam, think of today’s federal government as a multi-division racket controlled by the highest bidders.

  

  Despite these remarkable and costly debacles, one following the other, the same cast of characters has remained at the helm of US foreign policy for decades, including Joe Biden, Victoria Nuland, Jake Sullivan, Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell, and Hillary Clinton.

  What gives?

  The puzzle is solved by recognizing that American foreign policy is not at all about the interests of the American people. It is about the interests of the Washington insiders, as they chase campaign contributions and lucrative jobs for themselves, staff, and family members. In short, US foreign policy has been hacked by big money.

  As a result, the American people are losing big. The failed wars since 2000 have cost them around $5 trillion in direct outlays, or around $40,000 per household. Another $2 trillion or so will be spent in the coming decades on veterans’ care. Beyond the costs directly incurred by Americans, we should also recognize the horrendously high costs suffered abroad, in millions of lives lost and trillions of dollars of destruction to property and nature in the war zones.

  The costs continue to mount. US Military-linked outlays in 2024 will come to around $1.5 trillion, or roughly $12,000 per household, if we add the direct Pentagon spending, the budgets of the CIA and other intelligence agencies, the budget of the Veteran’s Administration, the Department of Energy nuclear weapons program, the State Department’s military-linked “foreign aid” (such as to Israel), and other security-related budget lines. Hundreds of billions of dollars are money down the drain, squandered in useless wars, overseas military bases, and a wholly unnecessary arms build-up that brings the world closer to WWIII.

  Yet to describe these gargantuan costs is also to explain the twisted “rationality” of US foreign policy. The $1.5 trillion in military outlays is the scam that keeps on giving—to the military-industrial complex and the Washington insiders—even as it impoverishes and endangers America and the world.

  To understand the foreign-policy scam, think of today’s federal government as a multi-division racket controlled by the highest bidders. The Wall Street division is run out of the Treasury. The Health Industry division is run out of the Department of Health and Human Services. The Big Oil and Coal division is run out of the Departments of Energy and Interior. And the Foreign Policy division is run out of the White House, Pentagon and CIA.

  Each division uses public power for private gain through insider dealing, greased by corporate campaign contributions and lobbying outlays. Interestingly, the Health Industry division rivals the Foreign Policy division as a remarkable financial scam. America’s health outlays totaled an astounding $4.5 trillion in 2022, or roughly $36,000 per household, by far the highest health costs in the world, while America ranked roughly 40th in the world among nations in life expectancy. A failed health policy translates into very big bucks for the health industry, just as a failed foreign policy translates into mega-revenues of the military-industrial complex.

  The more wars, of course, the more business.

  The Foreign Policy division is run by a small, secretive and tight-knit coterie, including the top brass of the White House, the CIA, the State Department, the Pentagon, the Armed Services Committees of the House and Senate, and the major military firms including Boeing, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon. There are perhaps a thousand key individuals involved in setting policy. The public interest plays little role.

  The key foreign policy makers run the operations of 800 US overseas military bases, hundreds of billions of dollars of military contracts, and the war operations where the equipment is deployed. The more wars, of course, the more business. The privatization of foreign policy has been greatly amplified by the privatization of the war business itself, as more and more “core” military functions are handed out to the arms manufacturers and to contractors such as Haliburton, Booz Allen Hamilton, and CACI.

  In addition to the hundreds of billions of dollars of military contracts, there are important business spillovers from the military and CIA operations. With military bases in 80 countries around the world, and CIA operations in many more, the US plays a large, though mostly covert role, in determining who rules in those countries, and thereby on policies that shape lucrative deals involving minerals, hydrocarbons, pipelines, and farm and forest land. The US has aimed to overthrow at least 80 governments since 1947, typically led by the CIA through the instigation of coups, assassinations, insurrections, civil unrest, election tampering, economic sanctions, and overt wars. (For a superb study of US regime-change operations from 1947 to 1989, see Lindsey O’Rourke’s Covert Regime Change, 2018).

  In addition to business interests, there are of course ideologues who truly believe in America’s right to rule the world. The ever-warmongering Kagan family is the most famous case, though their financial interests are also deeply intertwined with the war industry. The point about ideology is this. The ideologists have been wrong on nearly every occasion and long ago would have lost their bully pulpits in Washington but for their usefulness as warmongers. Wittingly or not, they serve as paid performers for the military-industrial complex.

  There is one persistent inconvenience for this ongoing business scam.

  In theory, foreign policy is carried out in the interest of the American people, though the opposite is the truth. (A similar contradiction of course applies to overpriced healthcare, government bailouts of Wall Street, oil-industry perks, and other scams). The American people rarely support the machinations of US foreign policy when they occasionally hear the truth. America’s wars are not waged by popular demand but by decisions from on high.

  Special measures are needed to keep the people away from decision making.

  The first such measure is unrelenting propaganda. George Orwell nailed it in 1984 when “the Party” suddenly switched the foreign enemy from Eurasia to Eastasia without a word of explanation. The US essentially does the same. Who is the US gravest enemy? Take your pick, according to the season. Saddam Hussein, the Taliban, Hugo Chavez, Bashar al-Assad, ISIS, al-Qaeda, Gaddafi, Vladimir Putin, Hamas, have all played the role of “Hitler” in US propaganda. White House spokesman John Kirby delivers the propaganda with a smirk on his face, signaling that he too knows that what he is saying is ludicrous, albeit mildly entertaining.

  The propaganda is amplified by the Washington think tanks that live off of donations by military contractors and occasionally foreign governments that are part of the US scam operations. Think of the Atlantic Council, CSIS, and of course the ever-popular Institute for the Study of War, brought to you by the major military contractors.

  The second is to hide the costs of the foreign policy operations. In the 1960s, the US Government made the mistake of forcing the American people to bear the costs of the military-industrial complex by drafting young people to fight in Vietnam and by raising taxes to pay for the war. The public erupted in opposition.

  From the 1970s onward the government has been far more clever. The government ended the draft, and made military service a job for hire rather than a public service, backed by Pentagon outlays to recruit soldiers from lower economic strata. It also abandoned the quaint idea that government outlays should be funded by taxes, and instead shifted the military budget to deficit spending which protects it from popular opposition that would be triggered if it were tax-funded.

  It has also suckered client states such as Ukraine to fight America’s wars on the ground, so that no American body bags would spoil the US propaganda machine. Needless to say, US masters of war such as Sullivan, Blinken, Nuland, Schumer, and McConnell remain thousands of miles away from the frontlines. The dying is reserved for Ukrainians. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) defended American military aid to Ukraine as money well spent because it is “without a single American service woman or man injured or lost,” somehow not dawning on the good Senator to spare the lives of Ukrainians, who have died by the hundreds of thousands in a US-provoked war over NATO enlargement.

  This system is underpinned by the complete subordination of the U.S. Congress to the war business, to avoid any questioning of the over-the-top Pentagon budgets and the wars instigated by the Executive Branch. The subordination of Congress works as follows. First, the Congressional oversight of war and peace is largely assigned to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, which largely frame the overall Congressional policy (and the Pentagon budget). Second, the military industry (Boeing, Raytheon, and the rest) funds the campaigns of the Armed Services Committee members of both parties. The military industries also spend vast sums on lobbying in order to provide lucrative salaries to retiring members of Congress, their staffs, and families, either directly in military businesses or in Washington lobbying firms.

  The hacking of Congressional foreign policy is not only by the US military-industrial complex. The Israel lobby long ago mastered the art of buying the Congress. America’s complicity in Israel’s apartheid state and war crimes in Gaza makes no sense for US national security and diplomacy, not to speak of human decency. They are the fruits of Israel lobby investments that reached $30 million in campaign contributions in 2022, and that will vastly top that in 2024.

  When Congress reassembles in January, Biden, Kirby, Sullivan, Blinken, Nuland, Schumer, McConnell, Blumenthal and their ilk will tell us that we absolutely must fund the losing, cruel, and deceitful war in Ukraine and the ongoing massacre and ethnic cleansing in Gaza, lest we and Europe and the free world, and perhaps the solar system itself, succumb to the Russian bear, the Iranian mullahs, and the Chinese Communist Party. The purveyors of foreign policy disasters are not being irrational in this fear-mongering. They are being deceitful and extraordinarily greedy, pursuing narrow interests over those of the American people.

  It is the urgent task of the American people to overhaul a foreign policy that is so broken, corrupted, and deceitful that it is burying the government in debt while pushing the world closer to nuclear Armageddon. This overhaul should start in 2024 by rejecting any more funding for the disastrous Ukraine War and Israel’s war crimes in Gaza. Peacemaking, and diplomacy, not military spending, is the path to a US foreign policy in the public interest.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 23:40

• These Are The Institutions Americans Trust Most (And Least)
  These Are The Institutions Americans Trust Most (And Least)

  In just a couple of days it will be three years since the January 6 United States Capitol attack.

  Ahead of our ‘Jan 6’ debate on Saturday, it feels apt to take a step back to try and capture an overview of the state of trust in institutions in the United States.

  

  As Statista’s Anna Fleck detail below, based on data collected by Gallup in June 2023, of the institutions selected, only the military and small businesses saw a great deal or a fair amount of trust in them from a majority of U.S. respondents.

  This is at odds with Congress, which saw only 8 percent of people say they had trust in the political institution.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Gallup has been asking this question on trust since 1973.

  Over the past 50 years, there have been significant fluctuations in responses.

  

  For instance, the police saw an all-time low level of trust in 2023, with just 43 percent of respondents saying they had a great deal/quite a lot of trust in them.

  But three other institutions hit their lowest levels of trust last year too, including public schools with 26 percent (on par with 2014), large tech companies with 26 percent (on par with 2022) and big business with 14 percent (on par with 2022).

  In 2022, public confidence declined in 11 out of the 16 institutions tracked by Gallup, with trust in the Supreme Court falling by 11 percentage points to 25 percent, and in the presidency by 15 percentage points to 23 percent. These hardly improved in 2023, rising to just 27 percent and 26 percent, respectively.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 23:20

• "It's One Of The Great Mysteries," Why COVID Spares Children
  “It’s One Of The Great Mysteries,” Why COVID Spares Children

  Authored by Marina Zhang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Bali Pulendran, a professor of microbiology, immunology, and pathology at Stanford University, has researched a mystery unique to COVID-19 for two years.

  “For almost every infectious disease, the most vulnerable populations are at the extremes of age—the very young and the very old,” he once said. “But with COVID-19, the young are spared.”

  The picture surrounding this enigma is still incomplete, but answers are forthcoming.

  

  Children Are Different

  Children are not mini-adults. Depending on their age, they can have similar or very different responses to infectious diseases.

  In the case of COVID-19, children generally experience a milder form of the disease.

  “It’s an interesting question that no one has fully answered,” said Dr. Cody Meissner, a professor of pediatrics at Dartmouth College’s Geisel School of Medicine, in an interview with The Epoch Times. “Several theories have been put forward to try and explain this.”

  The primary reason is that children have a faster innate immune system, often referred to as the first line of defense, compared to adults. This enables them to mount a robust defense against respiratory infections more quickly.

  Another explanation is that children are more susceptible to respiratory infections, and some of these prior infections may provide them with a degree of immune protection against COVID-19.

  Anatomically speaking, children not fully grown are at a disadvantage when exposed to respiratory diseases. They have smaller airway diameters, meaning more severe symptoms when the airways get inflamed or have mucus build up.

  They also have a smaller lung capacity, making them more prone to hypoxia with respiratory infection, professor of immunology Kenneth Rosenthal, PhD, told The Epoch Times.

  However, compared to adults, children have been found to have higher levels of innate immune cells in the nose, which can help eliminate viruses early on.

  

  “SARS-CoV-2 targets ACE-2 and TMPRSS, and these are expressed more in older adults,” Dr. Lael Yonker, pediatric pulmonologist and the co-director of Massachusetts General Hospital’s pulmonary genetics clinic, told The Epoch Times. Children, in comparison, have fewer of both receptors, which may reduce the number of viral invasions.

  Strong Innate Immunity

  While children tend to have a fast and robust innate immune response, studies have found that most adults who experience severe COVID-19 tend to have an impaired innate immune response.

  The innate immune response is the immune system we inherit when born.

  “[The immune response is] always there and ready to respond to microbes and triggers on the fly,” Mr. Rosenthal explained. In contrast, the adaptive immune system, which is more developed in adults, can generate more memorized, targeted immunity. However, it is slower to respond and can take days to activate.

  This is not to say that children do not have an adaptive immune response. But since this type of immunity is built up by experiences with viruses and other pathogens, children tend to have accumulated less immunological memory than adults.

  

  Vaccination is primarily used to bolster adaptive immunity while children are young.

  The most common innate protection impairment researchers saw in adults with severe COVID-19 was a deficit in types 1 and 3 interferons. Studies have shown that children mount the strongest types 1 and 3 interferon responses to COVID-19, and this response diminishes as people age.

  “A large proportion of adult men prone to more serious COVID have antibodies to interferon,” Mr. Rosenthal said. Consequently, they cannot mount the initial innate response, though scientists do not know why some adults form these antibodies.

  The infection progresses unhindered while the immune system attempts to restrain the extensive infection, which could “lead to problematic outcomes,” he added.

  This can cause full-blown inflammatory responses.

  Natural killer cells, innate immune cells responsible for killing cancer and infected cells, are also more active in children, particularly pre-pubescent children. The cell “dissipates in teen years,” Mr. Rosenthal said.

  Less Prone to Inflammatory Storm

  A significant risk factor for severe COVID-19 is the inflammatory cytokine storm caused by excessive levels of cytokines in the body.

  During an infection, immune cells release cytokines to help activate and coordinate other immune cells. There is always some presence of them in the body.

  When the immune system fails to control the infection, and viruses replicate, immune cells dispatch more cytokines as a warning. These cytokines then activate more immune cells, causing intense inflammation, which can lead to tissue damage, organ failure, and eventually death.

  

  Adults are more prone to cytokine storms because they tend to have more cytokines in the blood, meant to protect their bodies against daily assaults. These include smoke, toxic particles, toxic foods, and certain bacteria that live in our gut, on our skin, or elsewhere, Mr. Rosenthal said. The necessary protective responses produce inflammatory cytokines “on an everyday, routine basis.”

  Children, however, have lower baseline cytokine levels due to fewer exposures to environmental and pathogenic assaults. Plus, they generally have healthier constitutions with fewer chronic diseases and unhealthy habits.

  Even in the rare case of children developing severe COVID-19, which often presents as multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), most children quickly recover without any persistent symptoms.

  “[Children] were easier to treat than adults. I did not lose a single [pediatric] case, whereas adults, we were losing quite a bit of them,” critical care pulmonologist Dr. Joseph Varon, professor of clinical medicine at the University of Houston, told The Epoch Times.

  The Enigma of Mild COVID in Infants

  While mild COVID-19 in children and adolescents can be explained away by their fast innate immune systems and generally healthier constitutions, this explanation fails concerning infants and toddlers.

  “It’s one of the great mysteries of human immunology,” Mr. Pulendran told The Epoch Times.

  Infants are typically born with immature innate and adaptive immune systems with weaker constitutions, making them more susceptible to infections. Premature infants are even more vulnerable.

  Children under the age of 2 have a much higher chance of dying from respiratory diseases like respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza than older children and adults under age 50.

  In general, infants “do not have any prior immune history and, therefore, no antibodies or T-cell memory to rapidly respond to the challenge,” Mr. Rosenthal said. They also have very few innate immune cells at birth. By the second month of life, they should accumulate enough innate immune cells to overcome this vulnerability.

  Full maturation of the immune system occurs in the first seven to eight years of life.

  Dehydration is also a deadly factor in infected children and infants due to their higher metabolic rates and reduced water reserves compared to adults.

  Yet to researchers’ amazement, infants were largely left unscathed during the COVID pandemic.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 23:00

• Big Gov't Raids Small Amish Farmer Who Refuses To Participate In The Industrial Meat/Milk Complex
  Big Gov’t Raids Small Amish Farmer Who Refuses To Participate In The Industrial Meat/Milk Complex

  Local media, The Lancaster Patriot, reports that the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture served an all-natural Amish farm in southeastern Pennsylvania with a search warrant on Thursday afternoon. 

  BREAKING: State Troopers conducting search on Amos Miller’s farm in Lancaster County, PA. pic.twitter.com/4ibZPxfI0U

  — The Lancaster Patriot (@TheLanPatriot) January 4, 2024

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

  The farmer, Amos Miller, has been in the crosshairs with the US Department of Agriculture because of his repeated failures to comply with federal farming regulations. 

  Exclusive footage of state agents leaving Amos Miller’s organic farm store, carrying off some of his products. pic.twitter.com/yVAHSmr1WH

  — The Lancaster Patriot (@TheLanPatriot) January 4, 2024

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

  The USDA has tried to bring Miller’s farm into compliance with federal regulations, but Amos has yet to cooperate with the Feds and faces fines and jail time. 

  A Pennsylvania State Police spokesperson said:

   “The PA Department of Agriculture is conducting a search warrant on this property. Troopers from PSP Lancaster are just assisting with scene security. You will have to reach out to the DOA for information on their investigation.”

  Footage of the search being conducted inside Amos Miller’s organic farm store in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. pic.twitter.com/iKUDbo9CcR

  — The Lancaster Patriot (@TheLanPatriot) January 4, 2024

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

  According to LancasterOnline, Miller and the Feds have been locked “in a standoff over his compliance with federal food safety rules and failure to pay assessed fines.” 

  With his sovereign citizen defense, Miller has tried to thwart the Fed’s overreach to get him to comply with food safety rules. He sells all sorts of food to more than 4,000 buyers, such as organic eggs, raw milk, grass-fed beef and cheese, and fresh produce. He doesn’t use electricity, chemical fertilizers, vaccines, or petroleum products in farming. 

  Commenting on the raid, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said, “Looks like Amos Miller’s farm is being raided. With all of the problems in society today, this is what the government wants to focus on?” 

  Massie continued, “A man growing food for informed customers, without participating in the industrial meat/milk complex? It’s shameful that it’s come to this. “

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 22:40

• Green Energy Waste Overlooked In Climate Agenda
  Green Energy Waste Overlooked In Climate Agenda

  Authored by Autumn Spredemann via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  The amount of waste piling up from solar panels and wind turbine blades can be measured in tons. And the industry is just getting started.

  

  Almost all spent solar panels in the United States end up in landfills, and many first- and second-generation panels are already tapping out, well ahead of their anticipated 30-year lifespan.

  Added to that will be an estimated 9.8 million metric tons of dead panels to deal with between 2030 and 2060, according to a study published in Science Direct.

  Tossing a solar panel into a U.S. landfill currently costs about $1, maybe $2. To recycle that same panel, the cost balloons to $20 to $30, according to an estimate reported by PV Magazine.

  Wind turbine parts present a similar challenge, with thousands of blades having already found their way into dumps and fields in Texas, Wyoming, South Dakota, and Iowa.

  It’s no small feat to dump a blade. The length of a single wind turbine blade can be more than 200 feet or longer than the wingspan of a Boeing 747, according to the Department of Energy. Offshore wind rigs are even larger.

  Currently, about 7,000 blades are scrapped per year in the United States, according to David Morgan, chief strategy officer for Carbon Rivers, a Tennessee-based recycling center for advanced materials.

  Of all the glass fiber waste that Carbon Rivers receives, wind turbine blades are the most challenging, Mr. Morgan said.

  “They’re a very hardy, robust material. They’re large and cumbersome to deal with,” he told The Epoch Times.

  “Large wind turbine blades, travel trailers, boat hulls, and other waste streams can be converted into clean, high-quality glass fiber that can be economically reincorporated into your next car, boat, or turbine blade,” the Carbon Rivers website states.

  As wind turbine graveyards have turned into viral video content, the wind industry has become more “conversational” about end-of-life solutions, Mr. Morgan said, but it’s not set up for a “composite circular economy.”

  

  When it comes to truly “green” solutions, a “circular economy” is vital, Mr. Morgan said. It’s basically a business model that prioritizes the reuse, repair, or regeneration of materials to continue production in as sustainable a way as possible.

  He said renewable waste isn’t just an infrastructure problem, there are also legislation gaps.

  “Right now, you can largely landfill wind blades. It varies state by state.”

  Some companies backing wind energy—particularly those tied to fossil fuel giants such as Shell Global and General Electric—have left critics dubious about whether true sustainability is part of the existing plan.

  The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under former President Donald Trump, identified the looming problems with increasing renewable energy waste.

  “Without a strategy for their end-of-life management, so-called green technologies like solar panels, electric vehicle batteries, and windmills will ultimately place the same unintended burdens on our planet and economy as traditional commodities,” former EPA administrator Andrew Wheeler said.

  Expanding Industry

  As the so-called renewable energy industry expands—largely because of massive subsidies from the Biden administration—so does the waste on the back end.

  Solar generation capacity is forecast to increase by more than 38 percent in 2024, according to a Dec. 12 report by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), a U.S. government agency. Wind energy capacity is forecast to increase by 4.4 percent.

  

  Despite this notable surge in deployment of renewable energy systems, America’s electric generation in 2022 was primarily (about 60 percent) from fossil fuels—coal, natural gas, petroleum, and other gases, according to the EIA.

  Renewable energy sources accounted for about 21 percent and 18 percent was from nuclear energy. An additional fraction was from small-scale solar systems.

  Solar panels have a life span of up to 30 years. Understandably, some environmental organizations are raising the alarm.

  “If solar and nuclear produce the same amount of electricity over the next 25 years that nuclear produced in 2016, and the wastes are stacked on football fields, the nuclear waste would reach the height of the Leaning Tower of Pisa,” California-based Environmental Progress states.

  “The solar waste would reach the height of two Mt. Everests.”

  The number of retired wind turbine blades is expected to reach 9,000 per year over the next five years, according to a 2022 analysis published by Chemical and Engineering News.

  Mr. Morgan said he’s keeping pace with the inbound waste for now and the company is scaling up operations, including construction of a large-scale facility in Texas. Carbon Rivers has also broadened its scope into anything “composite-based,” including glass fiber and even aerospace parts.

  E-Waste

  Another area of waste—electronic waste, commonly known as e-waste—is growing at an exponential rate. It’s the fastest-growing solid waste stream in the world and includes renewable items such as solar panels and electric vehicle (EV) batteries.

  Only a small portion is being recycled.

  One analysis from 2019 released this year showed that of the 53.6 million tons of e-waste produced globally, barely 17 percent was recycled.

  “People think plastic is the waste boogeyman … but e-waste is still growing,” Paul Williams, vice president of communications for recycling company ERI, told The Epoch Times.

  Focused on breaking down and recycling all kinds of e-waste, Mr. Williams said ERI maintains a “military grade” level of data destruction when it comes to electronics.

  Privacy protection is a huge concern with e-waste.

  

  “It becomes not just an environmental issue, not just a human rights issue, it’s also a cyber security issue. A lot of technology today contains private data,” he said.

  In the early days of e-waste disposal, negligent companies handled e-waste in a way that left the door wide open to data theft.

  “What we found were these unscrupulous types were just shipping this stuff to developing nations … and it was a huge privacy challenge because of the data,” Mr. Williams said.

  Data security preparations must also be made for EVs, and not just their potentially volatile batteries, but also for the onboard computers in EVs when they reach the end of their life.

  “Cars are particularly scary because the type of data that is captured is very personal. It knows your routes, the weight, and sizes of the people sitting in the seats of the car,” he said. “It’s kind of scary to think about.”

  While ERI isn’t seeing a lot of solar panels or EV-related battery waste just yet, Mr. Williams said they’re ready for it.

  “They will ultimately come to our door. We don’t turn any e-waste away.”

  He said great strides have been made in the past two decades regarding the public’s disposal of e-waste.

  In the early 2000s, when ERI was first getting started, Mr. Williams says everyone had “old TVs in their garage or attic. People didn’t know what to do with them.”

  The same goes for the younger generations with retired cellphones. But he says attitudes have changed over the past 10 to 15 years, and much of that has to do with the data security challenges involved with e-waste.

  

  Mr. Williams isn’t daunted by the coming influx of solar panels and EV components.

  “Even with lithium-ion batteries and solar panels, they aren’t the last mile. We know there will be something new at some point.”

  He said transparency has been an issue with companies claiming to recycle e-waste in years past, with some advertising eco-friendly solutions while secretly dumping their e-waste in landfills.

  “The most important thing, really, is transparency. When ERI started, we were literally mounting cameras on our ceilings. Nothing goes to landfill when we work on it,” Mr. Williams said.

  Domino Effect

  Recycling dead solar panels, EV batteries, and wind turbine parts are major components of the waste problem, but supportive infrastructure is also impacted as alternative energy production ramps up.

  Chief among this infrastructure are electrical transformers, which industry insiders say there’s a skyrocketing demand for both new and reconditioned units.

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 22:20

• Activism Uncensored: California Sex Workers Fight For Labor Rights
  Activism Uncensored: California Sex Workers Fight For Labor Rights

  In the heart of Los Angeles County, a labor movement unlike any other is unfolding. Sex workers, often relegated to the shadows of the labor discourse, are stepping into the limelight, demanding rights equivalent to mainstream entertainment industry workers. This burgeoning movement, spearheaded by the dancers at the Star Garden topless bar, is not just a fight for fair wages and safer work environments; it’s a challenge to longstanding stigmas associated with sex work.

  

  In May 2022, Star Garden dancers declared their intent to unionize, setting in motion a series of events that have since captured national attention. This move toward unionization was more than a demand for better working conditions; it was a direct challenge to longstanding, industry-wide discriminatory hiring practices and wage theft.

  “They don’t pay us, they take half of our lap dance money and that is wage theft, illegal wage theft and we need to correct that,” said one dancer.

  The movement has quickly gained momentum, drawing support from the Actors Equity Association. The sex workers’ movement has even celebrity endorsements and media attention.

  Yet despite their progress, the dancers at Star Garden continue to face challenges. Allegations of unfair labor practices and retaliation for union activities underscore the ongoing battle these workers face. The club management’s actions – from charging for lap dances to imposing a cover fee – are at the heart of this dispute. The dancers’ fight for just treatment and fair payment is not just about them; it’s a fight for the dignity and rights of all sex workers.

  This movement extends far beyond the walls of the Star Garden. It’s a rallying cry for sex workers across the spectrum, from escorts to street workers. They are challenging not only city and federal laws but societal perceptions. With the 2028 Olympics on the horizon, these workers are advocating for their safety, the decriminalization of their work, and a clear distinction between sex work and human trafficking.

  Watch:

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 22:00

• Scientists Detect Spike Protein From COVID Vaccination In Long COVID Patients
  Scientists Detect Spike Protein From COVID Vaccination In Long COVID Patients

  Authored by Megan Redshaw via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Scientists in a new paper detected spike protein in the bloodstream of people with long COVID two months after infection and COVID-19 vaccination, suggesting that spike protein may persist in the body much longer than previously predicted and does not remain at the injection site.

  

  The study, published Dec. 27 in the European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences, found vaccine spike protein in two patients at least two months after receiving their second dose of a COVID-19 vaccine and viral spike protein in one subject who previously recovered from infection in a cohort of 81 patients with long COVID syndrome. Samples gathered from the unvaccinated control group were negative for spike protein.

  “This study, in agreement with other published investigations, demonstrates that both natural and vaccine spike protein may still be present in long-COVID patients, thus supporting the existence of a possible mechanism that causes the persistence of spike protein in the human body for much longer than predicted by early studies,” the authors wrote.

  Although U.S. regulatory agencies claim vaccinating against COVID-19 can reduce the risk of developing long COVID, some research suggests the condition may be caused by an immune overreaction to the spike protein in COVID-19 vaccines used to induce antibodies.

  In a February 2023 study published in the Journal of Medical Virology, researchers examined the levels of spike protein and viral RNA circulating in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 with and without long COVID. They found that spike protein and viral RNA were more likely to be present in patients with long COVID. In patients with long COVID, 30 percent were positive for both spike protein and viral RNA, whereas none of the individuals without long COVID were positive for both.

  CDC Claimed Spike Protein Was ‘Harmless’ and Quickly Breaks Down

  When COVID-19 vaccines were first authorized, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said the spike protein produced by the body after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine is a “harmless piece of spike protein.” Furthermore, the agency stated that spike protein didn’t “last long in the body” and breaks down within a few weeks like other proteins. The Infectious Diseases Society of America, a resource center funded partly through a cooperative agreement with the CDC, estimated that the spike proteins generated by COVID-19 vaccines only last up to a few weeks in the body.

  An early Pfizer biodistribution study showed that the COVID-19 spike protein gets into the blood after vaccination, where it circulates for several days before accumulating in organs and tissues, including the spleen, bone marrow, the liver, adrenal glands, and in high concentrations in the ovaries. In this study, researchers found vaccine mRNA was present from the day of vaccination and persisted in the bloodstream for weeks after vaccination.

  In an August 2023 paper published in Biomedicines, researchers found the design of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines allows uncontrolled biodistribution, durability, and persistent bioavailability of the spike protein inside the body after vaccination—which could potentially damage tissues and cause disease.

  The study group included 20 subjects who received two doses of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, 20 who were unvaccinated and tested negative for COVID-19 or antibodies indicating they had previously been infected, and a control group of 20 unvaccinated participants who tested positive for COVID-19. Researchers detected specific fragments of spike protein in about 50 percent of subjects who received mRNA vaccines 69 to 187 days following vaccination. All samples from the unvaccinated control group were negative, including the 20 individuals who had tested positive after contracting COVID-19.

  In a January 2023 study published in the Journal of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, researchers found full-length or traces of SARS-CoV-2 spike mRNA in some patient samples up to 28 days after COVID-19 vaccination, indicating prolonged spike protein production and the potential for a “continuous immune response in some persons.”

  A study published in March 2022 in Cell found vaccine mRNA in lymph nodes on days 7, 16, and 37 following vaccination. Immunohistochemical staining for spike antigen in mRNA-vaccinated patient lipid nanoparticles in some individuals showed spike protein antigen was still present as late as 60 days following the second vaccine dose.

  A November 2021 study in The Journal of Immunology found exosomes expressing spike protein 14 days after vaccination with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Levels of spike protein increased following booster doses, suggesting the amount of spike protein in the body increases with subsequent vaccination.

  A 2021 study in Clinical Infectious Diseases led by researchers at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and the Harvard Medical School found circulating SARS-CoV-2 proteins in the plasma of participants vaccinated with Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine. Spike protein was detected in blood plasma as early as one day following the first vaccine dose.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 21:40

• SpaceX Sues Federal Agency Over 'Unconstitutional' Structure
  SpaceX Sues Federal Agency Over ‘Unconstitutional’ Structure

  Elon Musk’s SpaceX has filed a lawsuit against a federal agency alleging that it’s out of control in violation of the constitution.

  

  The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has a panel of judges which hear cases brought against companies over workers’ rights. One such complaint lodged in December against SpaceX is being sent there for adjudication – however SpaceX argues that they’re essentially a rogue agency.

  The U.S. Constitution requires the president to have “sufficient control” over the judges, and an appeals court concluded in 2022 that administrative law judges (ALJs) in the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) are unconstitutionally shielded from presidential oversight.

  “The same reasoning applies to the ALJs of the NLRB, including the ALJ assigned to preside over the pending NLRB proceedings against SpaceX,” SpaceX said in the Jan. 4 suit.

  The company is asking the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas to rule that the current makeup of the NLRB is unconstitutional. –The Epoch Times

  “To prevent SpaceX from undergoing protracted administrative proceedings before an unconstitutionally structured agency—after which SpaceX is unlikely to have a chance to secure meaningful retrospective relief—the court should stay or enjoin the current agency proceedings, declare that the NLRB’s structure violates the separation of powers under Article II of the Constitution, and permanently enjoin the NLRB and its general counsel from pursuing unfair labor practice charges against SpaceX before agency officials that are unconstitutionally insulated from presidential oversight, ” reads the filing, which also claims that the NLRB’s five-member board is structured improperly, and is the “very definition of tyranny.” 

  US District Judge Rolando Olvera, an Obama appointee, was assigned to the case after the NLRB accused SpaceX of violating federal law by firing workers who spoke out against the company’s practices.

  In a 2022 open letter to management, workers complained about Musk’s posts on Twitter, calling them “a frequent source of distraction and embarrassment for us,” and complained that it should be made clear that “his messaging does not reflect our work, our mission, or our values.”

  According to NLRB officials, SpaceX, in a “wave of wrongful retaliatory terminations,” fired workers who signed the open letter, and others involved in activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act.

  More via the Epoch Times;

  Deborah Lawrence, one of the workers whom SpaceX fired, told news outlets in a statement through her lawyers that the company has a “toxic culture.”

  “We wrote the open letter to leadership not out of malice, but because we cared about the mission and the people around us,” she said.

  As of now, a hearing in the matter is scheduled to take place on March 5 in Los Angeles, California, before an administrative law judge.

  

  Campaign Against Musk

  The NLRB is one of several government agencies that have brought actions against Mr. Musk after he became a critic of President Joe Biden and the federal government.

  The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in August 2023 sued SpaceX, saying the company illegally only hired U.S. citizens and permanent residents. A countersuit in the same federal court in which the new suit was brought said the company was complying with federal law that governs companies involved with sensitive technology.

  Judge Olvera ruled in favor of SpaceX and paused the case, finding that the way the DOJ’s administrative law judges act does not adhere to the Constitution.

  The proceedings before the judges “are unconstitutional because the attorney general is not allowed to review” their decisions, he said.

  The Constitution says presidents must appoint federal “principal officers,” although Congress can authorize the head of departments to appoint “inferior officers.” Those inferior officers, though, must be “directed and supervised” by a principal officer. The judges are not inferior officers because they’re not supervised, according to the ruling.

  If the proceedings were not paused, SpaceX “will likely suffer irreparable injury,” Judge Olvera added.

  He also addressed how the judges cannot be directly removed by a president. Judges can only be removed by board members, who themselves can be removed by a president. That structure may be unconstitutional but the removal restrictions are severable by the courts, he said.

  The appeals court in the SEC case, which is set to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court, found that because presidents cannot directly remove the administrative law judges, they are unconstitutionally insulated from the chief executive.

  A judge who dissented disagreed, creating a split decision that the nation’s top court will resolve.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 21:20

• Judge Confirms Opinion: Oregon's Measure 114 Gun Law Violates State Constitution
  Judge Confirms Opinion: Oregon’s Measure 114 Gun Law Violates State Constitution

  Authored by Scottie Barnes via The Epoch Times,

  A state court’s preliminary ruling against Oregon’s Measure 114 gun control policy will stand after a hearing in which Harney County Circuit Court Judge Robert Raschio considered additional arguments against his original case findings.

  

  Judge Raschio rejected every objection that defense attorneys for the Oregon Department of Justice raised to his opinion about the case. That opinion found the measure violates the state’s constitutionally protected right to bear arms.

  Measure 114 was initially set to take effect on Dec. 8, 2022. It has been on hold since Judge Raschio issued a preliminary injunction allowing parties to argue its legality in federal and state courts.

  The measure has already been argued in a federal court, where U.S. District Court Judge Karen Immergut ruled in July 2023 that the law does not violate the U.S. Constitution.

  The plaintiffs in the federal case have filed an appeal in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. This could move the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

  Parties in the state case argued before Judge Raschio for six days in September 2023. He issued an opinion on Nov. 21. The defense immediately requested that the judge hear additional arguments. He granted that request and set a hearing for Jan. 2, issuing his decision the same day.

  With that decision, the court made the earlier injunction permanent.

  “This marks another victory for Oregon firearm owners against the most extreme gun ban in the United States,” Tony Aiello, Jr. attorney for plaintiffs told The Epoch Times.

  “The state defendants did nothing more than waste the court’s and parties’ time and resources with their motion. It is unfortunate that they do so with bottomless resources supplied by Oregon taxpayers.”

  The decision is likely to be appealed to the Oregon Court of Appeals and Supreme Court.

  Narrowly approved by voters in November 2022, Measure 114 requires Oregonians to undergo an FBI background check and take a police-sponsored firearms class, which does not yet exist, to obtain a permit to purchase a firearm.

  Police would be required to create and operate an application process and maintain databases of applicant information.

  The measure also bans magazines that are “capable of holding or being modified to hold” more than 10 rounds.

  Proponents contend that the “Reduction in Gun Violence Act” will save lives.

  Gun rights advocates have called it one of the most extreme gun laws in the country, claiming that it will strip law-abiding citizens of their constitutional right to bear arms in the state.

  They argue that legal gun sales would end in Oregon should Ballot Measure 114 survive court challenges.

  Hearing Objections

  In this week’s hearing, defense attorneys for the state argued that virtually every conclusion the judge reached following the September trial was wrong.

  State defendants objected to the court’s finding that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) would be unable to conduct background checks as required by the measure.

  The FBI had previously informed the state that it would not conduct the background checks required by the new law, explaining in a legal guidance that doing so would be a crime because the measure “does not meet the requirements of Pub. L. 92-544.”

  But shortly after Judge Raschio issued his Nov. 21 opinion, the FBI changed its position, stating that it would grant Oregon a “grace period.”

  This allowed the defendants to claim that this objection no longer applied.

  Judge Raschio disagreed based on the factual record.

  The state objected to the court’s finding that the parties had “agreed” that Measure 114 “delays the purchase of firearms for a minimum of 30 days.”

  It also objected to the court’s findings that mass shootings are sensationalized by the media, that the measure’s backers failed to present evidence of enhanced public safety, that a “magazine is a necessary component of a firearm,” and that “almost all emigrants to the Oregon Territory had firearms.”

  The judge rejected each of these arguments.

  Opponents of the measure took issue with the state’s defense of the law.

  “The state is spending millions to end firearm ownership in Oregon and prosecute Oregonians who exercise their rights under the U.S. and Oregon Constitutions,” Keven Starrett of Oregon Firearms Foundation, one of the plaintiffs in the federal case, told The Epoch Times.

  “The next step in Oregon’s endless war against its most law-abiding citizens will no doubt be an appeal of the judge’s injunction to a higher court, paid for by taxpayers,” he said.

  Mr. Aiello agreed.

  “Normally, I would anticipate that the parties will agree to language to be included in the General Judgment this week, the General Judgment would be signed, and then Defendants will file an appeal,” he said.

  “However, this case has been unpredictable.”

  For Measure 114 to survive, the state defendants must win in both the federal and state courts. Plaintiffs only have to prevail in one of these cases for the measure to be struck down.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 21:00

• Huawei's Newest Laptop Teardown Reveals Chips Made In Taiwan, Not Mainland China
  Huawei’s Newest Laptop Teardown Reveals Chips Made In Taiwan, Not Mainland China

  The proof is in the pudding, as they say.

  Despite claims of a Chinese technological breakthrough in chipmaking, a teardown of Huawei’s newest laptop reveals a chip made in Taiwan – not China – by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing, according to a new Bloomberg report.

  The teardown stands at odds with the claim that Huawei’s chipmaking partner, SMIC, based on the Chinese mainland, had achieved potential advancements in fabrication technique. 

  According to Bloomberg, the world noticed when in August Huawei’s launch of a smartphone featuring a 7nm processor from Shanghai’s SMIC made headlines in the US and China.

  Analysis by a Canadian research group for Bloomberg News revealed that the chip was hot on the trail of the current industry standard, insinuating that US trade restrictions may not be worker. The advancement was heralded in China’s tech community.

  

  But the recent teardown of Huawei’s Qingyun L540 notebook revealed a 5nm chip – a Kirin 9006C processor fabricated via TSMC’s 5nm method – not an SMIC chip.

  In 2023, Huawei’s Mate 60 smartphone, featuring advanced technology, solidified its role as a leader in China’s push for tech independence. This led to significant sales, helping Huawei surpass $100 billion in revenue and challenging Apple’s market dominance.

  The Shenzhen-based company, previously relying on TSMC for advanced 5nm chips, has since focused on developing and hoarding semiconductors, especially after heightened US trade restrictions and being listed on Washington’s Entity List since 2019.

  Bloomberg reported that Huawei has invested heavily in chip research and built a domestic supply network, partly government-supported. Its latest product, the L540 laptop, aligns with Beijing’s directive to replace foreign tech in critical areas, emphasizing data security and meeting China’s stringent requirements.

  This move is also part of Huawei’s broader strategy to expand into mobile and computing devices since 2016, the report says. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 20:40

• How Pervasive Is Academic Corruption?
  How Pervasive Is Academic Corruption?

  Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

  Whew, what a week it’s been for higher ed!

  

  The Claudine Gay debacle at Harvard has raised some fundamental questions about academia in general. She was president of the university, traditionally seen as the pinnacle of American academia.

  But a careful look at her extremely thin academic publishing record was packed with unattributed borrowings from other authors in her own field.

  Once all of this became public, and in light of her Congressional testimony in which she found a new love for the free speech that has been heretofore nearly banned at Harvard, it became impossible for her to continue as president and so she resigned.

  That’s the headline story but there is surely more going on. The press ran examples of her plagiarism. It was obvious to any graduate student that it qualified as such. It would result in removal from the class and likely the whole program.

  And yet the president of Harvard got away with it for many years.

  There had already been investigations ongoing but they seemed more performative than prosecutorial, which is a scandal of its own. Once it all came out into the open, thanks to independent reporters and media, there was no other way this could end.

  And yet, how long had people known? When she was hired in the first place, why was this never checked? How about when she was appointed Dean? How about when she was at Stanford? How about when she was awarded a prestigious prize for her Harvard dissertation that we now know is compromised? Maybe they knew but pushed her up the ranks anyway.

  None of this speaks well of Harvard or academia in general, much less the vaunted “peer review” process.

  Stranger still for people on the outside was reading the side-by-side comparisons of her prose and that from which she borrowed. None of it seemed to make much sense or be otherwise meaningful. It is all written in a highly stylized way that only people in academia could possibly understand and probably they cannot understand it either. It has the feel of high-level scholarship without the substance.

  One gathers that the thesis of her writing is always the same: racism is all-pervasive. Everything else is just filler. In defense of herself, writing in the New York Times, she essentially blames racism and also distrust of public health and media for forcing her to step down.

  “This was merely a single skirmish in a broader war to unravel public faith in pillars of American society …. Trusted institutions of all types—from public health agencies to news organizations—will continue to fall victim to coordinated attempts to undermine their legitimacy and ruin their leaders’ credibility.”

  That’s some amazing rhetoric right there, effectively arguing that she must remain president of Harvard despite 50-plus instances of plagiarism in her work, otherwise American society will fall! And by America, remember what she means: the rarefied and highly privileged Ivy elite that went to the “best” schools, bring down million dollar salaries, and believe they have every right to rule the rest of us for our own good.

  The actual subtext of her piece was apparent to a sympathetic reader in the comments:

  “Welcome to the America of TRUMP & his allies & followers. We have entered dangerous times that are very similar to pre-war Nazi Germany. Trump & his movement must be countered strongly and stopped.”

  Truly, this is how these people think. Criticize the CDC and the NYT—or hold the president of Harvard to normal standards of scholarship—and you are aligned with Donald Trump and Hitler.

  This problem of fake scholarship in elite academia goes back many decades, and has been proven repeatedly.

  In 1996, physicist Alan Sokal sent an article to a mainline liberal-arts journal called “Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity.”

  It argued that “an external world whose properties are independent of any individual human being” was “dogma imposed by the long post-Enlightenment hegemony over the Western intellectual outlook.”

  As a replacement, we need “emancipatory mathematics” and “liberatory science” to reject “the elite caste canon of ‘high science’” that believes in myths like “physical reality.”

  You get the drift. It was approved and published. Then the author revealed that he was just making it all up, writing the most preposterous gibberish he could dream up.

  That was 30 years ago, and the hoax has been repeated again recently.

  The Substack account called “A Midwestern Doctor” recently wrote:

  “One of the saddest discoveries genuine intellectuals make once they enter academia (which is supposed to be their ‘home’) is that much of the ‘prestigious knowledge’ their institutions produce is actually just simple or nonsensical concepts cloaked in elaborate rhetoric [language] that makes their points appear to be something much more impressive.”

  “For example, the ‘postmodernist’ discourse is pervasive throughout academia and frequently the standard you are expected to measure up to. Yet, in 1996, a programmer from Monash University realized that if he used an existing engine designed to generate random text from recursive grammars, he could generate postmodern essays which appeared to be authentic.

  In essence, this meant that complete nonsense (as the text was random) could be passed off as authoritative and credible simply because it matched the expected appearance of this hard to understand writing.”

  He concludes:

  “If we want to reclaim our Democracy, it is critical we allow open and honest debate to occur. As the last few years have shown, we cannot have the ‘expert’s’ narrative be shielded from all scrutiny, and as the internet has shown, the monopoly they used to hold over the truth is rapidly fading away. Conversely, I believe if the experts wish to regain the credibility they have lost, they must earn it by publicly defending the merits of their positions, and I believe as time moves forward, the expert class will soon realize this too.”

  This isn’t just a problem in liberal arts. Science itself has been seriously compromised throughout the COVID years, when people from statistical and medical departments grabbed hold of the chance to crank out an amazing number of papers on COVID (I’ve seen numbers in the six figures). It was all for purposes of resume padding and career advancement.

  For two years now, many of these papers on government controls, masks, and the supposed effectiveness of masks, even those cited and celebrated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, have been proven to be deeply compromised and even fraudulent. Hardly a day goes by without a new discovery of bad or faked data or poor study structure. Some have been retracted but most survived.

  It’s really too easy to chalk up the Claudine Gay situation to DEI, or what we used to call affirmative action, though that clearly plays a role here. The problem is actually more pervasive and affects the whole of elite intellectual circles. Many in these realms have institutionalized what a regular person would call corruption: a wink and a nod toward academic fakery simply because the practice is so pervasive and deeply baked into the process of career advancement.

  One reason that DEI recently took hold of academia so ferociously is that intellectual standards had long ago slipped to nothing, and corruption had already taken the place of the sincere search for and teaching of truth. Once that was gone, whole institutions came around to embracing fakery, fraud, plagiarism, political favoritism, and outright and brazen hoaxes as just the way business is done.

  Indeed, in deeply corrupt institutions, there is simply no way to make it to the top without participating in the corruption. This was how it worked in the Soviet Union. Because the moral compromise is so pervasive, the only way you could be trusted with real power is if others in power have something on you. That’s when corruption becomes thoroughly endemic. Corruption becomes the currency of institutional advancement. Staying clean and doing good work causes you to sink further and further: loser!

  This is where we are today with elite academia. It’s not just Claudine Gay, who, incidentally, has already returned to her position on the faculty to take in $900K per year. It’s everywhere in the leadership at all levels. This is why revelations of her plagiarism were a shock to no one. Now we are in a situation where thousands of administrators and faculty are sitting ducks, just awaiting the dreaded moment in which some intrepid researcher compares one published work with another.

  In the meantime, they will all keep covering up for each other and trying to keep the racket going on for as long as possible. The difference now is that the public has caught on. Harvard’s applications are in freefall. This extends to the whole of elite academia too. Once their credibility with the public is gone, there is no turning back. Somehow it all seems fitting for an age when the loss of trust is bringing absolutely every feature of elite presence in our lives into question.

  In college and having finished a class paper much earlier than everyone else, the professor assigned me the task of finding plagiarism in other student papers. I spent several days at the library. I easily discovered that about 40 percent of the papers were compromised. This was long before the internet, so I can imagine the situation is much worse now. These students weren’t reporting what they knew; they were merely faking it. What the students did back then is what faculty do now.

  Faking it: that’s a good description of a problem that is pervasive in elite intellectual circles today. This affects media, corporate empires, academia, and government. It’s so accepted that one is considered meritorious for doing a better job of faking than anyone else. That’s a chilling reality but one that anyone and everyone with experience in these realms knows to be true.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 20:20

• Watch: Indian Navy Boards Merchant Ship Ambushed By Pirates Off Somalia
  Watch: Indian Navy Boards Merchant Ship Ambushed By Pirates Off Somalia

  The tanker hijack situation in the Arabian Sea which was first reported Thursday involving a distressed Liberian-flagged merchant vessel off the coast of Somalia has come to an end after Indian Navy intervention.

  The warship INS Chennai was already patrolling regional waters and was dispatched to assist the vessel, ending in the successful rescue of all 21 crew members, including 15 Indians aboard the MV Lila Norfolk. Pirates had ambushed the vessel, in waters frequently targeted by Somali militants.

  

  The crew is said to be unharmed, as the Indian Navy carries out “sanitization” operations on the ship after boarding it, and without a firefight.

  “The attempt of hijacking by the pirates was probably abandoned with the forceful warning by the Indian Navy, marine patrol aircraft, of interception by an Indian Naval warship,” a New Delhi-based maritime think tank, the Maritime Policy Initiative at the Observer Research Foundation, told Reuters.

  India’s Navy said it “remains committed to ensuring [the] safety of merchant shipping in the region along with international partners and friendly foreign countries.”

  According to further details in a Gulf-based publication:

  The INS Chennai, a guided missile destroyer and part of India’s maritime force helping to protect shipping in the Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean, was sent to the scene of the hijacking attempt, along with maritime patrol aircraft, the navy said on Friday.

  It said its aircraft had been monitoring the ship’s movements while the INS Chennai sailed towards it to offer assistance.

  “The aircraft overflew the vessel on early morning of January 5, 2024, and established contact with the vessel, ascertaining the safety of the crew,” the navy said.

  The Indian Navy has released several videos showing commandos aiding and boarding the vessel…

  Somali militants have long threatened these waters, but given that the bulk of diverted Red Sea traffic must now travel via the Cape of Good Hope around Africa due to Houthi attacks related to the Gaza war, the fear is that the resulting increased traffic will push more vessels toward the Somali coast, leading to more ‘opportunity’ and ample potential targets for further piracy.

  * * *

  Map showing extent of Somali piracy in prior years, which greatly expanded in range from 2005 to 2010…

  

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 20:00

• 'To Make A Snowflake'
  ‘To Make A Snowflake’

  Authored by J.A.Frascino via AmericanThinker.com,

  A snowflake forms when cold water droplets freeze onto a nidus of dust or pollen in the atmosphere, creating an ice crystal.  

  Additional droplets are added in an infinitely variable pattern, forming a unique structure.  

  The product of a perfectly natural process taking about 30 minutes, a snowflake is a fragile entity, blown by the wind and threatened by warming, salt, shovels, and plows.

  There is nothing natural about the formation of a human snowflake.  

  

  The nidus is a normal child seeking identity in a complex society.  

  The first step is to disconnect him from traditional social foundations, viewed by the left as oppressive, while offering it nothing of substance to replace them.  

  Teach the child that his nation was built on slavery and is systemically racist, that religion is dictatorial and science-denying, that the traditional family is patriarchal, that gender designation is repressive, and that first names are too restraining.

  Having transformed the child into an isolated, self-immersed entity without an anchor, it is next necessary to weaken his resolve.  

  Teach the child that speech and events that may make him uncomfortable are an existential threat to his safety and well-being.  Teach him to be alert to microaggressions and to bullying.  Tell him that global warming will destroy the planet.  Allow him to skip classes and attend bereavement counseling when the Orange Man is elected.  Provide him with safe spaces.  Reward him not for accomplishment, but for participation.  Coddle and indulge him.  Capitalize upon his exalted status as the object of permissive parenting.  Discipline might be hurtful, especially for someone showing signs of emotional stress.  Allow him to find identity, escape, and safety in the alternate universe of social media.

  The snowflake is now fully formed — emotionally fragile, sheltered, socially withdrawn, and vulnerable to meltdown.  

  Just as physical stress builds strong bodies, dealing with emotional stress builds strong psyches.  Creating a stressful culture, and then taking every possible step to shelter the disenfranchised from having to deal with the stress so created, is how to make a snowflake.

  Snowflake creation is but one adverse outcome of leftist “change America” activism — activism that seeks immediate gratification through vengeful attack on the “oppressors,” with apparent disregard for the outcome of its actions.  Save the planet — ban fossil fuels!  Replace nationalistic xenophobia with open borders.  End racism by replacing merit with diversity.  Reduce crime by not prosecuting it.  Support the economy with fiscal stimulus.  Eliminate misogyny by prioritizing career over family.  What could go wrong?

  If the chaos arising from “changing America” creates snowflakes, they must simply be protected and coddled; excused from social interaction and having to go to school; and given drugs for their increased rates of anxiety, depression, drug addiction, and suicide.  But not to worry — they will grow up to be part of the Democrat party base, left with no alternative but to seek solace in the embrace of a nurturing government.  (As in Obama’s “The Life of Julia.”)

  Turning to the government, led by the Democrat party, to resolve the chaos created by the intentional churning of discontent in matters of race, sex, and class is the ultimate overriding goal of the left.  The creation of snowflakes is an integral part of that process.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 19:40

• Millions Brace For Northeast's Biggest Snowstorm In Years
  Millions Brace For Northeast’s Biggest Snowstorm In Years

  Millions of Americans from the Carolinas to Maine are under winter weather alerts ahead of what could be the biggest snowstorm to hit the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast in at least a year.  

  

  The storm is developing on Friday along the Gulf Coast. According to computer forecast models, major cities along the Northeast’s I-95 corridor will likely escape the brunt of the snowstorm (not what snow lovers want to hear). However, regions in the Interior Northeast could see upwards of 12 inches of snow. 

  The system will traverse the Southeast and into the mid-Atlantic Friday into Saturday. Snow, sleet, and rain are expected across the Atlantic region on Saturday, quickly changing to rain from DC to Baltimore to Philadelphia to New York City. Some metro areas along the I-95 might record an inch of snow.  

  The good news is that a multi-year snow drought could end across some of the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast metro areas. 

  Areas north and west of the DC to Baltimore to Philadelphia to NYC could record 4 to 8 inches of snow, with isolated amounts over a foot. 

  The first in a series of 7 winter storms that is predicted to occur by https://t.co/YxtQAImEWH. The first storm will bring heavy snow to PA into New England. The pattern will get busy through March and in that pattern, a storm of Big Daddy potential may occur. pic.twitter.com/Vrdygetb1d

  — Weather Madness (@HenryMargusity) January 5, 2024

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

  Rob Carolan, owner of Hometown Forecast Services, told Bloomberg that rain is expected to start in New York City late Saturday, with the storm strengthening overnight. He said northern New Jersey, the Hudson Valley, and parts of Connecticut might see 2 to 6 inches of snow, adding Upstate New York and interior New England could see upwards of 10 inches. 

  

  Carolan said, “It is the best snowfall we have seen in over a year in many of these locations.” 

  We noted on Monday, “First Time In Nearly 2 Years”: Snow Drought In Major US Northeast Cities May End Soon, and published a note this morning about an incoming cold blast for the Lower 48 later this month. 

  Is there another storm forecasted for next week? 

  Power outages could be a big story by midweek next week. Back to back systems… with rains… snow… melt… more rains… then huge winds. Gust maps continue to show widespread 50mph+ across the eastern US. Some even higher along the coast! Early Wednesday AM here shows the… pic.twitter.com/zeVT1TWTWJ

  — Mike’s Weather Page (@tropicalupdate) January 5, 2024

  Thank you, El Nino.  

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 19:20

• Politicized, Progressive Big Philanthropy
  Politicized, Progressive Big Philanthropy

  Authored by Michael E. Hartmann via RealClear Wire,

  Steve Miller’s December 12 RealClearInvestigations article, “How Tax-Exempt Nonprofits Skirt U.S. Law to Turn Out the Democrat Base in Elections,” is both jarring and informative and helps frame many important questions facing philanthropy, conservatism, and conservative philanthropy.

  

  Miller describes the general size and scope of activities being conducted a progressive nonprofit infrastructure that has “taken on an outsized part of the Democratic Party’s election strategy” and, specifically, how they “work around legal restrictions on nonprofits that accept tax-deductible donations by selectively engaging in nonpartisan efforts including boosting voter education and participation.”

  The infrastructure also includes nonprofit grantmaking institutions, which are also tax-advantaged and also evade restrictions on partisan political activity.

  As Institute for Free Speech chair Bradley Smith tells Miller, that progressive grant-recipient groups outnumber, outraise, and outspend conservative entities. Contemporary, politicized Big Philanthropy — as my Giving Review co-editor Bill Schambra has noted — is “an oppressively arid, progressive monoculture” and “[c]onservatives need to face this truth.”

  On the day Miller’s article appeared, the Subcommittee on Oversight of the House Ways and Means Committee held a hearing on the how the growth of the tax-exempt sector is changing the U.S. political landscape. During the generally non-contentious proceeding, members and witnesses floated or endorsed several potential discrete changes to law and regulations on tax-exemption, foreign funding of exempt nonprofits, and the degree to which those groups and their also-exempt funders can engage in voter registration.

  The proposed reforms included, among others, the following: (1) banning foreign contributions to tax-exempt nonprofits; (2) curbing contributions to political super PACs from social-welfare nonprofits that accept foreign contributions; (3) barring private foundations and public charities from funding and engaging in voter-registration projects; (4) banning private contributions to state- and local-government election administration; and (5) redesigning Internal Revenue Service Forms 990, including to request and then provide to the public more information about “fiscally sponsored” projects, and 990-PF.

  Two days after Miller’s article and the oversight subcommittee hearing—at the other end of the U.S. Capitol, Sen. J. D. Vance, Republican of Ohio, introduced the College Endowment Accountability Act, which would increase the excise tax on endowment net investment income from 1.4 percent to 35% for secular, private, nonprofit colleges and universities with at least $10 billion in assets under management.

  Big Philanthropy is big mostly because of its similarly large nonprofit endowments. Vance’s bold bill would be a decidedly non-incremental policy step, and could serve as an opening bargaining position for future discussions about all such endowments’ tax treatment.

  Rates and Rises

  The current 1.4-percent tax rate on the endowments of colleges (whose student bodies are majority U.S. citizens, where more than 500 students are tuition-paying, and where total assets exceed $500,000 per student) was set by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.

  “While it is a relatively small tax, this new law is a first step towards the exploration of taxing non-profit entities on the vast sums of wealth they hold in their endowments,” University of Kentucky law professor Jennifer Bird-Pollan wrote in a Pepperdine Law Review article about the tax and its wider implications.

  “If we believe the rationale for imposing the excise tax stems from a distaste for excessive accumulation on the part of these wealthy universities, perhaps we should take the rationale even further,” she observed. “Why are we focused only on universities? … Seeing the 2017 tax bill’s university endowment excise tax as opening the door to imposing tax as an incentive tool to stop the excessive accumulation of wealth by non-profit entities lets us imagine what else we might see ….”

  In fact, in the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020, Congress set the excise tax on the income of private-foundation endowments at a flat 1.39%. Prior to the simplifying change, the rate was 2% percent, but could decrease to one percent if a foundation increased its charitable grant distributions.

  Rationales for Reform

  If one believes there’s a good rationale for proposing an increase of the tax in the higher-education context, it seems the same rationale would apply to private foundations. Here’s how Vance’s explained his reasoning for a higher-ed endowment tax increase on the Senate floor: “How is it,” he asked, that universities, which “should be responsive to the public will, responsive to their donors and alumni, responsive to their students, how is it that they can go so far so fast without any pushback?”

  The answer, he continued, “is university endowments, which have grown incredibly large on the backs of subsidies from the taxpayers, and they have made these universities completely independent of any political, financial, or other pressure ….”

  In 2021, prior to formally declaring his Senate candidacy, Vance floated a reform idea that treated the tax status of all nonprofits, including foundations, the same. “[W]e should eliminate all special privileges that exist for our nonprofit and foundation class,” he told a Claremont Institute audience.

  Why is it that if you’re spending all your money to teach literal racism to our children in their schools, why do we give you special tax breaks instead of taxing you more? …

  The decision to give those foundations and those organizations special privileges is a decision made by public policy. It was made by man, and we can undo it.

  Three months later, Vance then specifically applied this equivalence. “Any charitable organization with an endowment over $100 million must spend 20% of its endowment each year, or else it loses its 501c3 status and the preferential treatment of its income,” he proposed. Echoing his made-by-man-and-can-be-unmade thinking, Vance notes, “The Ford Foundation and the Harvard endowment don’t have a constitutional right to tax advantages that are unavailable to the vast majority of American citizens.”

  Questions

  Along with the similar work of others — including at the Capital Research Center, where I’m a senior fellow — Miller’s article, the Ways and Means oversight-subcommittee hearing, and Vance’s bill raise even more fundamental questions. These are especially relevant to conservatism, and conservative philanthropy.

  Of philanthropy: What’s it for? If it’s for charity, but it being used for partisan electoral politics, what’s to be done?

  Of conservatism: Where on the spectrum of proposed policy reforms, between the carefully tailored oversight subcommittee options and Vance  more-existential “threat” to large nonprofit endowments, should principle nudge us? Slight alterations or frontal assaults, or a mixture of both?

  Finally, regarding conservative philanthropy: Can it face the truth of how radically progressive, policy-oriented, and partisan most Big Philanthropy has become? Are conservatives bound by principle to defend such a regime? Is the traditional understanding of charity worth somehow trying to preserve despite how the system has been abused by partisan politicization?

  Or should the conservative side of philanthropy aggressively “fight fire with fire” and engage in the same kind of politicization itself, if only to try neutralizing the other effort? And if the other side’s fire so often includes successfully influencing the formulation, passage, and implementation of government policy — shouldn’t its fire too?

  Michael E. Hartmann is a co-editor of The Giving Review and a senior fellow at the Capital Research Center.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 19:00

• Defense Minister Says Israel Won't Assert Civil Control Over Gaza Post-War, In Bow To US Pressure
  Defense Minister Says Israel Won’t Assert Civil Control Over Gaza Post-War, In Bow To US Pressure

  Israel’s defense minister Yoav Gallant on Friday published and circulated a document laying out the military’s “vision for Phase 3” of the Gaza war, which ostensibly lays out a new scaled-down, more targeted approach for operations in the Gaza Strip. 

  However, Gallant made clear the contents of the plan are not yet official Israeli policy, only that these are his ideas. “In the northern region of the Gaza strip, we will transition to a new combat approach in accordance with military achievements on the ground,” Gallant’s office said of the policy proposal.

  Operations will continue to focus on raids, demolishing tunnels, air and ground strikes, as well special forces operations in the north – even including all of these tactics apparently also continuing in the south, which will go on “for as long as is deemed necessary” until Hamas is eradicated and the hostages are freed.

  

  Israel has recently announced a drawdown of reserve forces active in the Gaza Strip, and repositioning of troops, with an eye toward more targeted operations, which has been widely seen as a nod to US pressure for the campaign to deescalate. Gaza’s Health Ministry has cited a Palestinian death toll of over 22,400 – which it says are mostly women and children.

  Defense chief Gallant’s plan is most interesting when it comes to the Hamas ‘day after’ – given this has been a point of contention between the Netanyahu and Biden governments. The White House has floated a plan that would eventually give control over to the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority (PA).

  But Netanyahu has consistently rejected this, calling the PA terror supporters and sympathizers. But the Gallant plan is seeking to strike a compromise, it appears: 

  “Gaza residents are Palestinian, therefore Palestinian bodies will be in charge, with the condition that there will be no hostile actions or threats against the State of Israel,” Gallant’s office said in a statement on Thursday.

  Al Jazeera’s Sara Khairat, reporting from Tel Aviv, said Gallant made it clear that Israeli officials want a “Palestinian entity” to be in charge of running civilian affairs in the Gaza Strip, but with “very specific conditions”.

  “Those conditions are that they won’t act hostile towards Israel, and they won’t act against it in any way, shape, or form.”

  It’s unclear who this “Palestinian entity” would be if the PA is not considered among the options. But the importance in this lies in that it’s another significant concession to Washington’s will… an affirmation that Israel won’t assert civilian control over Gaza in a post-war scenario.

  However, the reality is that we could be years from seeing any such ‘day after’ plan materialize, given that Hamas is still intact, after having lost likely thousands of fighters. And the sad question must be asked: will there be any Palestinian civilians remaining in the Strip to speak of?

  Hamas will meanwhile continue to employ guerrilla tactics utilizing small teams which attack from the vast network of tunnels, which means they do not suffer large-scale losses in any single assault operation.

  * * * 

  Below: Hamas has been publishing footage of its close-quarter ambushes in Gaza almost on a daily basis…

  ⚡️Hamas publishes footage of their fighters targeting zionist vehicles in Gaza city axis pic.twitter.com/O616d8oZs9

  — War Monitor (@WarMonitors) January 4, 2024

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

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 18:40

• Supreme Court Takes Up Trump Ballot Disqualification Case
  Supreme Court Takes Up Trump Ballot Disqualification Case

  Authored by Catherine Yang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court accepted a petition for immediate review regarding a Colorado Supreme Court decision to strike former President Donald Trump from the 2024A presidential ballot.

  “The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted,” reads the procedural order.

  Oral arguments are scheduled for Feb. 8.

  Petitioners’ and amicus briefs are due by Jan. 18, and respondents’ and amicus briefs are due by Jan. 31, with any reply briefs due by Feb. 5.

  The Colorado Supreme Court had disqualified President Trump as a candidate on Dec. 19 in an order that left little chance for the actual removal of his name from the ballot.

  On Dec. 27, the Colorado GOP filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court asking three separate questions regarding the application of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment and political parties’ First Amendment rights to primary their candidate of choice.

  On Jan. 3, President Trump filed a separate petition with a simpler question: Did the Colorado Supreme Court err in its ruling?

  The U.S. Supreme Court has taken up President Trump’s petition, and has yet to accept to reject the Colorado GOP’s petition.

  ‘Chaos’

  Colorado was the first state to disqualify President Trump, and the first state to hold hearings regarding the merits of a Section 3 challenge at all.

  The legal theory that President Trump can be disqualified under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment rests on the premise that the events of Jan. 6, 2021, constituted an insurrection, and that President Trump actively participated in or instigated it. It also assumes that individual state courts at various levels have the authority to adjudicate the eligibility of a presidential candidate under Section 3.

  There have been at least 60 of these challenges across the country in recent months, according to President Trump’s attorneys.

  However, the majority of these challenges have been dismissed for a wide range of reasons, with several courts citing lack of jurisdiction.

  Officials and some judges have argued that if individual state courts were meant to be able to rule if a presidential candidate engaged in insurrection and whether that affected his eligibility, it could result in “chaos,” with upwards of 50 different rulings.

  In several amicus briefs filed with both the Colorado GOP and Trump petitions, experts and concerned voters argued much the same.

  The Colorado decision has already created a ripple effect, with legislators in other states calling for disqualifications of President Trump as a candidate on their own ballots, as well as other states calling for the disqualification of President Joe Biden from state primaries in retaliation.

  Soon after the Colorado Supreme Court ruling, Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows similarly disqualified President Trump as a candidate in a decision phrased as having little chance of actually removing him from the ballot. That decision is being appealed in state court, and marks the third jurisdiction that has found that President Trump engaged in an insurrection—without him, or any Jan. 6 defendant, having been charged with such.

  The lawsuits and wide range of rulings have raised a host of legal questions: Does the Constitution allow states to define “insurrection” individually? Does Congress hold sole authority over disqualifying candidates under Section 3? Does the disqualification from holding office allow states to prohibit candidates from running in primary elections, or can a candidate be disqualified or exempted via a vote by Congress as late as Inauguration Day?

  As such, several amicus brief authors have requested the U.S. Supreme Court adjudicate more than what the appellants have asked, including to hold a full hearing on the merits of the case.

  A group of 45 Colorado voters had filed an amicus brief on the Colorado GOP petition, urging the Supreme Court to do more than merely reverse the Colorado Supreme Court ruling.

  Such a ruling “would solve nothing and actually makes matters worse,” they wrote. “The Colorado court has unleashed harms which will creep beyond Colorado’s borders.”

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 18:19

• NRA Head LaPierre Steps Down Over "Health Reasons"
  NRA Head LaPierre Steps Down Over “Health Reasons”

  Ahead of a civil corruption trial in Manhattan, embattled longtime leader of the National Rifle Association, Wayne LaPierre, announced to board members that he would step down on Friday.

  “With pride in all that we have accomplished, I am announcing my resignation from the NRA,” LaPierre wrote in a statement published on social media platform X.

  

  He said, “I’ve been a card-carrying member of this organization for most of my adult life, and I will never stop supporting the NRA and its fight to defend Second Amendment freedom. My passion for our cause burns as deeply as ever.”

  NRA EVP Wayne LaPierre Announces Resignation from NRA

  The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) announced today that Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre announced he is stepping down from his position as chief executive of the organization, effective January 31.… pic.twitter.com/GbGBWktu7C

  — NRA (@NRA) January 5, 2024

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

  The resignation, effective at the end of this month, is not part of a deal with New York’s attorney general, Letitia James. “Longtime NRA executive and Head of General Operations Andrew Arulanandam will become the interim CEO & EVP of the NRA,” the NRA said. 

  LaPierre submitted his resignation at a board meeting in Irving, Texas, citing “health reasons” as a significant driver in his decision. 

  This new turn of events is set to change the dynamics of the Manhattan trial, as James sought to remove LaPierre from his head role, which he has held since 1991. 

  Under LaPierre’s leadership, the NRA became a powerful lobbying group for the Second Amendment. However, its various compromises on 2A issues has allowed Gun Owners of America (GOA), a ‘no compromise’ gun lobby group, to flourish in the shadows with a surge in new members and plowing millions of dollars into lobbying.

  The NRA’s most recent compromise was the Trump bump stock ban.

  

  Law-abiding Americans are gravitating towards GOA, which will likely displace the NRA as the nation’s premier gun rights group in the next several years in terms of spending on Capitol Hill and members. 

  GOA had our BEST YEAR YET in 2023 and we are incredibly thankful to our staff, members, and supporters across the country who fought for the Second Amendment. 🥳

  Scroll through the 🧵⤵️ to see GOA’s 2023 victories!

  What is your favorite GOA win?! pic.twitter.com/oViSyqaas6

  — Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) January 2, 2024

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

  The era of no compromise is only beginning. 

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 18:00

• 3 Years Ago His Wife Was Killed On Jan. 6, Now Aaron Babbitt's Mission Is Clear
  3 Years Ago His Wife Was Killed On Jan. 6, Now Aaron Babbitt’s Mission Is Clear

  Authored by Joseph Hanneman via The Epoch Times,

  January 6 has become Aaron Babbitt’s hill to die on.

  

  Over the three years since Ashli Babbitt was shot and killed outside the House Speaker’s Lobby at the U.S. Capitol, her husband has made it his mission to investigate her death and seek justice.

  “It’s not really possible to put it into words,” Mr. Babbitt told The Epoch Times in an extended series of interviews.

  “I wouldn’t wish it on anybody. But like I’ve said before, I mean, we’re all born with a purpose. You never know what that purpose is until it kicks you right between the legs.”

  For Mr. Babbitt, the jolt came in the early afternoon Pacific time on Jan. 6, 2021, when he received urgent phone calls to turn on the television. Someone had been shot at the protests at the U.S. Capitol. He remembers seeing Fox News anchor Bill Hemmer declare that the woman shot near the House of Representatives had died.

  Then everything went black.

  

  Aaron Babbitt ponders his journey since his wife was killed on Jan. 6, 2021, as he looks out over North San Diego Bay. (Joseph M. Hanneman/The Epoch Times)

  “That kick between the legs for me was watching my wife die on TV,” he said. “So my purpose now is just to fight for Ashli until I can’t fight anymore. I don’t even know what that means. But I’ll continue doing it until I can’t.”

  During the first 18 months, Mr. Babbitt was prominent in news media, defending his wife from an onslaught of hate for being an alleged insurrectionist, a rioter, a vandal, and someone who attacked the Capitol. Well before many facts came out, he knew in his heart that his wife was none of the things of which she was being accused.

  “Ashli’s name is going to be written history books at some point,” he said.

  “And I want it to be written correctly.”

  Mr. Babbitt recently sat down to reflect on nearly 36 months of suffering, investigating, and preparing for justice.

  Sitting on a park bench along the shore of North San Diego Bay, Mr. Babbitt watched the tour boats, catamarans, speed boats, and the occasional U.S. Navy warship sail past. On this fall afternoon, the USS Boxer headed out to sea while the USS Spruance made her way into port.

  Just beyond the opposite shore, a steady stream of aircraft took off from the sprawling Naval Station North Island, including helicopters similar to ones that Mr. Babbitt worked on for years as a U.S. Marine Corps mechanic.

  ‘It Was Awful’

  The first three months after his wife was gunned down by Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd, Mr. Babbitt struggled with the shock and what seemed like a never-ending line of haters who harassed him at his family pool-cleaning business in San Diego. He needed to decide what his life would become after being widowed at age 39.

  “From the start, I wouldn’t even look at the browser on my phone,“ he said.

  ”I wouldn’t turn my TV on for like a month because I was so traumatized by what I‘d seen. Anytime I’d log on and see pictures of Ashli dead, I’d get terrified and then shut it off. It was awful.”

  

  Aaron and Ashli Babbitt on an outing. ‘She just loved life,’ Babbitt said. (Photo Courtesy Aaron Babbitt)

  Mr. Babbitt made a gut-wrenching decision that rather than withdraw into his grief, he would launch a nonstop investigation of the shooting. That meant tirelessly searching for clues while wading through a sea of online disinformation and unbridled hatred.

  “I got to the point where I realized I need to be the foremost expert on what happened to my wife,” he said. “And in being that, I need to watch every single second of footage of what happened to her.

  “So I just turned it into a daily routine,” Mr. Babbitt said.

  “I‘d wake up and search Ashli’s name on Twitter. I’d read all the bad stuff. I‘d look at all the pictures. I’d see all the videos.

  “It didn’t come very quickly. But it got to a point where I have now seen everything,” he said. “More than all of you hateful people have seen. Everything. You can’t shock me anymore.”

  ‘Hill to Die On’

  Mr. Babbitt’s visibility in the first year after the shooting came at a price. The pool-cleaning business he ran with his wife came under attack. The business voicemail was a nonstop wave of hate-filled messages, such as, “Can Ashli come out and clean my pool?”

  “We lost, like, 30 percent of our customers just based on name recognition. They didn’t want to be associated with us. And then I couldn’t take new customers on because I was getting death threats.”

  Mr. Babbitt decided to sell the business and focus full-time on investigating his wife’s death. He has not looked back.

  “I ended up having to sell that business for pennies on the dollar. It hasn’t been easy,“ he said.

  ”I’ve sacrificed a lot. But I’m willing to do that for her. This is my hill to die on.”

  

  Aaron Babbitt with his wife, Ashli, who was killed at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. (Aaron Babbitt)

  Mr. Babbitt recalled seeing his wife reading her Twitter feed one day and laughing at how angry many people became after she shared her views on politics or current events.

  “There were a lot of tears, there was a lot of anger, there’s a lot of rage,” he recalled. “But I got to the point after I’d seen this for so long, this one night it just clicked in my head.”

  “‘Wow, these people are really mad at me. They really hate me,’” he recalled her saying. “She’s laughing at the same time. So that moment came when I was reading all this bad [expletive]. And then I remembered that moment with Ashli. I just started laughing out loud. She had to have been there in that moment to remind me of that.”

  Mr. Babbitt made the decision to forge ahead, to resist thoughts of revenge and focus instead on justice. It was a battle inside himself.

  “I had three options. I mean, I could turtle up and go into my shell and go away forever,” he said.

  “I could do something brazen, you know, and try and exact revenge for my wife, and then just be dead or incarcerated, the husband of a dead ‘domestic terrorist,’ as they like they label her.

  “Or I could go about it the smart, calculated way and bring these people to justice,“ Mr. Babbitt said.

  ”Do what’s right for Ashli in the long run of history.”

  The beginning of that journey saw some “very dark days,” he said.

  “It’s hard to put into words, but I believe—and I will continue to believe—that I chose the right path,” Mr. Babbitt said. “Because it’s not about me. It’s really not about me. It’s about Ashli.

  “Ashi’s voice was taken that day. And now I speak for her,” he said. “And if I did anything stupid, then that voice would be lost.”

  Secret Tour of Capitol

  Part of that investigative journey led Mr. Babbitt and his attorney to Washington to retrace the steps Ashli took on Jan. 6.

  In 2022, Mr. Babbitt was given a secret tour of the U.S. Capitol, arranged by U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas). Mr. Babbitt and his attorney were instructed to be at a certain location near the Capitol late on a weeknight.

  

  A view of the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Jan. 19, 2022. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

  A black SUV with dark windows pulled up at the specified location at the appointed hour. The pair got in. Mr. Babbitt looked and realized Mr. Gohmert was driving. The now-retired congressman dropped the men off at a discreet entrance to the Capitol, and they went inside.

  Mr. Babbitt was given a private moment on the spot outside the Speaker’s Lobby where his wife was fatally shot by Lt. Byrd. He was then given a tour of the Capitol by Mr. Gohmert and other supportive lawmakers.

  Not long after that tour, Mr. Babbitt and his attorney went to the O’Neill House Office Building to view U.S. Capitol Police security video. The invitation for that visit came from then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.).

  Mr. McCarthy and staff from the Committee on House Administration promised Mr. Babbitt he could obtain any videos he needed for his investigation, he said. More than 10 months later, however, Mr. Babbitt is still waiting. Despite submitting a detailed request, no videos have been turned over by the House.

  Police ‘Breakdown’

  When he went through all of the cell-phone videos taken in the hallway outside the Speaker’s Lobby, Mr. Babbitt saw his wife’s years of training as a military police officer and the tours she spent in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. She looked at what unfolded around her not only as a witness but as someone who served in the U.S. Air Force and Army National Guard.

  “She saw a breakdown of the police. Three police officers were not acting correctly in front of that door,” Mr. Babbitt said. “They weren’t acting like they were there to defend that door.”

  Officers Kyle Yetter and Christopher Lanciano and Sgt. Timothy Lively faced an angry group of protesters demanding to go into the House Chamber and make their voices heard. The officers had no pepper spray or batons but were armed with service pistols.

  

  Moments before being fatally shot, Ashli Babbitt confronts three police offers for not stopping the vandalism outside the U.S. House. (Video Still/Tayler Hansen)

  The situation went off the rails when Zachary Alam vented his rage by punching the glass in the doors, including one strike that went right between Sgt. Lively and Officer Lanciano’s heads. Mr. Alam seemed emboldened by their inaction. He eventually used a black riot helmet like a cudgel to smash the glass.

  “They were just standing there, letting people punch around their heads, not doing anything to quell the violence or stop the violence and the people who were creating violence and havoc that day,” Mr. Babbitt said. “They weren’t stopping them. And then Ashli yelled at them to ‘call [expletive] help.’”

  Ms. Babbitt tried to intervene with Mr. Alam at one point, but he brushed her aside. She retreated to the north wall, where videos show she shouted against the violence.

  “Once they start going full force on those doors, that’s when you hear Ashli screaming at them to stop,“ Mr. Babbitt said. ”‘Stop! No, don’t! Stop! Wait!’ And that was when it had to have been—just knowing Ash, it had to have been that moment. She’s like, ‘What the [expletive] is going on? What is happening right now?’”

  Memories of Iraq

  Perhaps at those very moments, Ms. Babbitt recalled the worst of her military deployments. Camp Bucca, Iraq, was a brutal duty assignment. She had to guard jihadis who would have gladly cut her throat if they escaped their confines.

  

  Ashli Babbitt was a military police officer in the U.S. Air Force and Army National Guard. (Courtesy of Micki Witthoeft)

  “It was just all detainees that they would bring in. There was CIA coming in all the time,” Mr. Babbitt said. “Blackhawks coming in, dropping people off, taking people out.

  “Lines of SUVs coming in, taking people out, bringing people in,” he said. “Riots—they kill each other. They threatened to kill our forces.”

  One day, Ms. Babbitt had to run from the shower in just a towel and take cover in a foxhole because the base was being shelled, he said. On another occasion, Ms. Babbitt and another female MP came across three prisoners who had tunneled out of their cells.

  “They got into a hand-to-hand fistfight with three of them before the guys in the tower could run down and help them,” he said. “So it’s two females fighting three grown men.”

  Ms. Babbitt enlisted at age 17 and had to get her mother’s permission to sign up before age 18. During four deployments from her Texas base, Mr. Babbitt said, she guarded an airfield for a visit of President George W. Bush and served as security for then-Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice.

  

  U.S. Marine veteran Aaron Babbitt says the Capitol Police lieutenant who killed his wife Ashli violated protocol for use of deadly force. (CapitolPunishmentTheMovie.com/Bark at the Hole Productions)

  ‘I Have My Purpose’

  Looking back on it all, Mr. Babbitt said there’s no way he could have known how big—and tragic—Jan. 6 would turn out to be for him and his wife.

  When he kissed her goodbye at home on Jan. 5, he recalled, she sensed his unease about the trip.

  “The last words to my face that she spoke to me were, ‘You’re worried about me, aren’t you?‘ I’m always worried. I’m always worried about you,” Mr. Babbitt said.

  “And she said, ‘I’ll be fine. Everything’s gonna be alright.’”

  Mr. Babbitt reflected on how far he has come since hearing the fateful news broadcast the afternoon of Jan. 6.

  “I was not in a good place. It was a very deep dark place,“ he recalled. ”But I pulled out of it. Knowing that I have my purpose. And my purpose is for Ashli.

  “And as sad as it is to say, maybe it was Ashli’s purpose at that point in time to be wrongfully shot. And to be that person in history to shine a light on what was really wrong that day and during those times.”

  

  Massive crowds gather as President Donald Trump speaks to supporters from The Ellipse near the White House on January 6, 2021. (Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)

  While Jan. 6 is obviously a difficult day every year, Jan. 8 also brings memories and sadness. He was supposed to grab her a takeout meal from Roberto’s, one of their favorite haunts.

  “I was supposed to pick her up at 5:30 on Friday, and she said, maybe with a California burrito,” Mr. Babbitt said. “People don’t know what a Cali burrito is. But it’s got french fries on it. She wanted me to pick her up on Friday at 5:30 at San Diego International with a California burrito.”

  He planned to order the Cali just as she liked it: carne asada, fries, cheese, sour cream, guacamole, and pico de gallo.

  “Want to talk about hard,“ he said. ”Five-thirty hit here on Friday and I was like, ‘I’m supposed to be picking her up right now.’”

  But now, the grief takes a back seat. Mr. Babbitt knows it is a time for action—and justice.

  “I know she’s always with me,” he said. “But it took a while. It did. It took a little while, but I just knew that I had to bury my grief and bury any bad thoughts that I had in my head.

  “Because if I am nothing but 100 percent focused on my fight for Ashli and what we’re doing, then I’m no good to her.”

  Aaron Babbitt fully believes that justice is coming in his wife’s case.

  “Yeah, I’m confident we’re gonna get there,” he said quietly. “Yeah, I will. I will. I’ll go down trying.”

  *  *  *

  The Epoch Times original documentary “The Real Story of January 6 Part 2: The Long Road Home” will be available to full subscribers starting Saturday, Jan. 6, at 8:30 p.m. ET on EpochTV.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 17:40

Digest powered by RSS Digest

• Only Citizens Should Vote In America: Gingrich
  Only Citizens Should Vote In America: Gingrich

  Authored by Newt Gingrich via RealClear Wire,

  The next step in radically changing America is now underway. City officials in our national capital plan to allow non-citizens to vote next year.

  

  President Joe Biden let millions of illegal immigrants cross the border. Then he bussed them to Washington DC. The city’s Democratic machine now wants to let them vote – knowing they will almost certainly vote Democrat for all the support and assistance.

  This policy is a clear threat to American nationalism.

  Three characteristics define a survivable national identity.

  There must be a border which defines the nation. There must be a broad sense of history and common culture which enables people to see themselves as belonging to a common community. And there must be meaningful citizenship which gives people a stake in the larger national community (in our case, citizenship allows us to vote).

  The American left has been working overtime to erase all three of these characteristics.

  The left believes in open borders – and has done everything to make America open to millions of Biden’s illegal immigrants. This has not been the result of incompetence or lack of resources. This is deliberate policy. And, from the left’s standpoint, it is successful.

  The left hates American history. It despises the great men and women who sacrificed and worked to make America the most successful, prosperous, and freest country in the world. For three generations, the left has been brainwashing children into an anti-American worldview. The anti-American prejudice now infects most of our newsrooms and many of our larger corporations.

  Now that the left has been getting Biden’s illegal immigrants into the country, its members want to start letting illegal immigrants vote. In effect, the non-citizens would offset Americans with whom the left doesn’t agree. They are especially committed to getting new non-citizens to vote. Their dream of a huge American Latino-Democratic majority has been destroyed by the radicalism and real-world failures of Bidenism (Trump is now running ahead of Biden among American Latinos).

  A key test case for getting Biden’s illegal immigrants to vote in 2024 will be the City of Washington DC. Our national capital’s left-wing politicians are totally failing to protect residents from runaway crime (there were 959 car-jackings in DC in 2023). The city bureaucracy is driving sports teams out of town. The roads are decaying, and American citizens must visit their own national capital with a sense of concern for their own safety. Now, the DC City Council has decided its next contribution to American decay is to disenfranchise its own residents and allow non-citizens to vote.

  Now, the left – as they always do – will shout that being concerned about the votes of U.S. citizens being cancelled out by the votes of non-citizens is (you guessed it) racist. This is a ham-fisted attempt to shout down any discussion of what is an absurd, self-destructive policy that would make the entire concept of American citizenship meaningless.

  This is nothing but a fringe political position which is totally rejected by the American people.

  In a national survey from February 2021, Americans deeply opposed allowing non-citizens to vote in American elections. Further, they support requiring citizenship verification during voter registration.

  In Arizona, 81 percent support allowing only American citizens to vote and requiring citizenship verification to register to vote in federal elections. Only 15 percent oppose. In Maine, 75 percent support a ban on non-citizen voting and only 19 percent oppose. In Montana, the figures are 86 percent support and 11 percent oppose, and in West Virginia, they are 84 percent to 13 percent.

  In another national poll by McLaughlin & Associates from May 2021, 61 percent disapproved of “new laws in places such as California and Vermont that allow non-citizens to vote in U.S. elections.” Only 30 percent approved.

  Congress should move this month to block the DC politicians’ effort to let non-citizens vote in our national capital. Congress should also pass a law making it illegal for non-citizens to cast ballots in federal elections.

  The effort to let non-citizens overrule Americans must be stopped.

  For more commentary from Newt Gingrich, visit Gingrich360.com.

  Tyler Durden
  Fri, 01/05/2024 – 00:00

• More Than A 3rd Of US Adults Say Biden's Election Was Illegitimate: Poll
  More Than A 3rd Of US Adults Say Biden’s Election Was Illegitimate: Poll

  Authored by Samantha Flom via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  More than one-third of U.S. adults now believe that President Joe Biden wasn’t legitimately elected, a new survey shows, marking an uptick from December 2021.

  

  The Washington Post-University of Maryland poll, conducted last month, found that 36 percent of respondents believe that President Biden’s election was illegitimate—a 7-point increase from two years ago.

  Comparatively, 62 percent said he was legitimately elected, down from 69 percent in 2021.

  Republicans showed the largest decrease in belief in the president’s validity, dropping from 39 percent to 31 percent. Independents also saw a 6-point drop, from 72 percent to 66 percent, while Democrats saw a slight dip, from 94 percent to 91 percent.

  In the same vein, 33 percent of all adults said there’s solid evidence of widespread voter fraud during the 2020 election. That includes 62 percent of Republicans, 33 percent of independents, and 10 percent of Democrats.

  Overall, 63 percent said there’s no solid evidence.

  Election Integrity Still a Concern

  The survey’s results track with the findings of a CNN poll conducted in July 2023.

  That poll found that 38 percent of adults believed President Biden didn’t legitimately win the 2020 election. It was the highest percentage to have given that response out of the eight surveys that the outlet has conducted on that topic.

  Conversely, 61 percent said the president legitimately won enough votes to secure the presidency—a clear majority, but a new low.

  While a majority (51 percent) of those who doubted President Biden’s legitimacy said there was solid evidence that he lost the election, 49 percent said it was just their suspicion. Those results marked a significant decline in certainty among the group from 2021, when 73 percent said there was solid evidence.

  Nevertheless, the results across both polls show that questions linger about the validity of the 2020 election results for a significant portion of the public, despite the insistence of certain media outlets—including The Washington Post—that there’s no evidence of fraud.

  Former President Donald Trump, for his part, has maintained that the 2020 election was stolen—a claim that he’s currently defending in two separate criminal cases.

  Capitol Breach

  The rest of the Washington Post-UMD survey focused primarily on attitudes surrounding the Jan. 6 Capitol breach.

  Overall, the results show a slight softening in the public’s perception of the event, with 50 percent now saying that the protesters were “mostly violent,” compared to 54 percent who said the same previously.

  Among that group, Republicans again marked the largest shift over time, dropping from 26 percent to 18 percent. By contrast, both Democrats (77 percent) and independents (54 percent) alike were just 1 percent less likely to view the protesters as mostly violent, while those who viewed them as “mostly peaceful” (21 percent) or “equally peaceful and violent” (28 percent) increased slightly.

  Another finding was that fewer Americans hold President Trump responsible for the breach. Where 60 percent said he bears either “a great deal” or “a good amount” of responsibility for the event in 2021, only a slight majority (53 percent) now say the same.

  Republicans again account for most of that change, with just 14 percent holding the 45th president responsible, compared to 27 percent in 2021. However, it’s worth noting that Democrats saw the second-largest drop in this category, from 92 percent to 86 percent, while independents shifted just 1 point down to 56 percent.

  The results are noteworthy, given that two states recently disqualified the 45th president from appearing on their presidential primary ballots based on his alleged activities on and about Jan. 6, 2021.

  The Colorado Supreme Court and Maine’s Democrat Secretary of State Shenna Bellows argue that President Trump is ineligible to hold presidential office under the 14th Amendment, which bars certain individuals from holding federal offices if they have “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the United States.

  That legal theory has been floated by critics of the former president in multiple states as a reason for keeping him off the ballot.

  President Trump’s legal team disputes the clause’s applicability to the presidency and the depiction of the Capitol breach as an insurrection. His attorneys have appealed both states’ decisions, which have been suspended as the litigation plays out.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 23:20

• Was "January 6" A Manufactured Crisis? Media Icons To Clash In ZeroHedge's No-Holds-Barred Debate
  Was “January 6” A Manufactured Crisis? Media Icons To Clash In ZeroHedge’s No-Holds-Barred Debate

  

   

  Depending on whom you ask, it was either “the darkest day in American history” or “a guided tour.” To this day, the January 6 Capitol Riot remains one of the most divisive issues in American politics.

  Conservative pundits like Tucker Carlson and Dinesh D’Souza point to lengthy prison sentences for nonviolent trespassers, the killing of Ashley Babbitt, and suspicious characters like Ray Epps as evidence of a burgeoning “police state” entrapping and imprisoning dissidents.

  On the other hand, liberal pundits and never-Trumpers like MSNBC’s Joy Reid, Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney, believe Jan 6 was nothing short of an attempted coup by former president Donald Trump.

  According to recent polling by the University of Chicago, 80% of Democrats believe Trump broke the law by inciting the Capitol riots, while roughly half of Republicans believe he did nothing wrong: 

  

  Such divides have consequences.

  On December 19, the Colorado Supreme Court — citing “clear and convincing” evidence that he engaged in an “insurrection” — ruled that “President Trump is disqualified from holding the office of President” and barred the state’s Secretary from including Trump’s name on the ballot for upcoming GOP primary elections.

  This dispute over January 6 — and whether it was indeed an insurrection — may very well determine the next U.S. President.

  The ZeroHedge “January 6” Debate

  On the coming anniversary of January 6 (Saturday), ZeroHedge will present the second debate in our inaugural series aimed at bringing long-form dialogues back into the ideologically-siloed and echo-chambered media landscape.

  We will host an in-depth discussion on the various aspects of that fateful day in 2021, allowing people with all perspectives a chance to present evidence and make their argument.

  Our panel will include such media luminaries as Alex Jones, Darren Beattie, Glenn Greenwald on one side, and Ed and Brian Krassenstein, as well as YouTuber “Destiny” on the other.

  We hope to get closer to the truth of what happened on that day and get to the bottom of what creates such harsh social divides on this issue.

  Add To Your Calendar

  Set a reminder on your calendar for the Jan 6 ZeroHedge debate, airing on this website and on X, on January 6, 2024 at 7:00pm EST. We will also dedicate a portion of the debate to responding directly to questions submitted by our premium subscribers.

  

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 23:00

• This Is The Most Dangerous Time To Drive In Each US State
  This Is The Most Dangerous Time To Drive In Each US State

  Thousands of commuters around the world lose their lives in vehicular accidents each year, and in the U.S., the most dangerous time to drive can actually depend on which state you’re in.

  According to the CDC, car crashes are the eighth leading cause of death globally, and the leading cause for young people between the ages of 5–29 years old. Each day, the U.S. alone sees an average of 102 fatal traffic accidents.

  Visual Capitalist’s Freny Fernandes introduces this graphic by Clunker Junker uses data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to identify the most dangerous time to drive in each state of the country, based on traffic fatalities.

  

  The Deadly Hours

  On average, U.S. commuters lose over 50 hours of their time in rush hour traffic every year. In addition to being a frustrating drive, NHTSA data found that this time frame is also the most dangerous in some states.

  The number of fatal traffic accidents across various parts of the U.S. increases after 5pm, peaking between 9pm and 10pm.

  State	Most Dangerous Time to Drive
  Alabama	5:00‒5:59 p.m.
  Alaska	2:00‒2:59 p.m.
  Arizona	7:00‒7:59 p.m.
  Arkansas	5:00‒5:59 p.m.
  California	9:00‒9:59 p.m.
  Colorado	5:00‒5:59 p.m.
  Connecticut	7:00‒7:59 p.m.
  Delaware	5:00‒5:59 p.m.
  Florida	8:00‒8:59 p.m.
  Georgia	6:00‒6:59 p.m.
  Hawaii	8:00‒8:59 p.m.
  Idaho	4:00‒4:59 p.m.
  Illinois	6:00‒6:59 p.m.
  Indiana	9:00‒9:59 p.m.
  Iowa	5:00‒5:59 p.m.
  Kansas	1:00‒1:59 p.m.
  Kentucky	2:00‒2:59 p.m.
  Louisiana	9:00‒9:59 p.m.
  Maine	4:00‒4:59 p.m.
  Maryland	9:00‒9:59 p.m.
  Massachusetts	6:00‒6:59 p.m.
  Michigan	9:00‒9:59 p.m.
  Minnesota	4:00‒4:59 p.m.
  Mississippi	8:00‒8:59 p.m.
  Missouri	3:00‒3:59 p.m.
  Montana	2:00‒2:59 p.m.
  Nebraska	4:00‒4:59 p.m.
  Nevada	8:00‒8:59 p.m.
  New Hampshire	2:00‒2:59 p.m.
  New Jersey	8:00‒8:59 p.m.
  New Mexico	6:00‒6:59 p.m.
  New York	6:00‒6:59 p.m.
  North Carolina	6:00‒6:59 p.m.
  North Dakota	4:00‒4:59 p.m.
  Ohio	8:00‒8:59 p.m.
  Oklahoma	3:00‒3:59 p.m.
  Oregon	5:00‒5:59 p.m.
  Pennsylvania	3:00‒3:59 p.m.
  Rhode Island	9:00‒9:59 p.m.
  South Carolina	8:00‒8:59 p.m.
  South Dakota	1:00‒1:59 p.m.
  Tennessee	8:00‒8:59 p.m.
  Texas	9:00‒9:59 p.m.
  Utah	3:00‒3:59 p.m.
  Vermont	5:00‒5:59 p.m.
  Virginia	6:00‒6:59 p.m.
  Washington	5:00‒5:59 p.m.
  West Virginia	3:00‒3:59 p.m.
  Wisconsin	3:00‒3:59 p.m.
  Wyoming	3:00‒3:59 p.m.

  This is reported to be an outcome of various factors: low visibility at night, glaring headlights, more cars on the road, and a higher number of drunk drivers. In some states, regional geography and weather also contribute to dangerous road conditions, including hills and mountains, rain, snow, and strong winds.

  Another factor is congestion. More populated states with longer average commutes like California and Maryland had the most dangerous time to drive as later (between 9 p.m. to 10 p.m.), while central states with smaller populations like Kansas and South Dakota had earlier peak dangerous times (between 1 p.m. and 2 p.m.)

  The safest times to drive across all states? Early in the morning from 3 a.m. to 5 a.m.

  The Most Dangerous Time to Drive by Month and Day

  While holidays are a time for relaxation and celebration, they can be hazardous on the roads.

  According to NHTSA data, the summer and fall months are the most dangerous by average fatal accidents.

  

  June through August are the peak months of vacation travel in the U.S. and see increased traffic (often on high-speed highways and unfamiliar roads) and fatalities. But September is actually the most dangerous month to drive in America, as the Labor Day weekend and the new school term bring new drivers to the roads.

  Other popular U.S. holidays, including the Fourth of July, New Year’s Eve, and Halloween, are also more dangerous than average. In addition to increased instances of drinking and driving, many holidays involve long-distance travel, leading to fatigue.

  And finally, according to the NHTSA, the U.S. sees an average of 4.68 fatal accidents on Saturdays making it the most dangerous day. This reaches a peak of over seven fatal accidents between 9 and 10pm every Saturday.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 23:00

• US Strike Kills Iran-Backed Leader In Baghdad Believed Behind Attacks On US Bases
  US Strike Kills Iran-Backed Leader In Baghdad Believed Behind Attacks On US Bases

  Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

  A US drone strike in Baghdad killed a senior militia leader on Thursday, marking another significant escalation that could lead to a full-blown regional war.

  The strike killed Mushtaq Talib al-Saidi, also known as Abu Taqwa, a deputy commander of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) operations in Baghdad. The PMF is a coalition of mostly Shia Iraqi militias that are part of the government’s security forces.

  

  At least one other militia member was killed in the strike, which targeted a PMF base in Baghdad. Later on Thursday, the Pentagon confirmed it was responsible for the bombing.

  The Pentagon claims Abu Taqwa was believed to be responsible for attacks on US bases in Iraq and Syria that started in October in response to US support for Israel’s onslaught in Gaza, but the US has not provided any evidence for the assertion.

  The drone strike has enraged the Iraqi government, which condemned it as a “flagrant violation of the sovereignty and security of Iraq” and said it was “no different from a terrorist act.”

  The US has launched several rounds of airstrikes in Iraq since October, all of which have been strongly condemned by the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, the US’s supposed partner in the country.

  Al-Sudani’s government has also condemned the attacks on US bases in Iraq but wants to work to find the perpetrators and strongly opposes the unilateral US airstrikes and extra-judicial killings.

  

  Al-Sudani said last week that his government was “heading towards” ending the presence of foreign forces in Iraq, which includes 2,500 US troops.

  Iraq’s parliament voted to expel US troops back in 2020 following the US drone strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani and PMF leader Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, but the US has refused to leave.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 22:40

• "Early Signs Of Rebound": Manhattan Home Prices Rise For First Time In Year
  “Early Signs Of Rebound”: Manhattan Home Prices Rise For First Time In Year

  For the first time in a year, Manhattan home prices in the fourth quarter rose as homebuyers came off the sidelines after the Federal Reserve’s pivot led to a plunge in mortgage rates, laying the groundwork for a re-acceleration in the borough’s housing market this spring. 

  Bloomberg cites new data from appraiser Miller Samuel Inc. and brokerage Douglas Elliman Real Estate, which shows the median sales price closed was around $1.16 million, up 5.1% – the first annual increase since the third quarter of 2022. 

  

  Data showed two-thirds of Manhattan buyers paid cash despite the 30-year fixed mortgage rate plunging from a two-decade high of around 8% at the start of November to about 6.61% by the end of December – on the back of the Federal Reserve’s rate hike cycle pivot. 

  

  Even though the total number of property transactions declined in the quarter, home sales valued at more than $5 million surged – an indication wealthy folks are buying ahead of the spring season. 

  “The market is giving early signs that it’s beginning to rebound,” Miller said, adding, “It’s not going to do an about-face overnight, but it’s trending to stronger performance in terms of transactions and inventory and, to a certain degree, prices.”

  Bloomberg noted, “Contracts to buy homes in Manhattan — a more timely indicator of demand than closed sales — rose in December from a year earlier … The increase signals the start of a process in which lower interest rates bring in more buyers, and prompt more sellers to list their homes.” 

  The late-year surge in the Manhattan housing market came after US home prices in October, one month before mortgage rates began to fall, rose for the 9th straight month. 

  “US home prices accelerated at their fastest annual rate of the year in October,” says Brian D. Luke, Head of Commodities, Real & Digital assets at S&P DJI.

  “We are experiencing broad based home price appreciation across the country, with steady gains seen in nineteen of twenty cities.”

  Could lower mortgage rates and tight housing supply unleash another round of bidding wars for the spring season? 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 22:20

• Florida Surgeon General Warns Against Using mRNA COVID Vaccines Over Possible Cancer Risk
  Florida Surgeon General Warns Against Using mRNA COVID Vaccines Over Possible Cancer Risk

  Authored by Jacob Burg via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  Florida’s Surgeon General, Dr. Joseph Ladapo, is warning against any use of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines citing cancer concerns.

  

  Dr. Ladapo says a Canadian study found “billions to hundreds of billions” of DNA molecules per dose, exceeding guidelines set forth by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the World Health Organization (WHO).

  He sent a letter on Dec. 6, to the FDA Commissioner Dr. Robert Califf and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Dr. Mandy Cohen outlining his concerns about the high presence of DNA molecules in the mRNA vaccines alongside lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) used to deliver medicine into human cells.

  If LNPs are so effective at administering the vaccine’s medicine into human cells, Dr. Ladapo says he fears they will deliver the contaminant DNA molecules simultaneously.

  He cites a 2007 guidance report from the FDA on the regulatory limits for DNA in vaccines, which indicated risks of affecting the human genes that transform healthy cells into cancerous cells.

  The report also discusses the risk of how this integration of DNA in vaccines can lead to issues with the heart, brain, blood, kidney, liver, bone marrow, lung, ovaries, and testes, draining lymph nodes, spleen, and the vaccine’s administration and injection site.

  “DNA integration poses a unique and elevated risk to human health, and to the integrity of the human genome, including the risk that DNA integrated into sperm or egg, gametes could be passed onto offspring of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine recipients.

  “If the risks of DNA integration have not been assessed for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, these vaccines are not appropriate for use in human beings,” Dr. Ladapo said in a news release.

  He is not calling for a widespread rejection of all vaccines and instead urges health care providers to prioritize non-mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and treatment while assessing research into overall vaccine risks.

  Dr. Ladapo was in hot water in April 2023 after a public records request discovered edits he made to a state-commissioned survey on mRNA vaccines, garnering accusations of “exaggerating” the data to fit his position against giving COVID-19 vaccines to “healthy” children and adults of certain ages.

  He defended the move as a scientific “revision” and felt justified in removing a certain data analysis from the original survey.

  But others have raised concerns with the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines as well, including Dr. Eduardo Balbona, an internal medicine doctor from Jacksonville, Florida.

  Dr. Balbona has been practicing for three decades and advocates for evidence-based medicine that emphasizes preventing disease and maintaining health with “education and a deliberative proactive approach to lifelong care.”

  After receiving single or repeat doses of the mRNA vaccines, some of his patients experienced a host of different symptoms and felt “ill immediately afterward.”

  In “some people, it takes a couple of weeks. So there [are] different patterns of injury. And I would say [for] some people, it’s almost an anaphylactic reaction.

  “They have the vaccine, and from that moment on, they’re just not well. Often … they lose their blood pressure, or they have a crazy blood pressure. It either drops to 70 or goes to 200,” Dr. Balbona told The Epoch Times.

  Several of his patients also developed posterior orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) which, according to the Cleveland Clinic, is a condition that “causes your heart to beat faster than normal when you transition from sitting or lying down to standing up.”

  POTS is not easy to diagnose because several of its symptoms, including dizziness, fainting, chest pain, headaches, and heart palpitations, can occur over time despite resulting from a common cause.

  There is currently no cure for POTS, although exercise, physical activity, and a cardiac rehabilitation program can be used as treatment.

  Dr. Balbona also saw patients with increased blood pressure and others who had developed a hypercoagulable state, which is when the blood coagulates excessively in the absence of bleeding, according to the National Institutes of Health.

  He was also concerned by the number of men in their late teens, 20s, and 30s who developed pulmonary embolisms without genetic predispositions or pre-existing health issues that would cause them.

  A pulmonary embolism occurs when a fragment, most likely a blood clot, gets stuck in a lung artery and blocks the flow of blood, according to the Mayo Clinic.

  Other patients developed myocarditis and pericarditis directly after receiving the vaccine, Dr. Balbona said.

  According to the CDC, “myocarditis is inflammation of the heart muscle, and pericarditis is inflammation of the outer lining of the heart.”

  The symptoms of myocarditis and pericarditis are chest pain, shortness of breath, and “feelings of having a fast beating, fluttering, or pounding heart.”

  The CDC admits that some patients developed these conditions after receiving the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines but that cases are “rare” and that many heal on their own.

  However, since the symptoms can mimic anxiety reactions, some patients might be unaware they have either myocarditis or pericarditis, making data collection difficult.

  Dr. Balbona spoke with patients who went to hospitals with these symptoms and were turned away by nurses and doctors who told them the issues were psychological, possibly assuming the patients were anxious or experiencing acute panic attacks.

  He also believes some who received the vaccines were given “blanks” instead of shots with active medicine inside. Dr. Balbona said he tested several patients after they received their shots, and they lacked COVID-19 antibodies, which should be present in the blood after vaccination.

  Dr. Balbona believes some patients might have been vaccinated with just saline solution as a result of poor storage and handling of the vaccines themselves, which required cold storage at all times to prevent the destruction of the medicine inside.

  Patients often tell him they’re worried about falling ill because of having had one or many COVID-19 vaccines.

  “So if you had the vaccine several years ago, and you feel fine, and you have no problems, you’re likely okay,” he added.

  Dr. Balbona believes the research will eventually catch up with what he and other physicians are seeing while treating their patients.

  “At some point—I think that point is long past due—these vaccines will be withdrawn from the market. They’re not safe. They’re harming people. They may be harming people in ways that are durable. The recent DNA contamination is very concerning for increasing risk of cancer,” he said.

  However, despite the alleged cancer risks of using mRNA inside COVID-19 vaccines, he said, “the underlying technology is something that’s actually very remarkable.

  “mRNA technology was misused in the COVID pandemic,” he said. “It should not be given indiscriminately.

  “It’s gene therapy; there’s no question of that. And it has the ability to do some remarkable things in terms of good in the right situation. If you can turn on and off a gene or a protein in a patient who has a very serious illness, that’s fine.

  “That may be a fabulous tool in the future, but you have to disclose the risks and the benefits.”

  Nanette Holt contributed to this report. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 22:00

• Potential Running Mates For Trump, Including 2 Wildcards
  Potential Running Mates For Trump, Including 2 Wildcards

  Authored by Janice Hisle via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

  As former President Donald Trump’s polling lead over his Republican rivals has come to look insurmountable, more than 40 names have bubbled up in speculation about his pick for vice president in the 2024 election.

  “People are talking about Trump VP picks because they recognize the primary is over and has been for quite some time,” Jason Meister, a New York-based adviser to the former president, told The Epoch Times. “Trump is polling stronger than he did in 2016 and 2020. He’s surging with blacks, independents, and younger Americans.”

  

  Nearly 63 percent of would-be voters say they favor President Trump as the GOP presidential nominee, according to the latest RealClearPolitics polling average.

  That compares with about 11 percent support each for Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor who served as President Trump’s ambassador to the United Nations.

  President Trump’s dominance in the polls has persisted in spite of—or, some say, because of—the “lawfare” being waged against him. The former president faces 91 criminal charges that threaten his freedom, civil cases aimed at his financial empire, and state-level efforts to boot him from 2024 ballots.

  Arguably, these precarious circumstances make it even more important to wisely choose a running mate, since a vice president must be prepared to step in if the president cannot, for some reason, fulfill his duties.

  Even if the vice president doesn’t assume the role of president, the position often serves as a steppingstone to the presidency.

  

  Among the past 10 presidents, four previously served as vice president, including the incumbent, Democrat President Joe Biden.

  Shopping for the ideal vice president requires consideration of many variables. That person should possess political clout and experience and must embrace the presidential candidate’s proposed policies. He or she also should be capable of drawing more supporters into the fold.

  In that vein, an ethnic minority or a female might make an advantageous vice president choice for President Trump, because such a person might bolster his support among those factions of voters.

  Many of his supporters bristle at the notion of a “check-the-boxes” choice. But savvy presidential candidates always seek to “balance” the ticket and “fill in gaps” of their base, analysts say. Factors such as home state, ideology, and personal characteristics come into play.

  Above all, President Trump has said he has one paramount requirement: his confidence that the person will do a good job.

  Whomever he chooses, a good vice president cannot be overly charismatic and upstage the top of the ticket. This chosen leader also must be capable of being subordinate to the president.

  On top of all that, the running mate’s personality must mesh well with the presidential candidate.

  Opinions All Over the Board

  When choosing a running mate, an overarching principle should be “first, do no harm,” according to Aubrey Jewett, a political science professor at the University of Central Florida. He said it’s “the political equivalent of the Hippocratic oath that doctors take,” and it simply means that a vice presidential candidate cannot be a person who might “drag the ticket down.”

  The choice of a running mate seems to have little effect on whether a candidate becomes the presidential nominee or wins the presidency, Mr. Jewett said.

  Still, many voters do pay at least some attention to the second name on the ticket. And, to some degree, they do judge presidential candidates by the company they keep. Voters see the vice presidential selection as “a sign of the presidential candidate’s judgment,” he said.

  

  These are among the reasons people start buzzing about who might make a good running mate fairly early in an election cycle.

  Speculation about President Trump’s possible running mate began more than two years ago—almost three years in advance of the Republican National Convention, where delegates will choose their nominee for the November ballot.

  Customarily, presidential candidates announce their choice of a running mate a few days before the convention’s start; the GOP convention is set for July 15–18 in Milwaukee.

  Although President Trump and his team have said they aren’t ready to talk about potential running mates, voters wonder who will make the cut—and some have begun voicing opinions about who they prefer.

  On Dec. 13, 2023, Newsweek magazine reported that Mr. DeSantis prevailed as the No. 1 vice president choice among 1,500 voters surveyed, drawing 25 percent support from people who said they would vote for President Trump.

  But a few days after that poll’s release, Mr. DeSantis ranked toward the bottom of a different survey at Turning Point Action’s “AmericaFest 2023” in Arizona. Among the 1,113 attendees who responded to the questions, 81 percent said they were Republican; more than half were over age 50, and one-fifth of them were under age 30.

  When asked whom they favored as a running mate for President Trump, 35 percent named former Fox News personality Tucker Carlson. Only 6 percent named Mr. DeSantis.

  

  Ohio businessman Vivek Ramaswamy was the sole would-be vice president who finished in the top three slots in both of those polls. He drew 16 percent support in the Newsweek survey and 26 percent in the AmericaFest poll.

  Although Ms. Haley’s 19 percent share ranked her second in the Newsweek survey, she was decidedly unpopular with the AmericaFest crowd. The audience booed and jeered when her name was mentioned onstage; the poll showed that only 2 percent wanted her as President Trump’s running mate.

  Mr. DeSantis, Mr. Ramaswamy, and Ms. Haley have all publicly stated they have no desire to be second-in-command. So have a number of other people whose names have been mentioned.

  And, at a Michigan speech in September 2023, President Trump said he saw little running mate potential among the dozen or so candidates who were then vying for the Republican presidential nomination.

  Still, people who said they were uninterested in an offer might change their minds. So could President Trump.

  

  The Epoch Times has compiled a list of potential Trump running mates based on political betting odds, surveys, political scientists’ opinions, online chatter, and interviews with insiders.

  The list includes many of the most-talked-about possibilities—plus a few more obscure picks that just might appeal to President Trump. After all, his eventual 2016 running mate, former Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, was an unexpected choice.

  Possible Picks

  US Sen. Tim Scott

  For several reasons, the South Carolina lawmaker could bolster President Trump’s candidacy more than many of the other names that have been proposed in recent months.

  Mr. Scott is passionate about sharing his religious faith, endearing him to evangelical Christians—an important voting bloc that also found President Trump’s former vice president, Mr. Pence, appealing.

  Because he is the only black Republican senator in Congress, Mr. Scott also might help draw more black voters, a group that has traditionally voted Democrat but has recently been shifting more toward President Trump and other Republicans.

  Although Mr. Scott often delivers powerful speeches, they’re tempered by a Southern-gentlemanlike, more genteel demeanor, Mr. Bullock said, which would provide a counterbalance to the brash native New York style of President Trump.

  

  Mr. Scott, 58, comes across as “younger and more vigorous” than President Trump, Mr. Bullock said.

  While campaigning for the presidency earlier this year, Mr. Scott largely avoided attacking President Trump. And the former president, known for aiming barbs at his opponents, had instead praised Mr. Scott.

  Both men used the phrase “good guy” to describe each other in July 2023 amid persistent rumors about the Trump ticket.

  Mr. Scott bowed out of the race in November 2023. One political insider told The Epoch Times that he had direct knowledge that Mr. Scott expressed gratitude to President Trump for a running mate offer but felt he had to turn it down.

  The Epoch Times attempted to reach Mr. Scott for comment in late December, but his staff said he was unavailable during the Christmas-New Year’s holiday break.

  Mr. Scott wasn’t listed as a vice presidential candidate in the Newsweek poll, and he drew less than 1 percent support from the AmericaFest crowd.

  Former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley

  Ms. Haley’s former gubernatorial and foreign policy experience, along with her status as a female and the daughter of immigrants from India, make her a logical pick—at least on paper. Both Mr. Jewett and Charles Bullock III, a political science professor at the University of Georgia, concur on those points.

  But in reality, President Trump risks turning off many supporters if he dares to choose her.

  Recently, media outlets began running a flurry of articles themed “Trump is secretly considering Haley as VP.” The reception from Trumpworld has been frosty.

  On Dec. 23, 2023, as such stories were circulating, Trump ally Roger Stone posted on Truth Social: “Fact: The United States has never had a VP nicknamed ‘Birdbrain’–and never will,” referring to a nickname that President Trump bestowed upon Ms. Haley.

  

  Mr. Meister said: “I can’t predict who Trump will ultimately choose as his running mate, but I can tell you who it can’t be. It can’t be Haley.”

  He and others see Ms. Haley as a “neoconservative,“ or a ”neoliberal” who is too closely tied to the entrenched political establishment that President Trump has said he wants to dismantle. Several say they flat-out distrust her.

  The former president’s son Donald Trump Jr. emphatically opposes her.

  But Lara Trump, the wife of President Trump’s other adult son, Eric Trump, refused to rule out Ms. Haley.

  Still, many of President Trump’s supporters dislike Ms. Haley so much that they swear they’ll vote against any ticket that includes the name “Haley.”

  During a Dec. 27, 2023, interview with journalist John Solomon, President Trump disputed reports that he was considering Ms. Haley for a running mate. He said he wasn’t considering anyone for the job because he is focused on winning the upcoming caucuses, which begin on Jan. 15 in Iowa.

  However, the former president did concede that he and Ms. Haley have gotten along well, even though he considers her “somewhat disloyal” for breaking her promise not to run against him. “But that’s a politician,” he said.

  President Trump “doesn’t seem to have the same sort of animosity against her” as he does against Mr. DeSantis, Mr. Jewett said.

  Mr. Bullock noted that Ms. Haley, 51, would provide a more youthful contrast to President Trump, who is 77, and his presumed Democrat opponent, 81-year-old President Biden.

  Other points in Ms. Haley’s favor: She hasn’t attacked President Trump as strongly as some of her fellow Republican challengers. And she has publicly stated, more than once, that she would pardon President Trump if she becomes president and he is convicted of a criminal charge.

  However, she has recently intensified her criticisms of President Trump, saying he shouldn’t be president because chaos follows him.

  Entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy

  By starting his candidacy at age 37, the millionaire millennial became the youngest Republican to ever seek the Oval Office.

  Although he lacks experience, the Harvard and Yale graduate brings energy, intelligence, and courage to the table.

  At the first GOP presidential debate on Aug. 23, 2023, in Milwaukee, Mr. Ramaswamy demonstrated that he’s willing to be bold.

  

  Without hesitation, he raised his hand to indicate that he would support President Trump if he were to be criminally convicted yet became the Republican nominee. The other GOP candidates onstage followed Mr. Ramaswamy’s lead, one by one, some rather sheepishly.

  Mr. Ramaswamy has denounced the weaponization of the justice system against President Trump. He also has decried numerous states’ attempts to ban President Trump from the ballot based on claims that he incited an “insurrection” during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol breach. Mr. Ramaswamy vowed to withdraw his own name from any ballot that excludes President Trump; he has challenged his fellow candidates to do the same.

  In addition, Mr. Ramaswamy publicly criticized Republican National Committee (RNC) chairwoman Ronna McDaniel as an ineffective leader and called for her resignation.

  Mr. Ramaswamy recently completed his second round of “The Full Grassley,” making stops in all 99 of Iowa’s counties, a maneuver that Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) pioneered. Still, he has been lagging in Iowa polls.

  Among the second-tier GOP presidential hopefuls, Mr. Ramaswamy has run “the most interesting and original campaign,” in the opinion of Roger Simon, a columnist for The Epoch Times.

  Many people, including Mr. Simon, have said that Mr. Ramaswamy has a bright future in politics, possibly as a member of a Trump administration—even if not as vice president.

  Besides being a fan favorite in two polls about potential Trump running mates, Mr. Ramaswamy ranks highly among some political betting sites, such as OddsChecker.com.

  And, he, like Ms. Haley, was born to parents who emigrated from India, a background that could appeal to ethnic minorities if President Trump were to choose him as a running mate.

  Still, Mr. Ramaswamy has no prior political or governmental experience. But neither did President Trump before his presidency.

  South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem

  Ms. Noem, 52, has risen in prominence during the past several years even though her state has next-to-zero gravitational pull in U.S. politics.

  One reason she gained attention: She refused to impose lockdowns during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, saying she trusted citizens to make wise choices for themselves.

  

  Ms. Noem served in Congress for six years and understands the D.C. Beltway. She also served on the Armed Services Committee and, in that role, observed President Trump’s leadership first hand.

  That’s one reason she cited when she endorsed him in September 2023 at a rally in Rapid City, South Dakota. She also pledged to do everything in her power to help President Trump win back the White House.

  Talk about her as a possible running mate choice accelerated after the words “Trump Noem 2024” flashed briefly on a video screen at the rally. And now, such speculation is renewed because Ms. Noem is set to campaign for the former president in Iowa during his pre-caucus blitz.

  She was elected in 2018 as South Dakota’s first female governor. Last year, she won reelection with “the largest vote total in the history of South Dakota,” her online biography says.

  Mr. Jewett put her in the category of “politicians and sort of traditional candidates” but noted, “She’d bring that diversity to the ticket by virtue of being a woman.”

  At one point in late December 2023, Ms. Noem, Mr. Ramaswamy, and Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) were in a three-way tie as betting favorites to gain the running mate spot. But in the Newsweek poll, Ms. Noem drew only 3 percent support; she registered less than 1 percent in the AmericaFest survey.

  North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum

  “Doug who?” was the question many people asked after Mr. Burgum declared his presidential candidacy in June 2023. He also hails from a low-profile Great Plains state and struggled to gain attention during his campaign, which he ended in early December.

  

  But during that six-month span, Mr. Burgum found a creative way to qualify for two GOP presidential debates—and made a positive impression onstage, drawing glowing remarks from President Trump, who has skipped all of the RNC-sponsored debates.

  After the first debate in August 2023, President Trump, commenting on potential running mate picks, told Newsmax that Mr. Burgum is “great” and said, “I respect him a lot.”

  Read more here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 21:20

• White House Says Russia Used North Korean Ballistic Missiles In Ukraine
  White House Says Russia Used North Korean Ballistic Missiles In Ukraine

  Throughout much of the Ukraine conflict, the US and UK have alleged secret North Korean artillery shell transfers to Russia, via train in the far east. 

  But this week Washington has ratcheted its accusations further, alleging that Russia is using North Korean supplied ballistic missiles to attack Ukrainian cities. 

  

  White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby on Thursday pointed to recently declassified intelligence which finds that Pyongyang provided Moscow with these weapons, and further said a North Korean missile was fired on Ukraine at least once. 

  However, any specifics were not forthcoming and the accusations remained vague, perhaps only for the purpose of the US generating some headlines as part of wartime propaganda.

  To be expected, Kirby also highlighted the deepened Russian-Iran relationship, and said that the Kremlin is seeking Iranian close-range ballistic missiles. Kirby said these negotiations are “actively advancing”. 

  In a bit of curious timing, a Bloomberg op-ed published on the same day as Kirby’s briefing urged America to stop the new “axis of evil”…

  Since Feb. 24, 2022, and especially since Oct. 7, 2023, a specter has haunted the world and worried US President Joe Biden in particular: Will Russia’s war against Ukraine, or Israel’s against Hamas, draw in other belligerents, perhaps even culminating in World War III?

  Biden has therefore done everything in his power to support Ukraine and Israel while also keeping the US and its Western allies out of direct confrontations with Russia, Hamas’ backers in Iran, and their Chinese and North Korean quasi-allies. But conflicts change unpredictably. Every vagary increases the risk that an artillery round fired over here sends missiles flying over there and detonates a bigger blow-up.

  The author says, “To avoid a wider war, American diplomacy must keep China, Russia, Iran and North Korea as separate as possible.”

  The US needs to confront the new “Axis of Evil” (Iran, Russia, China, North Korea) by preventing it from even forming @opinion https://t.co/9l26dTp4lp

  — Andreas Kluth (@andreaskluth) January 4, 2024

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

  Russia and Ukraine have over the last several days been engaged in a ramped-up air war, especially following last week’s rare Ukrainian cross-border attack on Belgorod. It the tit-for-tat escalation, scores of civilians have been killed on both sides, bearing the brunt of this latest escalation.

  Given Biden’s new defense aid for Kiev was held up by Republicans in Congress, it seems the only thing the White House has in its arsenal for the time being is to talk up the alleged Russia-North Korea-Iran links.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 21:00

• These 11 States Are Leading America's Oil Production Boom
  These 11 States Are Leading America’s Oil Production Boom

  Authored by Robert Rapier via OilPrice.com,

  • Texas dominates U.S. oil production, contributing 42.6% of the total output, mainly due to the Permian Basin.

  • New Mexico has seen a dramatic 190% increase in oil production over the past five years, becoming the second-leading oil producer in the U.S.

  • California faces a 30.7% reduction in oil production over the past five years, largely due to political and geological challenges.

  U.S. oil production has increased by 21% over the past five years. According to data from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), earlier this month U.S. oil producers set a new annual production record.

  

  This increase is being driven by a surge of production in a handful of states. I thought it might be of interest to look at which states are contributing the most to U.S. oil production, and how much production has changed over the past five years.

  Total production for 2023 is not yet available, but monthly numbers are available through September (as well as weekly number through mid-December). I averaged oil production over the past 12 months (October 2022 through September 2023) for the entire U.S., as well as for every state that reported oil production in the past five years. (See the data source here).

  Here were the Top 11 oil-producing states over the past year. Production is in million barrels per day (BPD).

  

  Top 11 Oil-Producing States in 2023.

  Texas is contributing the largest share to the production record at 42.6% of the U.S. total. This is primarily due to surging production in the Permian Basin. The Permian Basin effect can also be seen in New Mexico’s incredible 190% surge over the past five years. New Mexico is now the country’s second-leading oil producer.

  Production in North Dakota is still above one million bpd, but oil production there is down from its peak. However, North Dakota production has been increasing this year, and is up 17% over the past year.

  Five of the eleven states shown have seen production decline over the past five years. If you wonder why I listed eleven states, it was primarily to include Ohio, which has not historically been thought of as one of the leading oil producers. Ohio’s production is still modest relative to states like Texas and New Mexico, but it is growing due to development in the Utica Shale in the Appalachian Basin.

  A hundred years ago, California was the country’s top oil producer. In the late 1980s, California was still producing over one million bpd. But production has been in steady decline there, due to politics and unfavorable geology that rendered hydraulic fracturing less appealing than in midwestern oil and gas formations. Over the past five years, California’s 30.7% decline in oil production is the largest among top producers.

  One major area of production that I didn’t consider here was federal offshore production in the Gulf of Mexico. Over the past year, that contributed another 1.84 million bpd, which is 9.3% higher than it was five years ago (and just under the record 1.898 million bpd level set in 2019).

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 20:40

• Philly Police Fired Their "Diversity, Equity And Inclusion Officer" This Week
  Philly Police Fired Their “Diversity, Equity And Inclusion Officer” This Week

  Thanks to help from Harvard’s Claudine Gay, who was unable to condemn harassment on her campus against Jewish students and was later found to have plagiarized  what appears to be her entire body of academic work, it looks as though the diversity, equity and inclusion (“DEI”) wolf in sheep’s clothing is finally starting to be seen for what it is. 

  That reverberation may have made its way to Philadelphia, where the crime and drug-ridden city is once again attempting to make a swift change back to law and order under newly-sworn in mayor Cherelle Parker, widely acknowledged to be the most pro-police candidate out of the Democratic choices in the city. 

  And just hours before Parker was sworn into office, the Philadelphia Police Department’s first diversity, equity, and inclusion officer, Leslie Marant, was fired, according to a report by the Philadelphia Inquirer. Almost as if when your hellscape of a city needs more police desperately, it doesn’t matter what color, race, creed or orientation they are. Go figure. 

  The report says that Marant started her role in April 2022 and was dismissed by acting Commissioner John M. Stanford during a 10:30 a.m. meeting this Tuesday morning. Stanford stated that due to departmental restructuring under new police commissioner Kevin Bethel, Marant’s services were no longer required.

  

  Spokesperson, Sgt. Eric Gripp, said in a statement: “Under new leadership, restructuring and realignment of an organization is common. We want to express our sincere gratitude to Ms. Marant for her dedicated work and professionalism during her time with the PPD.”

  “As this is a Police Department personnel matter, the administration has no comment,” a spokesman for Mayor Parker said. 

  Despite the firing, the DEI office is going to continue to remain active, the report says. The department will soon reveal an interim director and a nationwide hunt for a permanent successor to Marant’s position is planned, the Inquirer wrote.

  Marant, initially appointed under ex-Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw, previously served as chief counsel to the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission. She holds degrees in finance, human resources, and law from Temple University.

  Lacking prior law enforcement experience, Marant’s DEI officer role, as outlined by Outlaw, involved leading the department’s DEI initiatives across all levels and developing relevant strategies. Her salary was $170,569.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 20:20

• The Houthi Butterfly Flaps Its Wings
  The Houthi Butterfly Flaps Its Wings

  Earlier, we reported that on Wednesday, the White House warned that this ongoing Red Sea turmoil could hit the US economy in a briefing:

  The White House has warned that the potential for higher shipping costs to affect the U.S. economy amid diversion of ships from the Red Sea will depend on how long Houthi rebels sustain their attacks on commercial vessels.

  “If we weren’t concerned, we wouldn’t have stood up an operation in the Red Sea, now consisting of more than 20 nations, to try to protect that commerce,” White House spokesman John Kirby said at a White House press conference on Wednesday, referring to the U.S.-led military force Operation Prosperity Guardian.

  “The Red Sea is a vital waterway, and a significant amount of global trade flows through it. By forcing nations to go around the Cape of Good Hope, you’re adding weeks and weeks onto voyages, and untold resources and expenses have to be applied in order to do that. So obviously there’s a concern about the impact on global trade.”

  Interestingly, Kirby was then asked by a reporter whether the spiraling situation would become “pocketbook” issue for Americans.

  Kirby responded by saying “It would depend on how long this threat goes and on how much more energetic the Houthis think they might become.” He added: “Right now we haven’t seen an uptick or a specific effect on the U.S. economy. But make no mistake. This is a key international waterway. Countries more and more are becoming aware of this increasing threat to the free flow of commerce.”

  Thus he fully acknowledged this is a distinct possibility that’s fast approaching.

  Indeed as Paris Johnson details below via DailyReckoning.com, the impact of a small group of rebels may just cause a financial hurricane in the US.

  The Butterfly Effect

  Houthi rebels are the new Somali pirates.

  Imagine a bunch of goatherders, who are pissed off at Israel over the Gaza bombing, stopping world trade.

  It’s improbable. Unlikely. Fatuous, even.

  And yet, here we are, talking about everything Joke Biden needs to bury if he (or his body double) wants to win in November.

  

  The Butterfly Effect is when a very small change in initial conditions that creates a significantly different outcome.

  In 1950, Alan Turing noted: “The displacement of a single electron by a billionth of a centimeter at one moment might make the difference between a man being killed by an avalanche a year later or escaping.”

  There is no need to wonder what Turing would be thinking if a bunch of Houthis were sitting on the cliffs lining the Bab Al-Mandeb Strait, lighting off cheap drones and rockets at any Israeli or Israel-aligned ship.

  If you’re Russian or Chinese or anyone aligned with the Global South, pass “Go” and collect $200.

  From the December 22nd edition of the Rude Awakening:

  On our editorial call on Wednesday, ex-naval aviator and Paradigm’s venerable historian Byron King mentioned something I hadn’t considered.

  Byron said – and I’ll paraphrase – that the Houthis were using $100,000 drones to attack commercial shipping in the Red Sea, while the US Navy was using $1 – 4 million rockets to shoot those drones down.

  You don’t need a mathematics degree to see why experts think this unbalanced exchange of munitions will eventually pressure the Pentagon.

  Well, thanks to these Houthis, we’re heading back to the water routes of the 1860s!

  Why Americans Need to Care About This… And Think Carefully.

  You may not yet recognize the Bab Al-Mandeb Strait I mentioned earlier. That’s the waterway a ship needs to travel through to get to the Suez Canal.

  If the Strait is blocked due to rocket fire and the subsequent suspending of maritime insurance, then the Canal is inaccessible. And that means you’ve got to sail around Africa for goods to reach Europe and the West.

  

  Credit: The Cradle

  The military angle is easy enough.

  From The Cradle:

  While the US military is successful at producing expensive, technologically complex weapons systems that provide excellent profits for the arms industry, such as the F-15 warplanes, it is not capable of producing enough of the weapons needed to actually fight and win real wars on the other side of the world, where supply chains become even more critical.

  But the economic warfare is even more dreadful.

  Impact on Shipping Costs

  Shortest Route

  The Suez Canal offers the most direct sea route between Asia and Europe, significantly reducing travel time and distance compared to the alternative Cape of Good Hope route (around the bottom of Africa). When the canal is inaccessible, ships are forced to take this longer route, increasing travel times by weeks and fuel costs exponentially.

  Fuel Costs

  Longer journeys translate directly into higher fuel consumption. This additional cost is invariably passed onto consumers, raising the prices of goods transported via these routes.

  Charter Rates

  The canal closure often leads to a shortage of available shipping capacity. Ships tied up in extended voyages reduce the supply of vessels available for other routes, driving up charter rates. This, in turn, inflates shipping costs, a burden that the consumer again bears.

  Congestion and Delays

  The aftermath of a canal closure typically involves significant congestion and logistical backlogs. This can lead to substantial delays, further disrupting shipping schedules and increasing operational costs.

  Breaking the Supply Chain

  Just-in-Time Inventory

  Modern business models, such as just-in-time inventory systems, rely heavily on timely and predictable delivery of goods. The closure of the Suez Canal disrupts these delicate systems, leading to widespread shortages and inefficiencies.

  Perishable Goods

  The delay in shipping routes particularly impacts the delivery of perishable goods. This leads to wastage and disrupts food supply chains, affecting markets and consumers globally.

  Manufacturing Delays

  Industries dependent on specific components, such as automotive and electronics, are significantly impacted by delays in the delivery of these parts. This halts production lines, leading to broader economic repercussions.

  Global Interconnectivity

  The closure of the canal highlights the deeply interconnected nature of global trade. A disruption in a single yet crucial location can have far-reaching effects, impacting various sectors and economies worldwide.

  Inflationary Pressures

  Increased Transportation Costs

  The surge in transportation costs due to longer shipping routes and heightened fuel consumption contributes to overall inflation, as these costs are typically transferred to the consumer.

  Supply Shortages

  Disruptions in supply chains can create shortages of various goods. According to the principles of supply and demand, reduced supply often leads to increased prices, contributing to inflation.

  Speculative Increases

  Anticipation and speculation about delays and shortages can trigger preemptive price increases. These speculative actions can exacerbate inflationary pressures even before actual shortages occur.

  Economic Recovery Post-Pandemic

  In a post-pandemic world, where economies are in various stages of recovery, the closure of a critical trade route like the Suez Canal compounds existing challenges, such as labor shortages and heightened consumer demand, further fueling inflation.

  Broader Economic Implications

  Global Trade Dynamics

  The Suez Canal’s role in global trade dynamics is multifaceted. It’s a conduit for goods and a barometer for global economic health. Its closure signals deeper issues in international trade relations and economic stability.

  Energy Markets

  The canal is also vital for the transport of oil and natural gas. Its closure can disrupt energy markets, leading to fluctuations in energy prices globally. This domino effect affects industries and consumers alike, as energy costs are a fundamental component of almost every economic activity.

  Long-Term Strategic Changes

  Repeated disruptions may prompt companies to reassess their supply chain strategies. This might include diversifying shipping routes, increasing inventory levels, or even reshoring some manufacturing operations. While these strategies can mitigate risks, they also come with increased costs and complexities.

  Environmental Impact

  Longer shipping routes increase costs and have a significant environmental impact.

  Wrap Up

  Whether you own a business or are just looking after your investments, it’s paramount that you keep abreast of this situation.

  Yes, a bunch of goatherders has just thrown a monkey wrench into the world’s economic works.

  But this also represents an enormous opportunity to profit if you keep your head about you.

  Look at the energy and transportation sectors. Look at precious metals. Look at other tangible assets and commodities, like copper.

  While the Houthis are wreaking havoc on the West, you can protect your investments and profits before most people even know what’s happening.

  Good hunting!

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 20:00

• Milei's Labor Reforms Hit Roadblock In Argentinian Labor Appeals Court
  Milei’s Labor Reforms Hit Roadblock In Argentinian Labor Appeals Court

  As it turns out, overhauling an entire country can be somewhat of a daunting task, as is being put on display in Argentina where Javier Milei is facing an uphill climb to make broad-stroke changes that the country needs to snap it out of socialism. 

  Argentina’s national labor appeals court suspended part of President Javier Milei’s emergency decree that was put forth to overhaul the country’s failing economy, Bloomberg reported this week. 

  The suspended portion of the decree dealt specifically with labor reforms, simplifying severance pay obligations and hiring “trial periods”. On Wednesday the court issued the injunction which will be seen as a “temporary victory” to the country’s labor unions, the report says. 

  Milei’s team will now challenge the court’s suspension, citing conflict with municipal and provincial rulings. The injunction prevents complete derailment by congress or courts for now, with lawmakers yet to vote on the decree, which hasn’t been blocked in recent administrations.

  We noted that to end 2023, socialist activists and workers unions were carrying images of Che Guevara and Eva Peron while protesting Milei’s cuts.

  As we noted then, the cuts are a part of Milei’s sweeping economic measures that will erase or rewrite over 300 rules regulating and restricting private enterprise within the nation.

  

  “The goal is to start along the path to rebuilding the country… and start to undo the huge number of regulations that have held back and prevented economic growth,” Milei said in a televised speech from the presidential palace.  

  The protests and anger from leftist elements within Argentina illustrate the numerous pitfalls of allowing socialism to be rooted within any country for any length of time. 

  Though Milei’s opposition often argues that Argentina has never been “truly socialist,” the government policies that have been in place for decades certainly are.  It is a classic far-left deflection:  Whenever a socialist government or economy fails, claim it wasn’t real socialism.  Rinse, and repeat.

  Deregulation, protesters argued, would pave the way for big business interests while reducing welfare programs and protections for the public.  The protests are of course built upon a number of assumptions and are reactionary at best, given that Milei has been in office for a mere two weeks.

  We’re also near certain these protestors have not asked critical questions about where the funding for such government programs is going to come from when the country’s currency has been zapped into a hyperinflationary oblivion.

  The country’s national debt has climbed to over $400 billion US dollars and they are struggling with a $44 billion IMF loan.  However, the real threat is their triple digit inflation which is igniting a mounting economic crisis.  It is the same crisis that has resurfaced multiple times since the crash of 1990.  

  But, as usual, we digress…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 19:40

• For Miners' Seasonal Rally, China Is The Wild Card
  For Miners’ Seasonal Rally, China Is The Wild Card

  By Michael Msika, Bloomberg markets live reporter and strategist

  January and February are usually pretty good months for Europe’s mining stocks, as factories in China rush to replenish their metals reserves. This year, that seasonal lift will hinge on Beijing coming through with stimulus.  

  The Stoxx 600 Basic Resources index is coming into 2023 after a decent run of gains, bouncing 13% from its October 23 trough as it became clear central banks are done hiking interest rates. Historical patterns from the past two decades indicate those gains could continue — January has been a positive month for miners 65% of the time, with an average 1.3% gain. And February, with a 3% average advance, is even better.

  

  Despite those promising signs, a net 26% of European fund managers were underweight basic resources shares, Bank of America’s investor survey found in December, the most unloved sector after chemicals. Their wariness likely stems from fears of an economic downturn, as well as uncertainty on how much stimulus China will deploy to support growth in the world’s largest steelmaking nation.

  Jefferies analyst Christopher LaFemina notes that US rate-cut prospects, falling Treasury yields and a weaker dollar all tend to act as buy signals for mining shares. He is positive on the sector over the one-three month horizon, with Anglo American, Alcoa and Teck Resources his top picks.

  “The risk is that this Goldilocks scenario might be followed by a recession. If that happens, then the near-term strength in these shares would likely reverse,” LaFemina warns.

  

  Many others are banking on Beijing. After all, China accounts for between 25% and 60% of large cap miners’ revenue, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

  Iron ore, particularly, will be key. At Rio Tinto and BHP — among the world’s biggest miners —  it comprises about 50% of revenue. The steelmaking material raced to fresh 18-month highs this week, after President Xi Jinping pledged to strengthen his country’s economy and amid speculation China’s central bank will cut rates. Recent dataflow, including imports and PMI surveys, also point to resilient commodities demand, says Caroline Bain at Capital Economics.

  Expectation that China will come through with aid is keeping Citi strategists overweight mining stocks. They are particularly bullish on Rio Tinto and South32, betting steel production will remain strong, leading analysts to raise iron ore price estimates. That in turn should underpin earnings momentum for related equities through the first quarter and possibly the second one, they reckon. 

  

  Morgan Stanley analysts led by Alain Gabriel expect a wider dispersion in shareholder returns from the mining sector this year, given uncertainty around Chinese policy, interest rates and the potential reversal in the dollar. Highlighting rising supply stresses in copper markets, they are tactically bullish on producers such as Lundin and Antofagasta.

  

  Finally, valuation could prove a headwind for mining stocks. Their recent bounce has taken forward P/E ratios to about 11, back to long-term averages, while the discount to the broader market has narrowed to 12%. Once-stellar dividend yields too have faded — at about 4%, they offer only a bit more than the Stoxx index’s 3.7%.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 19:20

• Kennedy Condemns Efforts To Remove Trump From Ballots
  Kennedy Condemns Efforts To Remove Trump From Ballots

  Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr said Donald Trump and American voters were being treated unfairly by efforts across the country to block the former president from 2024 ballots. Kennedy’s remarks came at a Wednesday press conference to spotlight his own first major milestone in his pursuit of 50-state ballot access: securing enough signatures to appear in the Utah general election. 

  Trump has already been declared ineligible to appear on Republican primary ballots in two states, as a court in Colorado and an unelected bureaucrat in Maine said he’s disqualified under the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, for having engaged in an “insurrection” in the form of the Jan. 6, 2021 riot on Capitol Hill. 

  

  As we reported Saturday, Colorado and Maine are just the start, as there are 20 states with lawsuits in progress aiming to eject Trump from the democratic process, and more to come. On Wednesday, RFK, Jr said the trend concerns him greatly. 

  “Donald Trump has not been convicted of an insurrection. Maybe he did it but, you know, he hasn’t been charged with it,” said Kennedy. “I don’t think it’s fair.” He also alluded to the fact that the ballot-blocking drive promises to stir the passions on the Trump side of an increasingly divided American electorate, saying it will make Trump backers “angry and frustrated and justifiably so.” 

  If Trump is kept out of office through judicial fiat rather than being defeated in a fair election, his supporters will never accept the result. This country will become ungovernable.

  — Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) December 20, 2023

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

  Separately, Tom Lyons, president of the Kennedy-boosting American Values 2024 PAC, told Sharyl Attkisson that Trump’s dilemma relates to the difficulty that independent and third-party candidates have in making it to the ballot:

  “We don’t need to be protected from a candidate by this sort of anti-democratic set of forces that is gaining traction in this country. Whether it’s Bobby Kennedy or Donald Trump or Joe Biden, it’s a direction that’s obviously bad for democracy.”

  The main purpose of Wednesday’s event was to announce that Kennedy has qualified to appear on the election ballot in Utah, having secured signatures from 1,000 registered voters. The campaign expects to spend $15 million on its nationwide ballot-access drive.

  .@BreakingPointsN @krystalball + @esaagar ask about my efforts to get on the ballot in all 50 states, support among non-voters, and whether or not I’ll be on the debate stage with Trump + Biden. #Kennedy24 pic.twitter.com/rqovJqMh0v

  — Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) December 28, 2023

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

  Kennedy decried the thicket that he and similarly-situated candidates must navigate just to put their names in front of voters, saying that “arbitrary and capricious” rules create an “undemocratic lock that the major political parties have on this process…It’s all designed to keep third parties from getting on the ballot.”

  Angling to play more than a mere spoiler in the November election, Kennedy shared some math that makes him optimistic: 

  “You could technically win the election with 34 percentage points because it’s winner take all. So all we have to do is take 4.5 percentage points from each President Trump and President Biden to win the national election, and I have 11 months to do that.”

  He may be a little farther from that goal line than he suggests. His numbers may be in the right neighborhood if you look at a three-way race, but in a more realistic five-person race that includes Biden, Trump, Kennedy, Green Party candidate Jill Stein and independent Cornel West, the current RealClearPolitics average has Trump at 40.6%, Biden at 35.6% and Kennedy at 13.0%.  

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 19:00

• Justice Department Sues Texas Over New Law Cracking Down On Illegal Immigrants
  Justice Department Sues Texas Over New Law Cracking Down On Illegal Immigrants

  Authored by Katabella Roberts via The Epoch Times,

  The Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a lawsuit against Texas over a new state law aimed at increasing security at the southern border by granting police broader powers to arrest, prosecute, and deport immigrants who illegally cross the U.S.-Mexico border.

  

  The DOJ filed the lawsuit against Senate Bill 4 (SB 4) in an Austin federal court on Jan. 3 on behalf of the United States federal government, including the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of State.

  It lists Gov. Greg Abbott and Texas Department of Public Safety Director Steve McCraw as defendants.

  Plaintiffs argue SB 4 is preempted by federal law and thus violates the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution and the Foreign Commerce Clause.

  The legislation at the center of the lawsuit was introduced by Republican state Sen. Charles Perry and sponsored in the House by Republican state Rep. David Spiller in November.

  It was passed by the Republican-controlled Texas legislature that same month and signed into law by Mr. Abbott in December.

  The measure makes it a state misdemeanor to illegally cross or attempt to cross into Texas from Mexico at any location other than a lawful port of entry.

  It also allows state and local law enforcement officials to arrest suspected illegal immigrants, take their fingerprints, and conduct a background check.

  According to the legislation, judges would be granted the option to order some illegal immigrants to return to the country from which they illegally entered the United States, in lieu of prosecution, but only after all identifying information is obtained and cross-referenced with local, state, and federal criminal databases.

  However, the misdemeanor charge would be raised to a felony charge if the illegal immigrant has previously been convicted of two or more misdemeanors involving drugs, crimes against a person, or both or if the individual refuses to comply with the judge’s order to return to leave the United States.

  ‘Clearly Unconstitutional’

  The maximum penalty for a misdemeanor charge is one year in prison while for a felony, the penalty is two to 20 years in prison.

  Republicans have argued that the measure, which is scheduled to take effect on March 5, is needed amid what they say is mishandling by the Biden administration of the ongoing immigration crisis. U.S. Customs and Border Protection data shows that agents encountered a record-setting 2.48 million illegal immigrants at the southern border in fiscal year 2023.

  U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) estimated in its December 2023 report that the number of non-detained illegal immigrants inside the United States has now exceeded 6 million.

  

  A Texas National Guard soldier directs migrants during a dust storm at a makeshift camp located between the Rio Grande and the U.S.–Mexico border fence in El Paso, Texas, on May 10, 2023. (John Moore/Getty Images)

  In their lawsuit, the DOJ urges the court to declare SB 4 unconstitutional and prevent Texas from implementing it, arguing that immigration laws can only be enforced by the federal government, not states.

  “SB 4 is clearly unconstitutional,” said Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta in a statement announcing the lawsuit.

  “Under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution and long-standing Supreme Court precedent, states cannot adopt immigration laws that interfere with the framework enacted by Congress. The Justice Department will continue to fulfill its responsibility to uphold the Constitution and enforce federal law.”

  The DOJ noted that the Supreme Court, in Arizona v. United States, previously confirmed that decisions relating to the removal of noncitizens from the United States touch “on foreign relations and must be made with one voice.”

  The Department argued that SB 4 impedes the federal government’s ability to enforce entry and removal provisions of federal law and interferes with its conduct of foreign relations.

  

  Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta speaks at a press conference at the Department of Justice in Washington on Dec. 6, 2021. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

  ‘Prepared to Fight Lawsuit’

  SB 4 includes some exceptions, including that law enforcement officials may not arrest immigrants who entered the United States illegally if the individual is on the premises or grounds of a public or private primary or secondary school for educational purposes; in a church, synagogue, or other established place of religious worship; or in a health care facility.

  It also states that suspects can provide evidence that they are in the country legally during the prosecution.

  The DOJ’s lawsuit comes after Civil Rights groups including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of Texas, and the Texas Civil Rights Project filed a lawsuit against SB4 in December, claiming it is preempted by federal law and infringes upon the federal government’s authority under the U.S. Constitution to enforce immigration laws.

  

  Texas Gov. Greg Abbott speaks during a news conference in Austin, Texas, on March 15, 2023. (Brandon Bell/Getty Images)

  Mr. Abbott responded to the DOJ’s lawsuit on X on Wednesday evening. “Biden sued me today because I signed a law making it illegal for an illegal immigrant to enter or attempt to enter Texas directly from a foreign nation. I like my chances. Texas is the only government in America trying to stop illegal immigration,” he wrote.

  “The Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives says that I and the state of Texas have the ‘constitutional authority’ to secure [the] border. Remember, it is Congress, not the President, that has the Constitutional power to regulate immigration,” he added.

  He said in previous comments that SB 4 was needed to “help stop the tidal wave of illegal entry into Texas” and that President Biden’s “deliberate inaction has left Texas to fend for itself.”

  

  Texas builds its own border wall in its effort to secure the border. (Courtesy Office of Greg Abbott)

  In recent years, Texas has spent more than $4 billion a year on efforts to curb illegal immigration at the border, including deploying $11 million in rolls of concertina wire to reinforce portions of the Texas-Mexico border and constructing steel border structures. The Abbott administration has also bused tens of thousands of migrants to sanctuary cities across the country, including Washington, D.C., New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles. In prior years, Texas spent about $400 million on border security and immigration, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick previously said.

  In a post on X on Wednesday evening, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the measure was created to “address the endless stream of illegal immigration facilitated by the Biden administration.”

  

  Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton speaks at the “Save America” rally in Robstown, Texas, on Oct. 22, 2022. (Brandon Bell/Getty Images)

  “Millions of unvetted foreign aliens have been released into Texas due to President Biden’s policies of dismantling border security at the US-Mexico border, collaborating with cartels, and inviting violent criminals and drug traffickers to enter the country,” Mr. Paxton said.

  “Just as I am prepared to fight the lawsuit brought by the extremist ACLU and the nonprofits enriching themselves due to the federal government’s open borders doctrine, I am prepared to fight the Biden Administration whose immigration disaster is leading our country to ruin,” he continued.

  “Texas has the sovereign right to protect our state.”

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 18:40

• Protests By Angry Chinese Workers Surge To Most In 7 Years, Posing A Threat To Beijing's Rule
  Protests By Angry Chinese Workers Surge To Most In 7 Years, Posing A Threat To Beijing’s Rule

  Chinese workers staged twice as many protests to defend their rights in 2023 compared to the previous year, according to a Hong Kong-based human rights group. As the of Epoch Times notes, China observers say that such widespread demonstrations could lead to the downfall of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

  China Labor Bulletin (CLB), a Hong Kong nonprofit organization that “supports and actively engages with the emergent workers’ movement in China,” reported 1,793 protests as of Dec. 31 amid massive layoffs, reduced wages, and business closures in the country. This was the largest number of annual protests in 7 years and the most since the “summers of violence” 2015 and 2016 when the Yuan devaluation sparked widespread economic turmoil across the country.

  

  The emergence of large-scale Chinese workers’ protests is “an inevitable outcome“ of China’s economic crisis,” Lai Jianping, a former Chinese lawyer and current affairs commentator based in Canada, said in a recent interview with the Chinese language edition of The Epoch Times.

  Mr. Lai believes that the protests may lead to the demise of China’s communist regime.

  Nationwide Workers’ Protests in 2023

  China’s economy remained sluggish in 2023 despite an abrupt relaxation of the draconian zero-COVID measures since December 2022. Reduced orders from international buyers and poor economic conditions in the country have led factories to lay off workers, relocate to minimize costs, or shut down altogether, according to the CLB.

  The CLB’s report reveals that the protests were mainly related to export-oriented industries—such as electronics, garments and apparel, toys, and automotive—and that workers protested over wages, layoffs, and relocations and demanded compensation.

  Protests broke out across China, including the four municipalities under the direct administration of the CCP.

  

  Guangdong Province, a major manufacturing hub, recorded 510 protests of various sizes last year, the highest in the country, according to the CLB report.

  The second highest number of protests (108) is reportedly in China’s eastern Shandong Province, followed by central Henan Province and northern Shanxi Province (100 protests recorded in each one).

  Of the four municipalities, Beijing, China’s capital city, reportedly recorded 33 protests last year, while Shanghai recorded 47 protests, Chongqing recorded 35, and Tianjin recorded 25.

  On Jan. 7 last year, a large-scale protest broke out in Chongqing after thousands of workers were abruptly laid off by Zybio, Inc., a manufacturer of COVID-19 test kits, one of the earliest protests in the first month of the year that was recorded in CLB’s report. The local authorities sent out riot police to suppress the protest.

  Other Protests

  According to Nikkei Asia, 1,777 demonstrations were recorded in the country that were linked to the property sector between June 2022 and October 2023. Two-thirds of these demonstrators were homebuyers and homeowners who protested over “project delays, contract violations, alleged fraud, and shoddy workmanship,” the report said. Most of the remaining protesters were construction workers demanding unpaid wages.

  On July 21, 2023, thousands of parents rallied at various government agencies in Xi’an city, Shaanxi Province, to protest against a government policy limiting students’ access to high school and college education opportunities.

  Due to Chinese authorities’ record of covering up information, it is difficult to assess the true scale of these protests.

  ‘They Have to Fight for Their Survival’

  Mr. Lai said the recent rights-defending campaigns in China involve “more numbers” of participants and that the events are “more intense than ever.”

  He added that many people are currently facing extreme poverty, lacking the financial resources to support their families, pay for their children’s education, cover medical expenses, and repay mortgages.

  “These individuals can only stand up to defend their legitimate rights, to demand wages arrears, and to request job opportunities,” Mr. Lai said.

  Furthermore, by reverting to the revolutionary era of Mao Zedong, Chinese leader Xi Jinping “has deterred foreign investors and Chinese private entrepreneurs from engaging with China.”

  Li Yuanhua, a former scholar of Chinese history now residing in Australia, believes that the widespread protests among workers primarily stem from their “will to survive.”

  “The privileged class within the CCP has been plundering social assets, while Chinese workers at the bottom of society have been pushed to their limits. Unable to secure their basic needs and survival, they are compelled to take a stand,” Mr. Li told The Epoch Times in a recent interview.

  China’s social welfare system is on the brink of collapse and cannot provide any support to the poor working class, he said, adding that “they have to fight for their survival.”

  Mass Protests May End CCP’s Rule

  The CCP has adopted a heavy-handed approach to suppress dissidents and protesters to maintain its authoritarian rule.

  Nevertheless, when the people struggle for survival, they no longer fear the CCP’s suppression, Mr. Li said, adding that this is what the regime fears.

  “This kind of resistance from the people is genuine, and they don’t fear the CCP’s violent suppression. For them, resistance may lead to death, but without resistance, death is inevitable. So why wouldn’t they resist?!”

  According to Mr. Lai, the CCP cannot effectively quash all the nationwide protest campaigns.

  The question is how much longer can Beijing delay injecting a massive stimulus to appease the angry crowds, one which will send the prices of all commodities across the globe soaring higher and end the Fed’s dream of a “soft landing”…

  Continue reading here.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 18:20

• 2024: The Year To Cancel 'Wokeness' In America
  2024: The Year To Cancel ‘Wokeness’ In America

  Authored by James Gorrie via The Epoch Times,

  When it comes to spending their money and supporting their values, many Americans are now wide awake, and most don’t like what they see. “Peak Wokeness,” a term that may or may not be new (it is to me), is now pervasive in our lives and dominates our culture.

  Undoubtedly, it would like to do the same with our private thoughts and our closely held traditional values and beliefs.

  It just about does.

  

  Wokeness Is Orwellian–and Everywhere

  The woke crowd in America is loud, proud, and … Stalinesque. It’s literally forcing communism down our collective throats.

  Worse, these greatly misguided and extremely intolerant people are seemingly everywhere—from your coffee shop and your bank and your 401k investments to the shows you pay to watch on your smart television. They’re in the boardrooms of corporate America; they run our schools, colleges, and universities that celebrate transgenderism and make indentured servants of their graduates­, and are in Human Resources departments to ensure that no independent thought or idea is expressed in the workplace.

  A big part of the woke movement’s success lies in its Orwellian distortion of language so that commonly understood meanings of words are inverted to mean the opposite. For example, words such as “tolerance” really mean intolerance of competing ideas and values, and “inclusion” found in the common woke phrase “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” or DEI, really means excluding traditional ideas, values, and beliefs.

  DEI is a woke term that’s misleading and un-American, but saturates our K-12 schools. The diversity component applies to every application and interpretation possible—race, ethnicity, sexual orientation—except for straight, white Christian people, over-represented Asian people, and the ideas that are the foundation of America and Western Civilization. No one in the woke DEI crowd wants to “include” politically or culturally conservative Americans in anything except re-education camps.

  To put a finer point on it, that re-education camp population would likely include all Trump voters. That would include Bible-believing Christians, pro-Israel Jews, most veterans, stay-at-home moms, home-schooling families, folks who drive trucks and SUVs, those who refuse to get the COVID-19 vaccination, those who think there are only two genders, those who believe that climate change alarmism is a fraud, those who think President Donald Trump won the 2020 election (election deniers, but not 2016 election deniers), and those who believe in the constitutional right to bear arms and self-defense.

  If there were any white, conservative males left over from that list, they would be in the re-education camps as well.

  Changing the Meaning of Words

  Other examples of woke terms are environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing and “stakeholder capitalism.” “Investing,” according to ESG guidelines, seeks to reward those companies that toe the leftist line of socialist policies with more investment money, no matter how inefficient or unprofitable that company might be. That strategy has cost American investors and their retirement accounts millions in lost growth and earnings.

  Like ESG, stakeholder capitalism has nothing to do with capitalism. Rather, it’s a cryptic term for nothing less than fascism, the blending of corporations and government. In stakeholder capitalism, a firm’s focus isn’t on earnings, profitability, or its responsibility to return value to shareholders, but on the “societal stakeholders.” That ambiguous term means that private and public companies must answer to the government and follow socialist and woke hiring policies, such as government-approved and controlled supply chain policies, pricing, and, of course, woke cultural guidelines.

  Fight the Wokeness with Alternatives

  In the aggregate, the woke ideology has nothing to do with the traditional meanings of the terms adherents use, but has everything to do with destroying traditional American society. That can happen only if Americans allow it to.

  The key to stopping this vile movement is to take a page out of their own playbook and cancel the woke mob at every turn, in every aspect of life in which they seek to dominate.

  Thankfully, that’s already happening.

  Woke film companies such as Disney are losing billions on their subversive films because most people can’t stand the woke messaging that permeates their stories. Meanwhile, films that celebrate traditional American values and beliefs, such as “Top Gun Maverick” and “The Sound of Freedom,” have made enormous sums of money. Now there’s Loor.tv, a movie studio committed to telling great stories, comedies, and more, through audience fundraising.

  Furthermore, there are now alternatives to woke Big Tech firms that censor free speech and promote the woke agenda, such as the recently liberated and formerly named Twitter (X). X is now a bastion of free speech, but so is the X alternative Telegram, and YouTube challenger Rumble, which allows much more free flow of content. There’s also a fantastic Amazon alternative called PublicSquare.com that connects consumers “with companies that share your values.” (Full disclosure: I have a product on Public Square.)

  There are certainly other options and opportunities to counter and cancel the so-called woke “mind virus” that’s plaguing our country. Standing up to school boards that push the multi-gender and communist agenda is critical, as is voting out politicians who support anti-American and anti-traditional values and policies.

  The resurgence of American ideals and values isn’t going to happen from the top layer, but from each of us, as individuals and small groups determined to not let our country go down the drain without a fight.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 18:00

• US Admits "No Signs Of Abating" As Houthis Escalate Red Sea Attacks, Deploy Suicide Drone Boat
  US Admits “No Signs Of Abating” As Houthis Escalate Red Sea Attacks, Deploy Suicide Drone Boat

  The Houthis have decided to respond to fresh warnings and threats from the US and Western allies by sending an unmanned boat packed with explosives to disrupt international shipping lanes in the Red Sea. Clearly, Biden’s “warnings” are doing nothing to deter anything.

  The Thursday incident marks the first time the Houthis have deployed a drone boat since its attacks started in the wake of Oct.7. Drones and ballistic missiles from Yemen have wreaked havoc thus far. A US Navy official said, however, that the drone boat exploded before it was able to strike any vessels.

  “We all watched as it exploded,” Vice Admiral Brad Cooper, the head of US Navy operations in the Middle East said in a press briefing. He described that the “one-way attack” was inbound toward shipping lanes “clearly with the intent to do harm” – and that the boat is a “new capability”. He indicated it came within a couple miles of foreign ships.

  

  “Fortunately, there were no casualties and no ships were hit, but the introduction of a one-way attack USV is a concern,” he added.

  Already major shipping companies have diverted their tanker and cargo ships to avoid the Red Sea region entirely. But ironically on the very day the Houthis unveiled their drone boat capability, the Pentagon tried to put a positive spin on its Operation Prosperity Guardian, meant to thwart Red Sea attacks. Adm. Cooper cited that some 1,500 commercial were able to transit the waters safely since the allied operation was launched on December 18.

  Still, Adm. Cooper admitted that “There are no signs the Houthis’ irresponsible behavior is abating.” The US Navy has tallied that the total number of Houthi attacks since Nov. 18 is now at 25.

  Meanwhile, also on Thursday there’s been a fresh piracy incident off Somalia. A Liberian-flagged vessel bound for Bahrain was boarded by armed men while it traversed to the south-east of Eyl, Somali.

  “Five to six unauthorized armed persons have boarded a merchant vessel…in the vicinity of Eyl,” the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) said in an advisory. “Crew are mustered in citadel.”

  Somali militants have long threatened these waters, but given the bulk of diverted Red Sea traffic must travel via the Cape of Good Hope instead, the fear is that the resulting increased traffic off the Somali coast will lead to more ‘opportunity’ and ample targets for pirates. 

  On Wednesday, the White House warned that this ongoing Red Sea turmoil could hit the US economy in a briefing:

  The White House has warned that the potential for higher shipping costs to affect the U.S. economy amid diversion of ships from the Red Sea will depend on how long Houthi rebels sustain their attacks on commercial vessels.

  “If we weren’t concerned, we wouldn’t have stood up an operation in the Red Sea, now consisting of more than 20 nations, to try to protect that commerce,” White House spokesman John Kirby said at a White House press conference on Wednesday, referring to the U.S.-led military force Operation Prosperity Guardian.

  “The Red Sea is a vital waterway, and a significant amount of global trade flows through it. By forcing nations to go around the Cape of Good Hope, you’re adding weeks and weeks onto voyages, and untold resources and expenses have to be applied in order to do that. So obviously there’s a concern about the impact on global trade.”

  Interestingly, Kirby was then asked by a reporter whether the spiraling situation would become “pocketbook” issue for Americans.

  Kirby responded by saying “It would depend on how long this threat goes and on how much more energetic the Houthis think they might become.” He added: “Right now we haven’t seen an uptick or a specific effect on the U.S. economy. But make no mistake. This is a key international waterway. Countries more and more are becoming aware of this increasing threat to the free flow of commerce.” Thus he fully acknowledged this is a distinct possibility that’s fast approaching.

  One thing is clear – the Western coalition statement filled with warnings aimed at the Houthis and released with great fanfare clearly didn’t have the intended effect…

  Wild.

  Palestinians would really love to get the same amount of attention and protection as shipping containers. pic.twitter.com/bT4ikWYeKy

  — Yasmine El-Sabawi ياسمين السبعاوي (@yasmineelsabawi) January 3, 2024

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

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/04/2024 – 17:40